NIAPN Urges Action on Anti-Poverty Strategy and Mitigating Disability Cuts

NIAPN was invited to present to the Committee for Communities on Thursday, 27 April 2025 on the Anti-Poverty Strategy and the proposed disability benefit cuts. Becca Bor, development coordinator of NIAPN, and Dr. Ciara Fitzpatrick, UU law lecturer, expert on social security, and NIAPN vice-chair, briefed the committee.

The Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network (NIAPN) convenes an Advisory Panel of people with lived experience of poverty and hardship to discuss policy, respond to consultations, engage with policymakers and politicians, and learn about specific issues that interest them.

Upon receiving the invitation to present, NIAPN asked the members of the advisory panel to share their thoughts about the proposed cuts to disability benefits, the forthcoming anti-poverty strategy, and the general context of living in poverty. Their thoughts are quoted throughout the briefing below.

“MLAs getting a pay rise of over £20k while we struggle to make ends meet week to week is an insult. How can any of them claim to understand how it feels for us when they are justifying an increase on a wage which is already far higher than anybody I know.”

High Court Ruling on the Anti-Poverty Strategy 

Beginning of this month, March 2025, the High Court ruled, once again, that the Executive is in breach of its legal duty to implement an Anti-Poverty Strategy based on objective need. The judicial review was brought forward by CAJ, and Judge Humphries ruled that “The inescapable conclusion is that the Executive Committee is in breach of the section 28E duty to adopt an anti-poverty strategy”.  

During the court proceedings it was discovered that the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy that was worked on before the current mandate with input from the Expert Advisory Panel and the co-design group was essentially binned by the Minister. That the new anti-poverty strategy developed by the department is based on “A Scoping Review of the Literature on Poverty in Northern Ireland” conducted by the department. Furthermore, aside from a meeting in April 2024 and August 2024 by department officials and the minister regarding the Anti-Poverty Strategy, there was no urgency regarding the APS.  

In September 2024, CAJ issued the department the pre-action letter, and it was at this point the Minster took steps to nominate officials for a cross-departmental working group, and presented a timeline for the APS which differed than the one from the department in April 2024. 

The Minister has said that he will present the APS to the Executive by the end of March 2025, and that the Department would brief the Communities Committee on 27 March 2025. 

Relevant findings and recommendations regarding the Child Poverty Strategy 

Public Accounts Committee recommended, in agreement with the Audit Office’s scathing report on the Child Poverty Strategy that a strategy must “have clear, timebound targets, supported by a budget and monitored by an independent body such as an anti-poverty commission.”  

For a strategy to be effective, there must be specific poverty reduction targets throughout the duration of the strategy. There needs focus and prioritisation that is reflected in its monitoring. Whilst the DfC needs to lead the strategy, there must be joined up working from across the departments. There must be a ring-fenced budget for delivery of the targets within the strategy. The overarching framework should be to “Invest to Save”, whereby policies that focus on early intervention and prevention should be prioritised. 

These recommendations must form the basis for the APS. You will be aware of the importance of ensuring an anti-poverty strategy based on objective need meets these criteria of an effective strategy. 

Deep concern regarding the exclusion of civil society 

NIAPN is deeply concerned that the Minister has indicated that he will not be engaging with any of the co-design groups from the social inclusion strategies going forward, including the anti-poverty strategy co-design group. 

The Minister used the phrasing “out-sourcing public policy to lobby groups” which we find highly problematic, as the point of co-design was not to out-source but to work in partnership with organisations within civil society. 

The members of the co-design group are experts in their fields, with extensive knowledge regarding the evidence and research on poverty. They are key stakeholders and organisations that are connected to and represent the lived experience of those experiencing poverty. 

It is unclear what the process is now. Will there be any engagement with civil society in the future? Will there be engagement with anyone with lived experience of poverty? 

Concern about the direction of government policy in regard to poverty 

“The £20 UC payment during Covid really made a difference for me, as did the holiday payments for children. They took these away while the price of everything continued to go up. Everything has only gotten worse.”

NIAPN is gravely concerned about the lack of urgency that the Department and the Executive have displayed by not yet producing an APS. The cost of doing nothing is detrimental to the people of Northern Ireland. In particular, the human cost for children will have lifelong adverse effects on their health, well-being, education, employment opportunities and will present society with greater social ills in the future.  

The Audit Office report on the Child Poverty Strategy noted that currently the cost of child poverty to our public sector is between £850 and £1bn annually. Stormont is paying for the impact of poverty, rather than investing in eradicating poverty.  

After years of curbing poverty rates in Northern Ireland, there are worrying trends that need to be addressed immediately.  

Due to government’s current policies, child poverty is increasing with 24% of children living in poverty. The impact of welfare reform and the 2-child limit has had a detrimental impact on children. Cuts to the school holiday food grant and other education cuts have increased financial pressures on households, leading to increases in child poverty. 

