Debate contribution: Programme for Government 2024-27

Debate contribution by Mr Brian Kingston on .

MLA
Mr Brian Kingston
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
3 March 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
Programme for Government 2024-27
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4826269

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I will speak as a DUP member of the Committee for the Executive Office and the Committee for Communities. I warmly welcome the publication of the Programme for Government. I acknowledge the work that has gone into it across the four-party Executive and add my thanks, in particular, to all those who submitted responses to the draft Programme for Government during the consultation period. As others have said, the PFG is not an encyclopedia of every action and all new legislation and ongoing provision that will be undertaken by each Department in the remainder of the Assembly mandate. Rather, the PFG sets out key priorities that will be expedited in the years up to 2027. The programme retains the nine priorities set out in the draft, along with the three missions on "People", "Planet" and "Prosperity" and the cross-cutting commitment to "Peace". Underpinning those, the Executive have previously adopted an outcomes-based accountability approach in order to evaluate government actions, which are assessed against nine defined outcomes and linked to 10 strategic domains of well-being. That involves asking simple questions: "How much did we do?", "How well did we do it?" and "Is anybody better off?" Critically, the final Programme for Government, as I pointed out to the Member for Foyle, adds targets and annual objectives against which the public can judge progress made during this Assembly term. That increases the accountability of the Executive as a whole and of individual Ministers, along with their officials and arm's-length bodies, to the Assembly and to the public. Our Assembly Statutory Committees play a key role in that accountability through scrutiny and challenge, through seeking detailed information and by engaging with relevant groups to garner their specialist knowledge and lived experience. The DUP believes strongly that the Assembly must be judged on delivery. We will continue to push all Ministers and all Departments for delivery against the commitments and targets in the Programme for Government.

I will give way, briefly, yes.

Thank you. I agree with the Member: it should not be a restriction on ambition or on what can be delivered. In many cases, it does say "at least" and sets minimum standards. It is right that we have those standards, that we deliver them and that, where possible, we go beyond them, so he is right to make that point. Whilst specific Departments and Ministers are tasked to take the lead on various new strategies, many of them are devised on a cross-departmental basis, with action points identified and agreed across all Departments. When launched, such strategies are branded, rightly, in the name of the Northern Ireland Executive as a whole. Indeed, I would, perhaps cautiously, suggest that there is an increased element of cross-departmental working during this Assembly mandate in the interest of delivery, although there is always room for improvement. As for the Executive Office, we welcomed the launch of the ending violence against women and girls strategy last year, along with an associated cross-departmental delivery plan. That includes a change fund and challenge fund to support initiatives at community level to challenge wrong attitudes and promote positive attitudes. The Communities Minister has published the housing supply strategy, also branded as an overall Executive strategy, with actions for different Departments and Ministers. As one of its priorities, the Programme for Government includes providing more social, affordable and sustainable housing. Over the course of this mandate, from 2022 to 2027, the Communities Minister commits DFC to start work on at least 5,850 new-build social homes. Over the coming year, the Communities Minister has committed to delivering 847 shared-ownership homes, with that number forecast to increase to 1,900 shared-ownership homes by the end of the mandate in March 2027. He is also to launch the loan-to-acquire move-on accommodation fund of £10 million, helping homeless charities purchase properties as a route into housing; and, this year, to publish an Executive-agreed fuel poverty strategy, to support those struggling with the cost of living. The Communities Minister also committed to bringing forward an intermediate rent operator, which will also increase access to affordable homes. I strongly welcome the fact that the reform and transformation of our public services has been retained as a priority in the final Programme for Government. The DUP will continue to push for efficiency and effectiveness in our public services and to challenge where savings can be made, particularly where there has been a rationalisation of public bodies. Getting on with the job and delivering for the people of Northern Ireland should be our focus and the measure of our success.

761 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.77).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.94).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.77Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.94
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.06
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.40
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.33
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.17
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.05
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.04

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:07 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification