Debate contribution: Cost-of-living Crisis

Debate contribution by Mrs Deborah Erskine on .

MLA
Mrs Deborah Erskine
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
21 April 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Cost-of-living Crisis
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5497578

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Families are struggling to make ends meet. Businesses are fighting to stay afloat. Farmers, hauliers and those in construction are being squeezed from every direction. Around two thirds of our homes rely on home heating oil. When prices spike, as they have done dramatically, our constituents feel that immediately and severely. Those who work in essential sectors such as agriculture, haulage and construction are also being crippled by soaring costs and rising prices. Those are not optional industries. Rather, they are the backbone of our economy. Although the motion criticises the Government's response, it is important to acknowledge fully how domestic policy choices are making matters worse. Excessive taxation on fuel, the cumulative cost of net zero policies and a clear lack of a cost-benefit analysis are all adding to the burden on working people. We must ensure that we do things in a balanced, affordable and realistic way.

Imposing additional costs on families and businesses without transparency or justification is not the right approach. We have seen how those rigid climate targets are impacting on major projects, including the A5, the A4 southern bypass and the A1. Many of those proposals, which have not been quantified, are being advanced under the current climate action plan. Families and businesses are being asked therefore to shoulder additional burdens without having clarity on what those costs will mean or what the return will be. It has been the DUP that has consistently called for practical and immediate measures. We need to see a reduction in fuel duty to ease the pressure at the pumps. We need VAT on home heating oil to be removed, at least temporarily, while the markets remain volatile. We need a serious and transparent assessment of the net zero policies. It is interesting to see that those in the Chamber who have called for that support have short memories, because, just last week, the SDLP, Sinn Féin, Alliance and, regrettably, the UUP all lined up to press ahead with a blank cheque instead of rightly carrying out cost checks on net zero targets. Many fiscal levers to ensure that homes — all homes — see support remain at Westminster. The SDLP, however, has got it wrong again. The support from the Executive is not "non-existent". Our Communities Minister has stepped up to support those homes that are most pressed. The Communities Minister took on that work to get support out the door. He has done that consistently, even when he was Economy Minister in 2022. Some people did not have their listening ears on in the Chamber yesterday during questions to the Minister for Communities, so, I repeat: the reason that it took a month was because the Minister wanted to get a plan together that supported not only those who are on benefits but working people and to test the options that were available to him and the Executive. While others talk a good talk, the DUP steps up and delivers. Let us not pretend, however, that regional interventions alone will solve the problem of scale. At Westminster, our DUP MPs have been clear that, when global prices rise, we need to see government policy that makes the decisions to sort out the excessive taxation. People do not want warm words or political point-scoring. Hitting out at the DUP here, when it is the DUP that is delivering in the Executive and speaking out on the issue at Westminster, is nothing more than opportunistic party political point-scoring. The DUP will continue to stand up for a fair and balanced approach to safeguarding household finances, supporting our key industries and ensuring that our working people are not left to carry the burden alone. We will continue our call at Westminster for action to support each household in Northern Ireland. It is time to cut the fuel duty and —

— remove VAT from home heating oil.

I will go again.

652 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: 0.07 (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 (0.90).
  • 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

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 framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.04No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.11No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.90Yes
Overall judgement0.07At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.93
Another identity-related subject0.04
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.02
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:21 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