Debate contribution: Social Security Reform and Economic Inactivity

Debate contribution by Ms Sian Mulholland on 1 April 2025.

MLA: Ms Sian Mulholland
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 1 April 2025
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Private Members' Business
Heading: Social Security Reform and Economic Inactivity
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4876705

Text

I beg to move
It is a real honour to propose the motion. I begin the debate with a question that I have been battling with since the publication of the UK Government's Green Paper, 'Pathways to Work': what kind of society do we want to be? If we judge that by how we treat our most vulnerable or how we treat and support our constituents who are sick, disabled, caring for others or living in poverty, I fear that we are heading in the wrong direction. Last week, the Chancellor stood up and promised to do nothing that would put household finances in danger. In the same breath, however, her Government released a plan that, by their own admission, will push a quarter of a million people — that is at the low end of the estimations — into poverty, and 50,000 of those will be children. Let us remind ourselves of what is being proposed in the Government's 'Pathways to Work' Green Paper. If you are disabled and receive the personal independence payment (PIP), which is the benefit that is meant to help you with the additional costs of your disability, you may soon be told that you no longer qualify. Your condition and your needs may not have changed, but, under the new criteria, you no longer tick the right boxes. PIP is an equity payment, and removing that from some of our most vulnerable will breed inequity and injustice, and it does not stop there. Losing PIP means losing so much more than PIP. The person who looks after you at home could lose their carer's allowance. You could lose the health component of universal credit (UC). You could even lose the roof over your head. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) tells us that 800,000 people will lose money from PIP, nearly half of those through reassessments. That is not reform; it is a step backwards, plain and simple. It is being landed on the shoulders of the most vulnerable, the people who already struggle to get by. I am particularly incredulous about the fact that those policies are not being delivered by the Tory Governments of years gone by, whose Administrations became a byword for austerity and cruelty. They are being delivered by a Labour Government who came to power promising a new progressive approach but ignored the options for taxing wealth and opted instead to raise money off the back of those who can least afford it. I want to be specific about what that will look like in my constituency. Since the changes were announced, having been leaked through rumours and conjecture, people have been phoning my constituency office in tears through lack of sleep and the fear and worry that have been caused. There is a single mother in Ballymena who cares for her disabled son. She gave up her career to care for the most important person in her world — her words. The carer's allowance did not just cover costs but gave her the breathing room to be fully present for him in order to build their life around his needs. Now, a bureaucratic change to his PIP assessment means that that support could be taken away as soon as he turns 18. She has not stopped caring, and he has not stopped being disabled, but the state may no longer recognise either of them. She is not backed up; she is left behind. There is a man in his 50s who lives on his own outside Ballymoney. He has chronic pain and arthritis, which he has had for years. He cannot work, not because he does not want to but because his body simply cannot let him. Right now, he gets PIP and the health element of universal credit, but, under the new rules, he will be reassessed, and, because he does not meet the criteria to get four points in one element, he will lose up to £9,000 a year. Nine and a half grand: that is his heating, his groceries and his lift to the GP, but it will be gone. He does not have family nearby, and he lives alone. That is the state telling him that he is no longer sick enough to be deserving of support. He has not changed, and his pain has not changed, but the system has and is leaving him behind. Northern Ireland will be hit especially hard. We have already said that we have the highest economic inactivity rate in the UK: 26·6% of all people aged 16 to 64. Over 120,000 people here are long-term sick, which is nearly 40% of inactive working-age adults. It worries me that part of my constituency falls in the Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council area, which is one of the areas highlighted in Ulster University's January 2024 report as having some of the highest levels of economic inactivity among working-age men and women anywhere in Northern Ireland. The reasons for that are not that hard to find. There are higher rates of disability and mental ill health, and the legacy of the Troubles continues to shape trauma, poor outcomes, poverty and poor infrastructure, especially in rural areas such as mine. Frankly, the job market is not exactly productive. When the Government say that this is about getting people into work, we in Northern Ireland especially have to ask these questions: where are the jobs that will accommodate fluctuating health conditions? Where is the transport system that gets you to a job if you have a disability, particularly in a rural area? Where is the help for employers to make reasonable adjustments or even to understand what a "reasonable adjustment" means? Áine from Carers NI said in the meeting that we had before the debate that, if you want to get people into work, you should get the entire infrastructure right before you start cutting their benefits. The Green Paper makes it crystal clear that we in Northern Ireland are being asked to bear the burden but will not share in the benefits. We are expected to implement all the cuts to PIP, carer's allowances and the health element of universal credit, but we will see none of the direct investment in employment supports that is being promised for GB in the package of measures. In the Green Paper, there is talk about 1,000 new work coaches, massive investment in NHS occupational health and programmes to work directly with employers to create more inclusive work places: all of that is being designed, trialled and funded in England. In Northern Ireland, we are being offered all the pain and zero gain. We are expected to cut support while our health system is in crisis. We have just had a debate that outlined that in its entirety. It is a false promise; it is pressure without partnership and, frankly, it is a disgrace.
The financial reality does not stack up either. The Disability Policy Centre found that, from 2016 to 2021, disability benefit cuts were meant to save £18 billion, but they saved £800 million. For this current package, which Labour claims will save close to £5 billion, a third-best-case model puts savings at £100 million, just 2% of the billions that Labour says that it will save. Meanwhile, projected losses — to name a few — come from the appeals and admin costs, £400 million; the increased NHS and social care demand, £1·2 billion; and lost consumer spending, £500 million. Those figures come directly from the Disability Policy Centre's data.
The crisis is particularly stark in specialities such as orthopaedics, dermatology and mental health services, including child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Therefore, when we talk about the impact of cutting disability benefits and pushing people off welfare, in a place where they cannot even get the healthcare that they need, it is not simply unjust, it is unworkable. Let us be clear about who this hits the hardest. According to the Resolution Foundation, across the UK, 3·2 million families will lose an average of £1,720 a year. A household with a disabled person and a full-time carer could lose £10,300, and the poorest half of working-age households will become £500 poorer. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, will be pushed into poverty. According to Carers UK, 150,000 unpaid carers could lose PIP and carer's allowance. I am using UK stats, Mr Deputy Speaker, because we simply do not know right now what impact this is going to have on Northern Ireland. We have absolutely no figures at our disposal at the moment that will say there are x number of people who will be disadvantaged in Northern Ireland and it will cost x amount of money to mitigate it. That is one of the reasons why I have a wee bit of concern about the SDLP amendment. We simply do not know how much mitigations will cost right now. Especially given the situation that we are in, it is hard to sign up to something so vague until we have the figures in place. What I want from this motion today is for us —.
Yes. Quickly, Sinéad. I have points to make.
I wholeheartedly agree with that. That is the point I am making. When we look for investment in the health service, occupational health, mental health services or employment programmes, we find that we are not getting any of it. If the amendment that the SDLP proposes is not just about a mitigation package that takes money out of our Budget but is a holistic package, which is what we need and ask for, I am slightly less concerned about it. At the minute, our priority is to find out and get detailed figures on what this is going to cost and the impact that it will have. We need a different path and a rejection of this Government's punitive approach. We need a UK-wide commission to shape real, compassionate solutions to economic inactivity amongst disabled people. We need a focus on progressive means of generating more revenue for public services, particularly increasing taxes on the superwealthy, which is one of the reasons why I cannot support the DUP amendment, which takes that out. We need to send a clear signal from the Assembly that Northern Ireland will not be punished for needing support. I return to my first question: what kind of society do we want to be?

1,746 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

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

Challenge this classification