Debate contribution: Cost-of-living Increase: Impact

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 17 November 2025.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

17 November 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Cost-of-living Increase: Impact

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5245876

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am pleased to speak towards the end of the debate to give my thoughts on the motion. Over the past number of years — in many ways, the past decade and a half but particularly since 2022 — we have been living through an extraordinary spike in the pressures facing ordinary working families and the most destitute. Costs have increased exponentially. We support the motion; we also support the useful amendment. For some time, ordinary working families here have had the lowest disposable income, certainly, in the UK and in these islands in general. As we know, we have the highest levels of economic inactivity, child poverty and precarity. All those things are a shame on our society, and they have got worse over the past number of years. They have got worse, yes, as a long-term consequence of some of the decisions made by UK Governments to squeeze spending — austerity, as it is often called — and, yes, as a result of international pressures, including the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and price gouging by lots of big companies. All those things have international consequences and broader challenges. The key thing, as multiple Members have said today, is not that we come to the Chamber and complain about that but that we take practical measures to help the people who sent us here — the people whom we promised to help and who, as many Members said, face real hardship this winter. Whether they are elderly people struggling to heat their home; working families or, indeed, families in which someone is out of work thinking about how they will pay for Christmas gifts; or parents having to go without in order to feed their child or get them an extra treat at Christmas, all those things should pinch at our conscience and be at the front of our mind every day. We need practical measures, not gesture motions. While we support the motion and the amendment, therefore, it is important that I say, further to what my colleague Mark H Durkan said, that the motion is problematic for a number of reasons, particularly because it is the lead party in government putting forward a list of complaints about policies that it has overseen in a Government in which it is the biggest party. When our politics is defined by a lack of responsibility, that is a problem. It is true that successive British Governments have made appalling decisions. The two-child limit is appalling, indefensible and immoral, and I hope that it will be reversed in full. Sinn Féin cannot, however, take credit for some welfare mitigations while avoiding responsibility for the Executive's failure to mitigate the two-child limit, for which the SDLP put forward a practical proposal last year. We said how we would pay for it. We said that we would change how vacant property relief works and use the rates revenue from that. Our proposal arose not as a result of what is in the Sinn Féin motion today but as a result of a Sinn Féin Minister putting up a tax that, despite what is stated in the motion, impinged on working families. We said, "Use some of it to mitigate the two-child limit". The Sinn Féin Finance Minister could have chosen to do that, but it was not done. Do not come to the Chamber today as if you have no responsibility and as if the only people who are ever responsible for bad things are the Brits or the DUP. Yes, they are responsible for bad things, but, if you seek office, you have to be accountable for the decisions that you do and do not take. There is a problem when we are presented with such a motion, and it is particularly disappointing to hear people talk about how awful it is to raise revenue in any circumstances and their refusal to do so. If a party is on the left, as mine is, it has to be honest about the decisions that it wants to take. As Mr Carroll said, those who have broader shoulders should pay more in order to help those who have less. Sinn Féin has not made that decision, despite having had the Finance Ministry for the past half decade and on another occasion before that. How is that the case? We had an indication from a previous Sinn Féin Finance Minister that they would abolish the domestic rates cap. That would be a small increase for people with more expensive homes, but we have had no indication of whether or when that will happen. Earlier today, we heard Sinn Féin's Economy Minister lambast air passenger duty, which is a tax that, I imagine, is paid largely by people who fly a lot, who, by definition, are people who can afford to fly. It is a small tax that is critical to getting people to reduce how often they fly, yet it is apparently an awful thing that must be abolished. I say to those who tabled the motion to take responsibility. Do not gaslight people who face real pressures in their everyday lives. Do not table meaningless motions when you hold the posts of First Minister, Economy Minister, Finance Minister and Infrastructure Minister, which are positions that can take real steps. Take responsibility. Use the power that you have rather than simply transfer the blame to others at every opportunity.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:01 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