Debate contribution: Child Poverty

Debate contribution by Mr Gordon Lyons on 14 October 2025.

MLA

Mr Gordon Lyons

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

14 October 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Child Poverty

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5181108

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank all those who contributed to the debate. It is an important issue. It is probably one of the most important issues that we face, because poverty is a curse, and child poverty is particularly egregious. Poverty limits potential and harms people and their life chances. I am serious and sincere in my attempts to try to deal with that issue. For what it is worth, I believe that others in the Chamber are sincere as well. We all want to tackle the issue and to work together to make sure that we can make a meaningful difference in people's lives. The fact that we all need to work together on child poverty is the first thing to highlight. It is an Executive strategy. I emphasise that point not because I am trying to share any of the brickbats that are coming towards me but because it has to be done together. We have to do it in a joined-up fashion. Therefore, I take exception to some of the comments that have been made about the draft anti-poverty strategy, because I brought it to the Executive. I did not present it as my plan or proposals, because, first, we had the cross-departmental working group. We went out to all Departments and asked, "What can you do, and what do you think that we should have in the strategy that can make a meaningful difference?". The Ministers came back with their ideas. Those ideas were put into the draft strategy, and the Executive, as a whole, agreed that it should go forward to the next stage. That is why I take exception to some of the comments, particularly those made by Cathy Mason and Danny Baker, though I am pleased to engage with Mr Baker; I do not see him often at any debates that I am here for. One of the first things that he said was that there is nothing new in the strategy. He said that I had scrapped everything that the co-design group wanted. I think that he said that I had put it in the bin. That is just wrong. Let me go through some of the things that the co-design group asked for that are in the strategy. It wanted period poverty to be included. That is in there. It identified the need to tackle fuel poverty. That is in there. It identified the need to make school attendance cost-neutral. Work is ongoing on that. We have the continuation of the extended schools programme and the RAISE programme. We know about the legislation that has been brought in on school uniforms, which it asked for as well. The co-design group asked for mitigation payments to be extended. I have done that. The co-design group asked that we continue to pressure the UK Government on the pensions triple lock. I have done that. The co-design group highlighted the need for a childcare strategy. We agreed, and, within weeks, the Education Minister will introduce that. The co-design group raised issues of low pay and workers' rights. The Member's party colleague is addressing that, unless he is saying that that is no longer the case. The co-design group highlighted housing as an issue, and the Executive housing supply strategy is in there as well.

Just one second. The co-design group asked that we maximise and improve access to benefits advice and support for older people. Those things are there. It is wrong of the Member to say that everything has been scrapped. Let me move on to something else that the Member is wrong on, and then I will take an intervention from him. This has been repeated ad nauseam by others: they say that there are no new actions in the anti-poverty strategy. We heard that again and again, and it is demonstrably wrong. There are new actions. Mr McCrossan, who is used to being wrong, is shaking his head.

There are new actions in there. There are new things that we have started since the Executive returned and new things that we are continuing to do, including the adoption of the housing supply strategy; the extension of welfare mitigation payments; the fuel poverty strategy; the £23 million subsidy for working parents; the childcare strategy that is coming forward; and all the other issues that I have just mentioned —

— as well as the Healthy Child Healthy Future programme and the new People and Place strategy. I will give way to Mr McCrossan, but I need to give way to Mr Baker first. One action that came forward last week was a new employability programme worth £12 million that will target some of the hardest to reach in order to get them into work. I have seen the impacts of that first-hand, and it changes lives. There are new actions. I will come on in a second to some of the new things that we may be able to take on afterwards, but I will give way to Mr Baker first.

You say that it will not make any difference. You do not think that welfare mitigations will make any difference? You do not think that the fuel poverty strategy, through which we will invest more than we have ever done before in retrofitting people's homes, will have an impact? What about the extended schools programme and the Make the Call service, in which I am continuing to invest?

One second. The Make the Call service that I am continuing to invest in is important. It may seem small, but, in 2023-24, we generated £62·1 million of annualised benefits. You do not think that that will have an impact on poverty? I make no apology whatsoever for those things that we are continuing and the new actions that have been included, some of which, by the way, have already been delivered, as well as the housing supply strategy. I miss Mr McCrossan. He is not on the Committee any more. I am more than happy to give way to him.

