Debate contribution: Child Poverty

Debate contribution by Mr Patsy McGlone on 14 October 2025.

MLA

Mr Patsy McGlone

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

14 October 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Child Poverty

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5181073

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Over a year ago, the Assembly debated a motion from our party on this very topic. The Northern Ireland Audit Office had just published a report on child poverty, and it found that one in five children in Northern Ireland was living in relative poverty and that nearly 10% of households were unable to afford basic goods. We called on the Minister for Communities to bring forward, by September last year, a comprehensive strategy that included specific and measurable targets to reduce child poverty. We also called on him to work with the Minister of Finance to agree an ambitious ring-fenced budget to deliver on those targets. As my colleague Matthew O'Toole said at the time, the Audit Office report was:

"full of 'shocking' findings on the stubbornly high levels of child poverty in our society." — [Official Report (Hansard), 15 April 2024, p21, col 1].

He also said that one in five children in the North were living in relative poverty and nearly one in 10 were living in absolute poverty and that it showed that not only have we, collectively, failed to properly address child poverty but we have allowed the problem to get worse. We also highlighted the challenge that those levels of child poverty present for Northern Ireland in the long term. It is not only a moral challenge; it creates long-term costs for other public services. Child poverty levels impact directly on the education system, the health service and sometimes, sadly, on the criminal justice system and social services, as any Member will know from their constituency office. We believed then, as we do now, that there should be a binding target for child poverty reduction to judge the effectiveness of efforts to tackle it. Over a year later, child poverty levels in the North are still shockingly high, and what have the Executive done? Their anti-poverty strategy still sits in draft form. There are no new policies and no ring-fenced budget. There are no agreed targets to measure any eventual policy against. Their draft strategy cannot even name which Departments are to be responsible for its three key pillars. That is not good enough. Charities, campaigners and families are right to be angry, as we all should be. They have gone through the Executive's box-ticking exercise for a hollow draft strategy: an exercise that has clearly failed to meet the scale of the crisis. The Minister and the Executive have no new ideas, have no money and evidently see no need for urgency in dealing with the problem.

Thank you for that, Mr Deputy Speaker. My colleague makes the point that I was trying to make, and perhaps in a much more articulate way, as ever. In the meantime, community-sector organisations are telling us that they want to help develop a meaningful plan. We are therefore back in the Assembly and bringing their message to the Executive. Our motion calls for an anti-poverty strategy that is fit for purpose and that introduces proven interventions: interventions that have been adopted in Scotland and in the rest of Ireland that have reduced child poverty rates significantly. For example, a child payment for families on universal credit, tax credits or other qualifying benefits; accessible and affordable childcare; and expanded free school meals. Those are all policies that the Executive could and should be introducing. Our message is clear. If the Executive have no new ideas for tackling child poverty, we and the community sector do. The public, however, will be asking what the Executive parties can agree on if they cannot or will not agree to funding an effective strategy to tackle child poverty. Tacaím leis an rún seo inniu.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:36 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