Debate contribution: Poverty: North Down
Debate contribution by Mr Colm Gildernew on .
- MLA
- Mr Colm Gildernew
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 9 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Poverty: North Down
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5296627
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank Connie for bringing the issue to the Floor. Although I do not represent North Down, I will say a few words as Sinn Féin's community spokesperson, as poverty is an issue that affects every town, village and area across the North. As Connie said, it is important to recognise that deep poverty can exist side by side and cheek by jowl with massive wealth. On a global level, inequality is a pervasive issue at present. A number of years ago, the World Bank issued a warning to the wealthy that the inequality levels were no longer sustainable and had to be addressed. That is something that we locally need to take account of as well. It is important that, when we discuss poverty, we remember the very human suffering that poverty inflicts on people every day in all our constituencies. Right now, as we debate the issue, there are people in our communities who do not have enough food to eat, do not have enough fuel to keep themselves warm or, potentially, do not even have a roof over their heads. Imagine what it must be like to wake every morning not knowing how you will feed yourself or your children or whether you will be able to afford to turn the heating on that day. We all have a moral obligation to do everything that we can to end that intolerable situation and ensure that everyone in our society has a fair chance in life. Over recent years, a number of economic and political factors have had a disproportionately negative impact on those on lower incomes, including Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic, the cost-of-living crisis, the disastrous Tory mini-Budget and a prolonged period of British Government austerity, with signs that the Labour Government have carried it on, as Andrew mentioned. That combination of factors has undoubtedly led to an increase in the overall level of poverty in our society, with the most recent 'Poverty and Income Inequality' report showing that roughly 18% of our population live in relative poverty while 15% live in absolute poverty. The figures for children are even more shocking, with roughly 23% of children living in relative poverty and 20% of children living in absolute poverty. We know that certain risk factors make someone more vulnerable to falling into poverty such as having a disability, being a carer, as Alan mentioned, or being in receipt of benefits. Other factors include low-wage or precarious employment, being a lone parent, geographical location and even gender. With regard to geographical location, poverty rates are generally even higher west of the Bann. Earlier this year, the Minister — I am glad to see him in the Chamber listening to the debate — published the long-awaited anti-poverty strategy, which promises to identify and address the root causes of poverty, mitigate its worst impacts and support people to exit poverty. While the publication of the strategy is indeed welcome — it was long overdue — the strategy falls short of what is needed and, as a result, has been criticised by anti-poverty experts, including some who helped to co-design the strategy. Alan Chambers's point about working people is really important. We need to be careful and understand that there is no clear or easy divide between people who are on benefits and people who are working. Many of our people who are working — our working poor — are dependent on benefits as well, so it is not a question of some people who get up in the morning and are struggling and other people who do not. It is much more complicated than that, to be honest.
As we await the final draft of the strategy, I strongly urge the Minister to consider the many voices that are calling for a change of approach and to come back with a strengthened anti-poverty strategy that will make a real difference in eradicating poverty once and for all, wherever it occurs across the North. With your indulgence, a LeasCheann Comhairle
, as this is the last debate of the session, I wish all my colleagues and you a very happy, peaceful and reflective Christmas. Nollaig shona daoibh.
696 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: 0.04 (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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.50 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.16 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.09 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.09 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.07 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:11 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.