Debate contribution: Job Creation: Ambitious Targets
Debate contribution by Mr Conor Murphy on .
- MLA
- Mr Conor Murphy
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 19 March 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Job Creation: Ambitious Targets
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4279759
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Members for the debate. It was very informative, and a lot of very good points were made. I apologise that I missed the debate last week, when I was away on travels, but the nature of the debates, particularly on the economy, has been very constructive. I hope that we continue in that vein and collectively realise that, if we pull together, we can make a distinct improvement on some of the problems. I do not underestimate the challenges and problems in particular areas of our economy, and that has focused my efforts on trying to provide strategic focus to the Department. I outlined that vision with a focus on good jobs, regional balance, productivity and decarbonisation, and I was glad to see that, in this and previous debates — I am aware of the debate last week — there has been a high level of consensus on that. The ambition is to create 5,000 jobs, and some Members wondered where that figure came from. It may follow on from an ambition set out in the New Decade, New Approach agreement. I like Stewart Dickson's approach of SMART targets rather than just arbitrary targets; nonetheless, it is useful to have targets. New Decade, New Approach set out to achieve 5,000 cybersecurity professionals by 2030, and, currently, there are approximately 10,000 people employed in the software sector and 15,000 employed in fintech or financial services. The rise of digitisation and AI means that there will be tech jobs in nearly every sector of our economy, from retail to agriculture to advanced manufacturing and cybersecurity. The challenge is to manage that revolution in technology in a way that supports good jobs, innovation and productivity, regional balance and a transition to net zero. A key indicator of a good job is the level of pay. Currently, 15% of jobs here pay less than the real living wage, and that figure must come down. I want everyone to earn at least the real living wage. The sectors highlighted in the motion are higher-paying, so growing those sectors should increase the number of higher-paying jobs in the economy. While developing the sectors, we must be aware of the need to ensure that women and people with disabilities can access opportunities. There is a gender employment gap of around 7% and a gender pay gap of approximately 8%. Evidence suggests that that gap is connected to the higher prevalence of women in part-time employment: 23% of part-time jobs are low-paid compared to 6·4% of full-time jobs. Part of the solution is more affordable childcare support, and I am keen to work with the Department of Education to take that forward. People with caring responsibilities would benefit from more-flexible working patterns. Members are aware that I will bring forward a wide-ranging good jobs Bill during this mandate. The Assembly debated a motion last week on the importance of protecting workers' rights, and while I could not be in the Chamber for that debate, I was pleased to hear the level of support across the Chamber for ambitious, new employment rights legislation. Flexible working arrangements will be included in the consultation, which will inform the content of the Bill, because remote or hybrid working, along with flexible working patterns, provide opportunities for more people to take up employment. The sectors outlined in today's motion are high-productivity industries that will improve our overall economic performance. Our dual market access, as a result of the Windsor framework, provides us with a significant opportunity to grow exports on both a North/South and east-west basis. To maximise the benefit of that unique market access, we will need to have the right level and mix of skills demanded by those sectors. That means supporting higher-level skills development and ensuring that our skills system is responsive to evolving need. Our city and growth deals provide a platform from which to grow jobs in those sectors. Again, provision of relevant skills for those investments will be key. My Department will enable clusters of companies, universities and colleges to flourish regionally and on an all-island basis. That will build on the previous work on priority sectors and will be a key driver of exports, job creation and regional productivity growth. The motion highlights the need to ensure that good jobs are available in rural as well as urban locations, and the amendment highlights the need for targets to address regional imbalance. Regional balance is one of my core priorities. My Department, along with Invest NI, will work in partnership with local councils, local enterprise agencies, the business community and the community and voluntary sector to identify regional challenges and strengths. That collective effort will enable targeted action to develop local businesses and incentivise investment in areas with real regional strengths. While high-quality FDI has an important role to play, the majority of job creation over the next few years will be from our own indigenous entrepreneurs. We already have significant assets at local level. Our regional further education college network, in particular, is an asset that we can further leverage for economic development. I think that that was a point that Mr Honeyford made. I have discussed the need for targets on regional balance with the new chief executive of Invest NI. Those will be aligned to a wider regional plan, which will be co-designed with regional partners and stakeholders. Although it is not mentioned in the motion, some Members raised the issue of decarbonisation, which offers opportunities to realise policy goals, as well as being necessary in its own right. We have a legal and moral obligation to drive down emissions and meet our net zero commitments. We can and must do that in a way that creates more and better jobs. The green economy is an area of enormous potential. We already possess specialities in areas such as green hydrogen. The green energy sector will be a source of productivity and job growth across the region. We have the capacity to become a global leader in the green economy by developing locally the solutions, products and services that will be used around