Debate contribution: Flooding in South Down: Economic Recovery

Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .

MLA
Mr Colin McGrath
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
27 February 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Adjournment
Heading
Flooding in South Down: Economic Recovery
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4238167

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the opportunity to take part in the Adjournment debate. What we saw last November was horrendous. It was devastation. At the time, we used the term "apocalyptic", because that is what it felt like. Many parts of South Down and beyond were impacted, but, when you have spent nearly 50 years growing up in a town, it is terrible to see it being absolutely wrecked in front of your eyes. It was terrible mostly because of the pain that you could see in the eyes of the town's business people, because they could see their futures being ruined in front of them. Being powerless as we stood alongside them, because there was nothing much that we could physically do at that time, was very difficult. What we do get is an opportunity afterwards to reflect and ask what things could be done differently to help people much more quickly. Like others in the Chamber who stood in those streets over those days, I know that, for the first couple of days, it was lonely, because no officials from any Department or agency were there to help us. That, I feel, contributed to the additional impact. Although we have the Economy Minister here, we need to see a whole-Executive response so that if flooding recurs in the future, there will be a much quicker response that helps people in their time of need. We are looking for financial resources, and it might be unpopular to say this, but it is about time. For four months, businesses have been left with very little help. They are losing their entire livelihood, and, to date, four months later, they have been given £7·5 grand. They are trying to get their businesses open and running again on £7·5 grand. They had to try to get through the Christmas period on £7·5 grand. They are trying to pay wages on £7·5 grand. They are trying to take some money themselves on £7·5 grand. Four months later, we are opening a scheme. The British Government — the Northern Ireland Office — announced £15 million back in December. The Civil Service announced £10 million in December. It then appeared that the £10 million was part of that £15 million. Then the scheme was about to be announced by the Northern Ireland Office at the end of January or the start of February. That was delayed, and here we are at the end of February announcing the scheme that will open, hopefully, and be sorted out in the next few weeks. These businesses have been waiting and waiting and waiting, and we are where we are. We need to get that money out to them, but we also need to do a review so that, in the future, if these things happen again in other places, it will not take four or five months before a pound goes into somebody's pocket to try to help them to be able to get over something that has completely wrecked their business or their home. We also have the scheme where money can be released automatically from councils to help people in their homes, but there is no similar scheme for businesses. That was rejected when my colleague brought it to the Executive a number of years ago. In places such as Downpatrick, we know that there is the potential for the flooding to happen again. As already referenced, we are only a couple of heavy rain days away from floods again in the future, so we need to see that review that is being carried out by the Department for Infrastructure, and we need to see it ASAP. If there are changes to be made to the tidal bridge, to the banks or to dredging, those need to happen before businesses are left next autumn or winter in exactly the same position of being left for months and months and months with no help or assistance. Do we welcome this money? Yes. Is it timely? No, it is too late, but let us get it out to the businesses that need it.

683 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.03 (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 (0.94).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.94Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject1.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:42 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