“It makes me feel like I’ve let them down and will impact them in future that their childhood was so chaotic.”

The social housing shortage, which has pushed many into the private rental sector, will further impoverish those on low incomes. Rents have been rising astronomically, and while Local Housing Allowance was uprated this past year, rents also continued to soar. We do not yet have the data on the impact. In 2023, however, the average rental shortfall is £116 per month for households receiving LHA through Universal Credit, and £90 per month for those receiving housing benefits. 

“Everything always feels temporary because of this. It doesn’t give the space to think long term about employment or anything like that as I never know where I’ll be living.”

Women are more likely to be in low wage work, part-time work, and take career breaks for caring. Therefore, women earn less throughout their lives and receive a smaller pension.  Women are more likely to be carers for children, older people and their disabled family members. Women are more likely to be responsible for the welfare of their households. Women are more likely to be in receipt of benefits.  

Currently, before the proposed cuts to PIP and disability benefit, disabled people have higher rates of poverty than the non-disabled population.  

Worrying trends of increased stigma of people on benefits 

“Why are we always being questioned or having to prove that we are entitled? If our doctors or medical team have diagnosed our illness or disability, there is no need for this whole process which puts us under pressure.”

“It’s like they are trying to catch us out.”

On the eve of when the APS is supposed to be delivered, the DfC announced that it will prioritise tackling benefit fraud.  This focus on fraud was raised by Keir Starmer, followed up by media spotlights and exposés, and then repeated by the DfC Minister. Benefit fraud and department error is 2% of the DfC expenditure. Increasing resource to address benefit fraud before spending money on lifting people out of poverty is misguided.  

Trussell Foundation and Joseph Rowntree Foundation researched the gap between the cost of essentials (£120 per week for a single adult) and benefits (£92 per week for a single adult over 25; £73 p/w for a single adult under 25). Their Guaranteed Essentials campaign clearly shows that people cannot make ends meet on the current benefit system. Furthermore, the shortfall between housing benefit and LHA and rents in the private rental sector show that people cannot afford their housing, and, therefore, the numbers presenting as homeless are bound to continue to grow. 

Therefore, any focus or prioritisation on benefit fraud before ensuring that benefits cover minimal essentials is a waste of money and resource because it does not address the root cause of the problem. Furthermore, it further stigmatises and casts doubt on the integrity of all benefit recipients.  

Proposed Disability Cuts – “Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working” Green Paper 

“Really worried about the changes and cuts to disability support. It’s already stressful having to fight for everything.”

“Caring for an adult child with complex needs is already difficult. Having to put ourselves through a process of proving we deserve support is something we don’t need. Their needs are lifelong, they won’t get better, why is support reviewed every few years?”

Disability and poverty 

Half of households in poverty include a person with a disability across the UK (JRF). Furthermore, more than one in five disabled people live in relative poverty in NI (Disability Action).  

According to Scope charity, the average cost of a disability is £1010 month. The purpose of PIP is to address issues of equity around increased cost of disability, yet currently, before any cuts to PIP, United Nations has criticised the UK for disability payments not being sufficient. Currently, PIP payments range from £1500 to £9610 per year depending on the claim. This is means an individual on maximum PIP would receive £800 per month, which is a £200 shortfall from the average cost of a disability. 

Disability, ill health and Northern Ireland 

NI has high rates of disability and ill health, with 20% higher rates than the UK. There is a strong correlation between areas that saw the worst violence of the Troubles, those with the highest levels of deprivation and the highest levels of ill health and disability. 

The proposed disability cuts would have a huge impact in this region which is still emerging from conflict. No account is being taken of the epidemic of PTSD here, which has been shown to increase the severity of issues faced by people with mental ill-health. (O’Neill et al, 2015, Towards A Better Future: The Trans-generational impact of the Troubles on Mental Health, Belfast, Commission for Victims and Survivors) 

There is a Mental Health Crisis in NI, with one in five adults and one in eight children having mental illness according to the “Mental Health in NI Fundamental Facts” report 2023. Additionally, mental health services are not fully funded, and the waiting lists are astronomical. For example, the CAMHS waiting lists reported by the Dept of Health in March 2024 had 1,990 children waiting across NI. 1,026 of those children have been waiting over 9 weeks, which is completely unacceptable with mental health emergencies. 

According to JRF, the increase of people with poor health and disability after 10 years of austerity, cuts to public sector, welfare reform and COVID 19 is consistent with the increase of disability benefit uptake. Therefore, the arguments about a too permissive disability benefit system are unfounded. 

Northern Ireland has the highest NHS waiting lists in UK, with over half a million people on waiting lists to see a specialist and half of those have been waiting more than a year.  

