Debate contribution: Job Creation: Ambitious Targets

Debate contribution by Mr Jonathan Buckley on 19 March 2024.

MLA

Mr Jonathan Buckley

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

19 March 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Job Creation: Ambitious Targets

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4279772

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I thank the Member for Foyle for that grand introduction. At this stage, we are in an almost unique situation, given that I am the third Member to wind up the debate: the Minister stole those clothes, then there was the Member for Foyle and now me. It has got to the stage where everything has been said but not everybody has said it. I enjoyed the debate in which the members of the Economy Committee have engaged. To a large degree, there is a real sense of energy and need. I will not go into the specifics of what every Member said, because other contributors have done so. The debate clearly set out to me — I very much agree with the Member for Lagan Valley Ms Eastwood on this — the connection between careers, education and the jobs of the future. It is so important that we get that right in order to go forward. Everybody can have ambitious targets for job creation, and, if we break it down, we are looking at a changing economy. Jobs of the future are not the same as jobs of the past. Mr Delargy mentioned the skills gap and productivity. It was important to raise those two key issues. He said that addressing those issues is about preparing our people for future employment. In order to do so, however, we have to have a careers service that is fit for purpose and enables our employers to look to the workforce to fill the jobs of the future. That is very much what the intention of the motion was. It was about looking at creating the conditions for employers to be able to fill new and emerging jobs in new and emerging sectors. Going forward, it will be so important that those jobs enter the mix. They already have to some degree, but there is much more work to be done. When proposing the amendment, Sinéad McLaughlin said:

"what you do not measure, you cannot achieve".

That is a fair comment. While we may look at the 5,000 jobs as a manifesto commitment, the aspirations for this place are endless, if the Assembly gets it right, but we have to put in place a structure that allows employers to benefit from areas of economic inactivity. The Minister and Ms Eastwood touched on the point about the number of people who are disabled and could contribute to the workforce and close that productivity gap. We could put people to work in creative industries and in the jobs of the future. That is admirable. I go back to the start of the debate in relation to careers services. It will be so important to have that vital link-up. We said in the Committee that we were not reaching our young people early enough to enable them to steer a path towards a good job. I know that we are open to a debate on what a good job is and how that is defined, but, in a sense, everybody should have the ability to access a good job.

Yes, absolutely.

I thank the Member for her intervention, because that is crucial, if we are to target those industries. We should not shun industries such as digital, agri-tech, advanced manufacturing, life and health sciences and fintech. Those are the careers of the future, but, if we are not getting that message downstream quickly enough, as the Member mentioned, we run the risk of exacerbating the productivity gap. That comes down to the targeted message. Ms McLaughlin touched on the point well in relation to the postcode lottery. It should not be about a postcode lottery, but, in the same sense, I agree with Mr Elliott's comments — he has just entered the Chamber — that there are people who have existed in those pockets of deprivation and isolation in rural constituencies and, as entrepreneurs, have been far ahead of those in urban areas and town centres in being able to grasp the jobs of the future. I remember having a conversation with a significant business owner in Fermanagh, in hospitality. I presumed, because I felt that it was very much the case in town centres and cities, that people working from home had devastated town centres. In many cases, it has, because the workforce no longer supports other indigenous businesses. The view was different in Fermanagh, however. He was able to point to the fact that people who had worked in London or Cardiff had come home and were supporting his indigenous business. One size does not fit all. When we go forward, we need to look at the different aspects and the way in which our citizens can put themselves to good use and have a career of the future in a good, well-paid job that enables them to develop into something else. The motion mentions ambition. The Sinn Féin Members mentioned the growth of jobs in the renewable green sector. They will be vital in the mix, if we can get issues such as planning in order to enable those jobs to become a reality. That is a real opportunity for Members from all parties to grasp. The Democratic Unionist Party welcomes Members' genuine engagement on the issue. We remain unashamedly committed to growing the Northern Ireland economy, and we want to see an ambitious approach taken to creating better, well-paid jobs, which, in turn, will lead to greater prosperity for all. I take the point — it is something that we need to focus on — that it is very easy in geographical locations for individual Members to talk places down. That is normally because we are dealing with negative circumstances, where we feel emotive and need to speak out. When it comes to international investors, however, whether or not it concerns a local constituency, the point is that they need to hear that there is a workforce — our people are our skill set — and it is our job to make sure that people are well equipped and prepared for the jobs of the future. That will ensure that we can not only have ambitious targets for job creation but realise that potential of job creation.

1,040 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

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.

Challenge this classification