Debate contribution: Regional Balance Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on 8 September 2026.

MLA

Mr Matthew O'Toole

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

8 September 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Regional Balance Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5674550

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am proud to speak in support of my brilliant colleague Sinéad McLaughlin's Bill. To say that it is a labour of love would be understating it. It has been a huge labour — a social democratic labour — of love, but it is also based on a deep love for the maiden city — the city of Derry — which Sinéad represents passionately. She was a champion of the city in a previous life as a councillor and, as she said, as a representative of the business community when she tried to create the best possible conditions for jobs and growth there. She also is, as we are as a party, a champion of sustainable growth and economic opportunity across the region, connected to our major economic hubs, the largest of which is Belfast, the city that I am proud to represent, and the next most important one — one that needs rebalancing and has had generations of underinvestment — is Derry.

I speak from a unique position in the sense that I represent a Belfast constituency but come from a rural market town that has experienced its own form of peripherality and lack of investment. I also have Derry lineage: my mum is from Derry. Indeed, a close member of my family has just moved back to Derry from London. I know the city well and am passionate about it, too, as is our party, as everyone knows. The structures and obligations created in the Bill are not designed to provide perfect and comprehensive policy solutions. They do not dictate what investment should happen in which place. They do not oblige Departments to spend a certain amount in every place or government to direct investment to a certain place. It is a much more subtle, flexible and innovative Bill than that. It is a short Bill, too, which is admirable. That is what Members' Bills are supposed to be designed to do because they can create real and meaningful impact and also allow an individual Member to navigate them through and Committees to interrogate them. That is what is happening today and what will happen at the Economy Committee. The Bill creates a number of obligations: a regional balance strategic framework; a statutory obligation that the Executive must provide one and consult with specific entities in so doing. There is a duty for Northern Ireland Departments to have due regard to said framework when producing policy. Each Department must provide an annual report on its adherence to the framework and review performance in relation to the framework. Sometimes, in this place, we talk about endless reviews and consultations, and that is a legitimate criticism of our policy-making process. It can feel like nothing ever really happens here, things are just consulted on, and, sometimes, guidance is not even issued. Statutory consultees are got in the room or via a Zoom call, they talk about things and then maybe a paper is produced at some point. That is not what the Bill is. It is a clear and focused set of requirements for the Department, and they are statutory requirements. I will come on to some of the questions raised about whether the statutory requirements should be placed on the whole Executive, as the Bill does, or on one Department. By the way, the Bill creates obligations for pretty much every Department. That is a reasonable critique for people to make, and it is important that those issues are fleshed out. There is nothing wrong in raising that point, and I am sure that it will be fleshed out further in discussion. The Bill is about creating legal obligations for the Department, not simply asking a Minister via correspondence or an Assembly question whether they will look at something but creating a binding obligation for Ministers to have due regard to regional balance when making policy. That statutory framework is something that we as elected representatives, the public out there when they come to vote, lobbying organisations, trade unions, charities, campaign groups and local chambers of commerce will be able to use to test the Executive against their delivery on regional balance. There are real structural problems with regional balance. I will not rehash them. They have been talked about by Members across the Chamber regarding relative levels of performance not just in economic terms but in a whole range of health outcomes, economic inactivity and educational outcomes across the region.

I will in one second. That persistent imbalance is among the major drivers of democratic frustration and disenfranchisement in the democratic world at the minute. It is clear that it is one of the drivers of populism and disenfranchisement, and it is something that all of us who have the privilege of being elected should be trying to tackle.

You have made your point. I will come to it, because is clear that Sinn Féin has come here today in an attempt to deflect from its responsibility for government over not just the past three years but the past 20 years.

To be clear, the DUP is in crisis. It is blocking lots of things. I make no bones about that.

I call it out all the time, Mr Delargy.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is important to respond to some of the points, because they form part of a line on the Bill that has been repeatedly taken by Sinn Féin Members. It is therefore important to address it. Sinéad and Mark have already addressed the point, but a couple of specific challenges need to be raised. The argument is that it would be wrong to create a legal obligation on the Executive, and I suppose that the suggestion is that the obligation should be on the Economy Minister specifically. I do not know whether that is what Sinn Féin is suggesting. You are shaking your head. In that case, it is impossible —.

No, I will not give way. I will speak for a little longer.

I will speak for a little longer, Mr Delargy. If you believe in a regional balance Bill, on whom should the legal obligation be? If it is not on an individual Minister or on the Executive, on whom should it be? How can we draft a Bill if we are not able to hold the Executive liable for anything?

I am happy to give way to Mr Delargy if he can explain his alternative.

