Debate contribution: Child Poverty
Debate contribution by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 14 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Child Poverty
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5181088
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Every child deserves the best start in life, and I believe that everyone in the Chamber agrees with that. Child poverty is devastating, but it does not exist in a vacuum. Rather, poverty affects families as a whole. Our aim should therefore be to address poverty in its entirety, and that is what the Communities Minister, Gordon Lyons, has done through the Executive's anti-poverty strategy. I am a member of the Public Accounts Committee, which undertook the child poverty inquiry. It is a bit disingenuous of the SDLP to use the findings of that inquiry to attack the Minister. The inquiry reflected on the 2016-2022 child poverty strategy, and, yes, it classed that strategy as a catalogue of failures and made a number of recommendations, but the Minister and his Department accepted nine out of the 10 recommendations and partially accepted the other one. After that strategy ended in 2022, there was a two-year gap until something else came forward. The Committee recommended that a new anti-poverty strategy be presented to the Executive as soon as possible, and Minister Lyons has done that. Mark Durkan said that the Opposition are serious about eradicating child poverty, but what evidence does he have of their doing that? The evidence for the DUP is that Minister Lyons has brought forward a strategy and is on the front foot in addressing child poverty. Children, by their nature, are vulnerable. They cannot support themselves by getting a job, so they rely on their parents and guardians to take care of them. The DUP has committed to standing on the side of families who are struggling, and Gordon's anti-poverty strategy is focused on tackling the issues.
Yes.
I thank the Member for her intervention, and I completely agree that, as we consider all the strands of the anti-poverty strategy, we should pull out the specific child-related issues that she mentioned. In the Chamber today, the Scottish child payment scheme has been mentioned as a potential option to be considered here. During the PAC inquiry, however, we heard evidence that the scheme had little effect on child poverty levels in Scotland and thus made very little difference to the situation. That huge spend of £471 million every year has barely moved the needle on child poverty, so the question is whether it is the right way forward for us.
It is simple for the SDLP and the Alliance Party to call for that scheme, but let us be honest with people: Gordon Lyons does not have an extra £471 million a year, and, if he did, would the best option be for him to put it into a scheme that has no proven track record of making a significant difference? It will be up to the Minister to assess different value-for-money options and how they align with different strands of his strategy.
I thank the Member for his intervention. I agree with that point. As we sat through the inquiry, it was devastating to hear about the plans and things that were outlined in the 2016-2022 child poverty strategy. The Member, the Chair of the PAC, was quoted as saying that it was a "catalogue of failures", which is a fair reflection of that. The key point to take forward from the inquiry is that we must learn the lessons from it and build them into the process. I am confident that Minister Lyons will do that. The Minister's priority has been to make a difference and do so now with the tools that he has had to hand. On that, he has brought forward the first Northern Ireland anti-poverty strategy, challenging though that may have been. It cuts right across. We need it to be cross-cutting in order to move away from the siloed nature of government in Northern Ireland, as Daniel McCrossan said. To fully address poverty, the strategy needs to hit every Department, and every Department needs to play its part. The Minister set out his commitment on the issue, and he is committed to helping every child in Northern Ireland. Unlike others, he does not stand on the sidelines criticising; he takes action. The Minister has a track record of delivery, and he cares about the people in Northern Ireland. He is serious in his approach to tackling child poverty. I support the Communities Minister in his work on that.
727 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: 0.06 (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 (0.87).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.84 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.08 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.03 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
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.