Debate contribution: Flooding in South Down: Economic Recovery

Debate contribution by Ms Liz Kimmins on .

MLA
Ms Liz Kimmins
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
27 February 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Adjournment
Heading
Flooding in South Down: Economic Recovery
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4238177

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate. Like the previous Member to speak, South Down is not my constituency, but Newry and Armagh were particularly badly hit as well by this unprecedented event. Others will agree that it was something that we have never seen before. Parts of Newry city centre and south Armagh saw unforeseen devastation, and they are dealing with it to this day. It will be a long time before they fully recover. It is important to pay tribute to the significant community response that we saw. It was definitely a case of all hands on deck. I was on the ground from the morning of the flooding, and it was incredible to see the community come together. I want to particularly mention Newry business improvement district (BID) in the city centre, which made a Trojan effort to support all the businesses across our city. Many of those businesses are still closed. As recently as this afternoon, I spoke to some of the businesses in Newry that do not know when they will be able to open due to the damage. That damage is sometimes not only directly in their premises but in adjoining premises, impacting access. It is clear, as others said, that we need a cross-departmental approach for dealing with the situation, because we need to look at so many elements of it. We need to find out why it happened. We need to find out what worked well and what did not, but that will require all relevant Departments to put their shoulder to the wheel and to make sure that we learn the lessons and deliver to ensure that it does not happen again. I thank my colleague Conor Murphy, the Economy Minister, for bringing forward the scheme. It is important to note that it is now three weeks since the restoration of the Executive and the Assembly, and the turnaround in the scheme has been fairly efficient. Many of the businesses in my constituency have been waiting four months for something to be brought forward. I feel that the Minister has listened to the businesses; he has certainly listened to those that he and I have engaged with on the ground from day 1 and that made very clear what their needs are and how they could be addressed. I thank him for that. One conversation is missing from the whole debate, and it is about the houses and homes that were affected by the flooding. They are part of the economic recovery, so it is pertinent to the debate. A very small number of homes across South Down and Newry and Armagh have been impacted, and they have been absolutely devastated. I have been dealing with a small number of families in my area who have been completely forgotten about. Yes, the nuts and bolts and fixtures and fittings of a home are so important, but, in some situations, it was life and death. I dealt with a family who were right beside Newry canal but were left to get themselves out in the pitch black at 4.00 am, with no response coming to them. The fear that that family, including the children, experienced, and how that has impacted them every day ever since, is just untold. I am so pleased that my colleague has brought the scheme forward, but I hope that the Minister for Communities is listening and watching. We need to see something to support those families. A £1,000 payment does not cut it. I have heard sympathy being expressed from right across the Chamber, and from the different officials to whom I have spoken over the past four months, but sympathy is not going to pay their bills or put a roof over their head, because they are still out of their home. Those children are absolutely traumatised every time that they hear heavy rainfall. They wonder whether their house, or where they are living at the minute, is going to be flooded and whether they will survive. I do not say that flippantly; that is the reality of what we are dealing with on the ground. We need to see delivery. The flooding impacted not just businesses but so many families in our area. Their livelihoods have been impacted. They are now worrying about how they are going to pay their mortgage and all the other bills that everyone else worries about every day, on top of worrying about how they are going to rebuild their homes and lives. I hope that the Communities Minister will listen to the plight of those families whose lives have been turned upside down. They watch on while other Departments fulfil their responsibilities to deliver for businesses within their remit. It is unprecedented, but we now have an opportunity to put the wrongs right and try to find a way forward that will provide long-term sustainable solutions. We need effective flood defences and a robust flood response. We also need the insurance system to be looked at, because all those affected have been impacted by the inability to get flood cover. I hope that we will be able to deliver for those people. I thank the Member for bringing forward this topic this afternoon.

876 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 (0.92).
  • 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 framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.92Yes
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 subject0.96
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.01
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.01
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01
Another identity-related subject0.01

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