Go.

I have given way.

I am afraid that that is one of the most bizarre arguments that I have ever heard any MLA make. You have just told me that the Executive cannot — should not — be held legally liable for anything —.

When I asked what the alternative was to holding the Executive to account for delivering on the regional balance strategic framework and the other obligations in the Bill, you did not tell me. The argument is that, because Sinn Féin is underperforming in the Executive and is attempting to deflect that underperformance purely

on to the DUP. Do not get me wrong: that is part of the story. The DUP is a blocker. I know that the DUP has blocked things, such as the 'good jobs' Bill — I do not dispute that — but we, as the official Opposition, will not give every other party on the Executive a free pass. When the First Minister stood for election, she said that Casement Park would be built. She said that the A5 would be constructed. She said that there would be 10,000 students at Magee. She did not say, "If the DUP lets me". We will therefore hold the entire, collective Executive to account for those promises, and we make no apology for doing so. I will hold Gordon Lyons to account for his failure in the arts sector, as I did earlier. I will hold Emma Little-Pengelly to account, as I did yesterday, for the DUP's antics: its blocking of reform and, yes, its blocking of the legislation on good jobs, which we support, that the Minister for the Economy is trying to get through. We make no bones about calling out the DUP. I do so every time that I am in the Chamber, as do my colleagues. The idea, however, that Sinn Féin can simply deflect, as it is trying to do now, from the performance of the Executive that it was elected to lead —.

Sorry, but I am on my feet. I have given way a couple of times. I may do so later in my remarks. The idea that Sinn Féin will simply be allowed to deflect from its performance is, I am afraid, fanciful. We will hold the DUP, the Alliance Party and the Ulster Unionists to account collectively and individually as Ministers, because that is the job of an Opposition. Now that I have made that clear, I will move on to what is in the Bill, which I had thought that all parties in the Chamber supported, because it is ambitious and innovative but also flexible. As I said, it does not set a cash or percentage amount for investment in individual regions. It does not even specify precisely the types of regional imbalance to be looked at, in part because it calls for a degree of flexibility. It is not straightforwardly about job creation and the activities of Invest NI, although that is clearly a major part of the Bill. It could also be about, for example — this is something that I want to unpack — the extent to which other regions are connected to Belfast and Derry and about other subregional drivers. For example, how well are people in rural Fermanagh — the Fermanagh representative who was here has gone — connected to Enniskillen? That is a regional balance question. It is about the extent to which people in rural Fermanagh are able to commute to Enniskillen and, indeed, further on, whether that is to Derry or Belfast. Not all areas are created the same. Belfast and Derry have distinctive economic advantages that relate to their being cities. We want to grow the economic advantages that Derry in particular has. It is a wonderful city. We want to increase the size of Magee and all the amazing things that go on there. I also want to understand what the Executive are doing to ensure that people in Downpatrick, which is my home town, Ballymena and Ballycastle are able to enjoy the proceeds of growth and investment that happen in Belfast. There may be a new investment in Belfast, which is a brilliant city that, like my colleague Kate Nicholl, I am really proud to represent. However, the regional balance story for Ballycastle, Downpatrick and Kilkeel — Diane Forsythe is not here any more — may be contingent on how well connected those places are via public transport to Belfast or, indeed, Derry or Dublin. There will be different issues along the A1/M1 Dublin-Belfast corridor. There are specific advantages. We know about the amazing advantages that Newry has, but we need to make sure that those opportunities are taken advantage of. This is an innovative, flexible Bill that is there to be scrutinised. There will be questions. I had a nice, testy little back-and-forth with Pádraig Delargy, but he raised a question about how those obligations will be understood. By all means, that is a question to be asked at Committee. The idea of simply not putting any obligations on any Minister ever — for what reason, I do not know — is surreal. By all means, let us ask some of those questions at Committee so that we can work out how the issues might be dealt with. I am really excited about the Bill. I am excited about the obligations that it will create. It is a long-term challenge to create more balance in the economy. I will say, in all sincerity, that the Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, is across this brief, which she is committed to and cares about. I do not dispute that at all. There have been really significant improvements. The original framework that was brought out by her predecessor, Conor Murphy, was clear in that regard. We as an Opposition have been clear in commending that. It is our job to hold this Minister and all Ministers to account for delivering it, both in robust terms in the Chamber and through the provisions of this excellent Bill when it becomes law. As a Belfast representative who grew up in rural County Down and whose ma is from Derry, I promise you that the Bill is a huge opportunity for our whole region, and I am really proud that our colleague has introduced it.

2,129 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:20 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