The question that this committee should be asking is what policies and initiatives is the Department implementing in coordination with other departments to improve well-being and health across NI, so that in one generation there are fewer people relying on disability benefits because they are healthier. The conversation should be about supports, interventions and well-being, not about cuts, sanctions and further stigmatisation. 

Disabled people and the barriers to paid work 

We are more than our capacity to engage in the formal workforce. Government policy needs to ensure that all residents are valued and all deserve dignity. You will want to ensure that policies and initiatives are person centric, compassionate, and strive to understand and value the lived experience of those impacted. 

Research consistently shows that disabled people who are out of work want to work at a higher rate than those out of work who are not disabled. However, there are concrete barriers to the formal workforce for disabled people. 

Disabled people submit on average 2.5 times as many job applications than those without disabilities, yet receive fewer interviews and job offers. Many disabled people report that if they tick the box of having a disability, they are not likely to get an interview. 

Work in Progress report (Disability Charities Consortium 2013) showed that NI employers are not willing to provide reasonable adjustments, even though they are legally required to. There is a general lack of knowledge by employers of what might be required of them and an incorrect assumption that reasonable adjustments would be expensive. Employers are generally more flexible, positive, and willing to pay for reasonable adjustments towards existing employees who become disabled than towards a new hire.   

Extensive research shows that the best ways of getting disabled people into work is to “place, train and support” in work, rather than through job skills programmes that are disconnected to jobs. This is true for disabled and non-disabled people alike. 

Furthermore, there are not enough jobs in some parts of the North – particularly West of the Bann – to provide employment for all the non-disabled people of working age. There are only 79 jobs for every 100 people of working age in NI, compared to 86 jobs per 100 working age people in Britain and West of the Bann it is closer to 65 jobs for every 100 people of working age.(ref: https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/gor/2013265932/report.aspx ) 

Finally, many people with disabilities leave school with few GCSE’s and therefore are more likely to be employed in low wage work, which may not be a path out of poverty. 

 

Looking forward to the Anti-Poverty Strategy

With the Anti-Poverty Strategy due, it is extremely important that it is a strategy takes a lifecycle approach. It must imbed preventative interventions, whilst also supporting those in poverty and those in persistent and deep poverty. 

The APS needs investment. Particularly with an aim to reducing “Adverse Childhood Experiences”. Currently, 5,000 children are in temporary accommodation, yet research shows that stable housing is a key driver of mental well-being. 70% of those experiencing homelessness have a diagnoses mental health condition. (Mental Health in NI 2023 report) 

The focus on “making work pay” in the proposed cuts to disability benefits, does not take into account the reality that NI remains a low-wage economy. Median annual earnings for full-time employees in NI were £34,400 in 2024, lower than the UK median of £37,400. (NISRA 2024, Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings).  Low pay means that some two thirds of the children who are living in poverty are in households where at least one adult is in paid work. 

While wages are lower, the cost of getting to work is a lot higher. NI is both more rural and has the lowest subsidy of public transport of any region of the UK. The Treasury produces annual figures which show public spending on services in the nations and regions of the UK. In 2022, public transport spending per head in Northern Ireland was £193, compared to £299 in Wales and around £465 in England and Scotland. (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwywjjyl919o#:) 

Furthermore, the absence of the 30-hour free childcare offer available to families in Britain adds considerably to the cost of working here.  

This means that any APS which focuses on work as a way out of poverty has to include plans to improve public services and strengthen employment rights and conditions that facilitate making work pay. 

Further commends on debt:

“I can’t survive these days without being in debt, relying on credit to afford bills”

“Why are we made to pay more for bills like gas and electric, then hear that these companies have made record profits or their CEO’s salaries have doubled? It’s insulting. Utilities should be nationalised and not something for people to profit off on the backs of ordinary people.”

Eligibility thresholds – in-work poverty

“Eligibility for so many schemes are too rigid, they should be gradual e.g. not getting help with warm homes scheme or being entitled to free school meals, uniform payments or EMA. We are on a low income, but never eligible for any kind of help due to working.”

“My small working pension means I won’t get pension credit. I am struggling more than ever but not entitled to help. I can’t afford to retire and am really worried about how I’ll survive financially as I get older. I feel I would have been better off never working.”

“Where is the help for people on a low income? Our wages haven’t went up with inflation. Talk about poverty is always about people on benefits. I don’t get benefits and struggle more than people I know who do.”

“Every child should get a free school meal no matter their parent’s income.”

Housing

“We need more social housing built. Myself and others have went through the process of being homeless, being stuck in unsuitable temporary accommodation.”

“We are put into 2 bed homes which are no good for young families. We aren’t getting the chance to establish roots, build community and provide a safe secure home for our children.”

“So much money is going to private landlords to house people in hotels, B&Bs and unsuitable temporary housing. Why can this not be put into building new homes?”

Watch NIAPN’s brief below, beginning at minute 50.