Debate contribution: Cost of Doing Business

Debate contribution by Mr Stewart Dickson on .

MLA
Mr Stewart Dickson
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
2 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Cost of Doing Business
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4981699

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you very much, Principal Deputy Speaker. The Alliance Party recognises the extreme cost of doing business in the current economic climate and the fact that many are experiencing financial strains that have been further compounded by recent decisions by the UK Government. Reference has been made around the Chamber to those decisions, particularly the increase in employers' National Insurance contributions in this financial year on top of inflation. Add in rising energy costs and the effects of Brexit, and a perfect storm of crisis has been created in a matter of a few years. As we have said many times in the Chamber, the UK Government took a decision to increase employers' National Insurance contributions without any meaningful consultation with the devolved nations or, more importantly, with those who run businesses. Those who run businesses are the people who, as employers, have to pay the extra money and, in turn, make a decision on whether to employ fewer staff. Unlike the public sector, which has been given some contribution towards those increased costs, businesses have once again been left on their own to chart their way through a difficult economic tide. The UK Government are making businesses fund a black hole that would best be addressed by pursuing progressive taxation and easing pressure on businesses and workers. Without appropriate support and the ability to function, businesses remain under threat. Simply forwarding to the Treasury a report of the issues that we already knew existed is not the tangible action that we should be taking as a devolved Administration. Indeed, there are much more targeted measures that could be taken that would ensure that local businesses feel that the Government are supporting them. The most obvious of those is the one that we have been discussing this evening: rates relief. My party — the Alliance Party — has consistently called for an independent and holistic root-and-branch review of the rating system in Northern Ireland in order to ensure that it is fair, fit for purpose and, importantly, supports economic growth. The various rate relief schemes that are offered in Scotland and England provide much more direct support to the sectors that need it most, which, ultimately, sustains their economies. What we have from our Minister of Finance is a step-by-step individual review of each rate relief. We are having one review now, but the likelihood of that relief needing to be changed again in five years' time is high, given the volatile economic climate in which we live. There was a clear recommendation in the high street task force report, which I made reference to in my intervention, for immediate rate relief. Schemes such as the small business rate relief scheme and Back in Business have enabled businesses to operate effectively in Northern Ireland and have brought vibrancy, footfall and investment back to our high streets while providing businesses with a boost at the start of their business journey, helping them to support jobs and bringing long-term vacant units back into use. I welcome the Finance Minister's plans to review the small business rate relief scheme by October this year. I encourage the Minister to consider expanding that scheme to enable more businesses to avail themselves of it so that our economy can grow. Other measures would help to relieve businesses in many sectors in Northern Ireland of the financial pressures that they face. We support an increase to the VAT registration threshold for small businesses to reduce their financial burden. Additionally, we propose a lower VAT rate for the hospitality, tourism and beauty and hair sectors, which are crucial to our local economies and job creation. As an Executive, we should lobby the UK Government on those issues at every opportunity. I trust that those items are on the Finance Minister's agenda today. The high street task force brought forth a wealth of ideas from various stakeholders — the very people who know what they need to drive our high streets forward. Sadly, there has been a lack of action from the Executive Office, which is responsible for the implementation of the task force report, not least because of the lack of an Assembly over the past number of years. The Alliance Party has long held the belief that the Department for the Economy, as the lead Department, should take forward the recommendations in the report. That is why our amendment seeks to put the onus on the Economy Minister to work with the task force and the Finance Minister to put forward realistic and pragmatic proposals to implement the recommendations and drive the economic growth that we all seek. Ultimately, our businesses cannot afford any further dither or delay. We know the issues, and we know the solutions. Now is the time to take action. I thank the Members who spoke in the debate. They all made valuable contributions, and, in reality, we are all talking about the same issues.

822 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 (0.96).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • 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 antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.96Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.59
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.40
Another identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:47 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