Member's statement: Carers' Week 2025
Member's statement by Ms Kellie Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Kellie Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 June 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Carers' Week 2025
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5000947
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the fact that it is Carers' Week. The theme for this year is Caring About Equality. It is not only a celebration of the invaluable contributions of unpaid carers but a call to address the profound inequalities that they face every day. Across the UK, around 5·7 million people provide unpaid care to family members, friends and neighbours in need. Their dedication sustains our health service and social care system. They save the Executive, this House and all of us a fortune every year, yet many carers face significant challenges. Unpaid carers are disproportionately affected by poverty. In the UK, 1·2 million carers live in poverty, with 400,000 in deep poverty. The poverty rate among unpaid carers is 50% higher than it is among those who do not provide care. In Northern Ireland, one in three unpaid carers has had to leave paid employment to carry out their caring responsibilities. The physical and mental toll of caregiving is substantial. One in four unpaid carers report not being in good health, and 36% of carers report that they have had bad or very bad mental health. That figure rises to 59% among those carers who also confirm that they are struggling financially. Caring can be an isolating experience. The demands of caregiving often lead to reduced social interactions, leaving carers feeling disconnected from the community, and this isolation exacerbates mental health challenges and diminishes overall well-being. Caring should not come at the cost of a carer's health, financial stability or social connections. This Carers' Week, I call for the Assembly to recognise the vital role of unpaid carers in our society, support policies that provide financial assistance, respite care and mental health services, and ensure that carers have access to flexible working arrangements and opportunities for social engagement. By addressing those inequalities, we not only honour the dedication of unpaid carers but show that the Assembly has listened to those carers. I thank those who attended the Carers NI drop-in event yesterday in the Long Gallery, where a lot of organisations that support carers were available to discuss the type of help that they provide. It is very sad that some of our Departments do not provide the same type of support. Remember that it is those carers who are saving our health service. If we had to replicate what they deliver, we would have a bankrupt health service. We need to ensure that carers' needs are met and that their equality is not ignored.
416 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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 (0.90).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.73 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.13 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.07 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:41 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.