the world. We have the resources, including wind, biomethane and geothermal, to become not only self-sufficient but an exporter of affordable renewable energy. We have the strategic opportunities to collaborate across the island through the single electricity market to support those aims. A huge number of issues were raised by Members during the debate, most of which I agree with. Gary Middleton raised points about areas of deprivation and regional balance. I am glad that he welcomed the appointment of the new CEO of Invest, who brings experience to the role, including experience of the South, where regional balance has been achieved more successfully than it has been here. I agree with Gary Middleton and the many others who mentioned the need for the skills pipeline. I think that Sorcha Eastwood said that the skills pipeline will be served if we get back to the starting point, which is by ensuring that children get the best possible start, young people get the best possible careers advice and all the pathways that are available to people throughout their lives are offered to them. We must ensure that children and young people and their parents are fully aware of those pathways. That is something that I have already spoken to the Education Minister about. I am very happy to take up an area of work with him in that regard to ensure that our colleges, our university system and our schools are fully utilised to make sure that the best opportunities for our young people emerge. Sinéad McLaughlin mentioned the subregional issue and Invest NI's track record on visits. I accept that that does not make for good reading. That has to change. Invest NI already has the power. Many agencies that promote jobs and the economy use their own financial incentives to ensure that government policy is met. That is what I expect Invest NI to do in future. We have had a commitment regarding regional balance in the Programme for Government for, I am sure, almost a decade now. Departments should be adhering to that. We need to make sure that all Departments step up to the plate in that regard. I think that Sorcha Eastwood and Stewart Dickson mentioned the ability to return to work and the value that social enterprises play in that regard. The difficulty is that we have lost EU funding, which supported that endeavour. That has been replaced in a very sporadic and uncertain way by the Shared Prosperity Fund. Part of the discussion that we will have with Treasury in the time ahead will be about getting more certainty in relation to that funding. That is, clearly, a significant gap that has been left in the Department for the Economy's budget. We managed to plug that during COVID, but it has now been left unfilled. That is something that we want to concentrate on in the time ahead. Sorcha Eastwood also mentioned the definition of "good jobs". As she said, it is about much more than simply pay. There are other factors that act as indicators, such as demands not being excessive; employment security; opportunities for career development; discretion over how work is organised; social support from management and co-workers; union representation; participation in organisational decision-making; work being safe to undertake; and work-life balance being provided for. I have asked Dr Lisa Wilson to work with the Department to review those indicators and help us to establish the best means of monitoring the creation of good jobs. Dr Wilson will also help us to produce data to allow for more analysis of that issue. As I said, there is much more to good jobs than simply a wage packet. I take Pádraig Delargy's point about positivity about the region. Of course, we have to talk up our areas. We have to ensure that, when people go to them, we have a good story to tell, so that they want to support them. However, we do not ignore the challenges that there are across the region. Those challenges are found in some urban areas of this city, where there is also deprivation. We need to be mindful of promoting the positives while not forgetting the challenges. I accept that, at the end of the three years, we will be judged on what we have delivered against the targets that we set out. I accept that and am quite happy to be judged on what we have produced at the end of the three-year period. David Honeyford's point about stability — I think that Stewart Dickson made the same point about political stability — was one of the main aspects of the discussion that we had in the States this week; we talked about dual market access and political stability. Those are critical in trying to develop that programme of work, just as they have been to many others that sought to reform the health service or education service. All those programmes require political stability. They also require funding. That is another matter that the Executive have to work on with Treasury. They require more than an annual budget, which does not allow for longer-term planning. We have said that we are happy to discuss how we achieve political stability for the institutions. We are here for the long haul to do that job. Some of the other points related to the FE sector. Quite clearly, we need to continue to work with our FE sector. It has accepted, and I have accepted, that it is underutilised. It has a significantly good estate, which previous Economy Ministers invested in. I acknowledge that. We need to ensure that that is linked in right through our education system. It is a critical, key component in what should be a seamless education system from nursery school right through to the end of people's academic pursuits. I am glad to see that there is not only general agreement about the type of economy that we must aim for but wide recognition that we must consider inclusion, whether that is of women, people with disabilities or those from rural or more deprived areas. I welcome the substance of the motion and hope that the Assembly recognises that it aligns well with the economic vision that I have set out. I am focused on taking a comprehensive approach that will result in a highly productive, zero-carbon, regionally balanced economy that provides good jobs.
2,092 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: 0.03 (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 (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.85 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.14 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:53 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.