Debate contribution: Job Losses: BT
Debate contribution by Mr Conor Murphy on .
- MLA
- Mr Conor Murphy
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 12 February 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Questions for Urgent Oral Answer
- Heading
- Job Losses: BT
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4218338
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for her question. I am at a slight disadvantage, in that, if I were responding to an announcement about those jobs, I might have more to say, but I am responding to a statement that announces a review, the outcome of which we do not know, although I agree with her that it raises a very significant concern. The rural west is an area that has largely lacked investment, both in its economy and in its infrastructure, which leads to economic investment. As a rural dweller and a border dweller, I get the urgency around the matter. As I have said, officials have already spoken to BT and will engage with its senior management tomorrow. This is part of an estates review, so I am not aware that it is a search for a different type of premises. Rather, it is a global exercise that BT has undertaken concerning its operations and its estate. We will, of course, endeavour to do all that we can to ensure that jobs are kept in Enniskillen and that those people who may, at some future date, become subject to a decision taken here get all the support that they can. In the first instance, however, the priority is to ensure that jobs are kept where they are needed.
Again, I find myself hamstrung by the fact that I am responding to an announcement of a review rather than to an announcement of a decision, but the question for urgent oral answer was taken, and here we are. I am not aware of what estate BT is looking at currently, other than that it is part of a global review of its operations and estate. My officials in Invest NI are dealing with BT and will be meeting representatives from it tomorrow. If there is any further update, I will be able to inform the Member.
Yes, they have been doing that and will continue to do so. As I said to the Member who asked the original question, I appreciate that potential job losses anywhere are to be regretted, but, in areas that do not have a good level of investment, such as the rural west, it is a matter of particular concern for entire communities. Of course, we will engage with BT as to what the possible outcome of its review might be and try to offer all the support that we can to the people of Enniskillen.
As I said, regional balance will be a particular focus of mine. I have made no secret of that, and I intend to give a statement to the House next week in relation to the broad approach to the policy across the Department for the Economy. Invest and the Department have a role to support business, to try to ensure that we sustain the jobs that we have and to attract and create more jobs, and to try to ensure, as I will into the future, that there is a regional balance approach to all that. Some of the decisions are taken by commercial companies in their own business interests. They are global companies, and they take global decisions outside the direct influence of the Executive or, indeed, the Department for the Economy. However, we will do all in our power to ensure that we sustain and maintain as many jobs as we can and that we get the proper spread of those jobs when we are creating them right across the entirety of the jurisdiction.
As I said, I will be making a statement to the Assembly, I think, next week in relation to all these matters, and I will expand on that further. Of course, we take that responsibility very seriously, and I have made no secret of the fact that I do not believe that there has been regional balance, particularly in areas like the west, the north-west and even the south, and where I come from in south Armagh, which have suffered from a lack of investment. That goes for Newry and other areas in south Down as well. We want to see that corrected in the time ahead, and we will work to see it corrected. In relation to this particular question, I appreciate that, in an area that has seen underinvestment, such a substantial potential loss of jobs would be very devastating. However, we are in a situation where we have to focus on skills and on getting people to a place where they can be available for jobs. We have a situation where we have more people seeking employees than we have available. It is a situation where, if a global company such as BT takes a decision that is detrimental to an area, we will put all our focus on ensuring that there are other opportunities for people in that area and in the areas that have been underinvested in to date.
820 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
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 (0.80).
- 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 | 0.80 | 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 | 0.90 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.07 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:37 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.