Member's statement: Fuel Prices
Member's statement by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 21 September 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Fuel Prices
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5741776
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank Matthew O'Toole for being so excited in his contribution when highlighting our excellent DUP conference at the weekend and our good unionist friends in Great Britain. Fuel prices are shocking. Diesel has hit £2 a litre, and we feel that pain at the pumps, but we can be assured that the rise will affect much more than that. Our hard-pressed working families feel it in their fuel and heating costs. It is also hitting the heart of our economy. Our farmers and fishermen, the backbone of our local agri-food sector, are being hammered once again. Those sectors are heavily reliant on fuel, and soaring costs run the risk of putting them under for good. Our small businesses and local tradesmen are on the road across the Province daily, and they continuously see their profits diminish. The prices that they pay for their fuel have been rocketing since they quoted for jobs. How are they supposed to manage running their businesses? For transport businesses, including hauliers, it is devastating for an industry that is already under pressure, with a large coach or HGV taking around 400 litres of diesel. The recent increase could see them hitting an extra £180 on average for a tank of diesel. That is unmanageable.
People do not often think of the bigger impact of the pressures on the haulage sector. It means that less food and fewer supermarket products make it on to our shelves and that more of our restaurants and building suppliers are pressurised when it comes to getting supplies. It further drives up the prices for those who cannot access those materials. We also have the impact on our public services. Transportation services, including taxis, are contracted on rates that are based on the fuel cost at that time, which may be lower. With those costs escalating, it might be unaffordable to run those businesses. We could have children who might not get to school and patients who might not get to their appointments. We could see pressures on airports, our tourism sector, sports teams and weddings. No aspect of our lives will be unaffected by it. We need to see an intervention on the escalating fuel costs now. They are crippling our households, businesses, sole traders, farmers and fishermen. It is pressurising our public services. It is felt by every person here. We need to see an extension of the reliefs for hauliers and cuts in fuel duty and taxes on red diesel beyond this year. We need to see further interventions. Action is needed now, before it is too late to recover. We saw a UK Government intervention on electricity costs, but any support on fuel needs to be direct. It should not have taken a special scheme in Northern Ireland to sort it out. The zero rate on VAT for domestic electricity should have applied automatically. The Windsor framework was a barrier, and the Government need to stand up to the EU on that. We need action on fuel costs, which are crippling everyone. Our DUP MPs will raise that issue at the heart of Westminster, and every MLA should raise it at every opportunity.
527 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: 0.09 (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 (0.94).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.10 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.09 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.94 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.05 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.79 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.14 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 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.