I will say two things. First, it is wrong to say that there are no new actions, because I have just read those out. It seems in this place that, no matter how often I give not opinion but fact, Members argue against that. OK, we will take that on board. Secondly, this is a plan that is out for consultation. Well, the consultation has now closed, but the plan was out for consultation. We have an opportunity to hear, and I have said from the start that we will listen to all the ideas, but what I was not prepared to do was introduce a strategy that was unaffordable and uncosted. It would have been the easiest thing in the world for me to bring forward a plan that included a child payment — Mr Durkan called for a child payment in his motion without even knowing how much it would cost — or more money for childcare, or which removed the two-child limit or included more free school meals or other free provision. I could have brought that forward, stuffed it all into the strategy, and then handed it over to the Executive and said, "There you go", but I am not prepared to do that. In the previous debate, the leader of the Opposition said how fed up he is with people bringing forward unrealistic proposals, and I am not doing that. What we have here is affordable and costed. We have gone out to consultation and asked, "Where do you think we fall short? What else can we do? What can we do to make a difference?". The Executive can consider that and decide what we can take forward. That takes me to the next issue that I want to address, which is the need for us to be grown-up. I have said how easy it would be for me to fill the strategy with all the wonderful things that we might be able to do, but it comes down to funding. We can have our priorities, but we have to recognise that they come with a price tag. Take the child payment of £300 million, for example. I do not think that the evidence from Scotland is convincing: it has not moved the needle beyond the margin of error for how to analyse those who may be in poverty in Scotland. Let us talk about the child payment. The Member included that in the motion, although he did not know how much it would cost and has no plan for how it could be funded. Perhaps we can find the money from somewhere. Perhaps there are other things that we can stop in order to enable the child payment to be introduced, but that would need to be tested. I want to make sure that we spend every pound that we have in the best possible way. I want every pound to have maximum impact. That is why I am so passionate about the fuel poverty strategy. So much of households' income goes towards keeping their homes warm. If we can put more investment into retrofitting and making them energy efficient, it will benefit our constituents not just for one year but every year after that. It is why I am so passionate about getting people into work. The disability and work strategy will take our employment rate up from 40% to 50% and get 50,000 more people into work. That is good for them and will help their life chances. Do you know what else it will do? It will allow us to have more money. With an average of £15,000 of savings per person to Treasury each year through National Insurance contributions and tax revenue, those 50,000 people getting into work will represent £750 million a year. Think of what we could do with that money, getting it to people who are in work and still need support. To the House and to all the groups that are interested in listening, I say that I am more than happy to explore those options. I will listen to what has been said during the consultation period and will take that on board, but I will be realistic. I will not support anything going through the Executive that I do not believe will work or make a difference or that is simply a wish list. I am not prepared to do that. I want delivery, not delusion.

There he goes again: he is making it political. I have not disregarded the sector. I am not saying that at all, and I think that he is being disingenuous in saying that. I genuinely want to work with people to get this right. I have done nothing but set out facts. The Member quoted statistics from the Scottish Government. They might have a special interest in this —

— but the information that we have is that it has not moved beyond the margin or error. However, let us have the debate. Maybe that was a good investment. Maybe the £490 million that went into the child payment would be the best way for us to spend money —

— or maybe it would be best to invest it in retrofitting or childcare or some of the other issues that we want to tackle. I will have that debate —

— but this draft anti-poverty strategy is affordable. The Member is getting very exercised. I am more than happy to give way to him.

I am not sure what the Member specifically refers to. It is clear, however, that his party tabled the motion without saying how it would pay for it. While we are talking about those who are wrong, I will add that Mr McCrossan said that child poverty has got worse in Northern Ireland, whereas, in fact, it has not changed over the past couple of years. The party got something else wrong: I think that Mr McGlone said that the Public Accounts Committee's recommendations were trashed, but they have been taken on, one of them partially and the rest in full. What I am saying, I hope, clearly, to the House is that we have a draft anti-poverty strategy that is costed and that, we believe, tackles some of the root causes of poverty in Northern Ireland.

One second. Some of us want to go further. I would like to go further as well. I will work with all those who are interested and will look at what comes to us as we finish analysing the consultation responses and hear from the Committee and others. I am more than happy to look into that and see what can be taken on board, but, if Mr Durkan and others say that they would bring in a child payment, childcare and all the other things, we will need to be honest about that.

I was in the Executive meeting, Mr McCrossan, when it was agreed that the draft strategy would go out to consultation. For weeks beforehand, Ministers had had the papers and had contributed to the action points. It was agreed. Questions were asked of me, I answered them, and we went out to consultation. It is fair to say, therefore, that, yes, I was surprised, standing beside the First Minister, to hear what she had to say, given that not only had the Executive signed off on the strategy but Sinn Féin Ministers had contributed to it.

I will, yes.

I have outlined how much is still in it. I do not really see the relevance of that point. That was and is the case. My time is almost up.

We have had the consultation and we will see where we go from here. I am determined that we sort out this issue.

2,312 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