Motion or amendment: Ban Petroleum Licensing and Fracking
Motion or amendment by Mr Pádraig Delargy on .
- MLA
- Mr Pádraig Delargy
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 9 April 2024
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion · Private Members' Motion
- Heading
- Ban Petroleum Licensing and Fracking
- Assembly identifier
- Document 396728
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Ban Petroleum Licensing and Fracking
That this Assembly recognises that tackling climate change is a global priority and, to be successful, must be grounded on the principles of fairness and a just transition away from fossil fuel dependency towards a fairer and greener society powered by renewable energy; further recognises that we need to develop solar, tidal, onshore and offshore wind resources across the island of Ireland and off our coast; believes that a move towards renewable energy with a diversity of sources can increase energy security by reducing reliance on fossil fuel imports which are more susceptible to international markets; acknowledges the deep concerns communities have about the environmental and public health risks associated with practices such as hydraulic fracturing; and calls on the Minister for the Economy, as an important first step in moving away from fossil fuel dependency, to introduce a ban on petroleum licensing, drilling, and extraction.
151 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Also tabled by
Each MLA who tabled or co-signed this item has their own record:
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:52 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9. The text was identical to an already-assessed record, so the same answers were reused.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.