Member's statement: Community and Voluntary Sector: Funding Crisis

Member's statement by Mr Colm Gildernew on .

MLA
Mr Colm Gildernew
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
20 January 2026
Type
Member's statement
Business
Members' Statements
Heading
Community and Voluntary Sector: Funding Crisis
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5348183

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I take the opportunity to, once again, raise the existential crisis that is facing our community and voluntary sector. As Members will know, 31 March 2026 will see the end of the Shared Prosperity Fund. As a result, thousands of jobs are now at risk. I remind Members that the Shared Prosperity Fund is one of the most significant levers that we have in tackling economic inactivity by providing thousands of people with the skills and training that they need to re-engage with the workforce. Not only are those services a lifeline for many vulnerable people but they support our economy by increasing growth and productivity whilst reducing our public spending on social security. The proposed local growth fund, which is due to replace it, is wholly inadequate and will deliver devastating cuts to vital front-line services. On my way into the Chamber this morning, I literally bumped into a leading member of the East Belfast Mission, which, in its own words, offers:

"services which aim to alleviate the difficulties faced by our community".

I am being told that its employability service could be reduced from 15 people to three. That will affect the most vulnerable people. The First Steps Women's Centre in my constituency, which provides support for some of the most vulnerable women who come into our country, is also having its services slashed — as are all groups — by the same amount. Yesterday, at a training and development session in the Building, I learned that 82% of part-time workers are women. One third of women are so-called economically inactive. That is actually economic disadvantage and discrimination. The British Government have promised, time and time again, that they would fully replace European funding that is lost as a result of Brexit. Time and time again, they have absolutely failed to live up to their word. The community and voluntary sector has been warning for many years that, unless the British Government changed their approach, that was likely to happen. Now, we are a matter of weeks away from the cliff edge, and disaster seems unavoidable. Many employees in the sector have started to receive their redundancy notices, informing them that their jobs will no longer be funded beyond 31 March. First and foremost, my thoughts are with all those who are affected by those cuts — nobody deserves to be treated in that way — and, secondly, with the people who so badly need those services, from which we all benefit. My thoughts are with them. Let me be clear: those shameful cuts need to be reversed now, and the thousands of jobs in the community and voluntary sector need to be protected. Almost a decade ago, we warned that leaving the EU would bring economic and political chaos to these islands and that we would be financially worse off as a result. Unfortunately, that is now the reality that we are living in. Time and again, the people of the North suffer the consequences of harmful decisions that are taken in London by British Governments who, to be frank, neither think nor care about us. More and more people are rightly coming to the conclusion that it is time to move forward in a new Ireland.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.43 (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 (0.84).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.64).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • The overall probability was moderate at most and none of the culture-war criteria was close to being met.

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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.15No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.09No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.17No
Controversy escalation0.16No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.84Yes
Overall judgement0.43Between thresholds
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.64
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.35
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.54
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.27
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.17
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:12 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