Debate contribution: Ban Petroleum Licensing and Fracking

Debate contribution by Mr Danny Donnelly on .

MLA
Mr Danny Donnelly
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
29 April 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Ban Petroleum Licensing and Fracking
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4486650

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I rise in favour of the motion, and I thank the Sinn Féin Members for bringing it forward. In February 2020, one of the first acts of the previous Assembly, following its restoration at the end of a three-year deadlock, was to declare a climate emergency. Much of the wording of that motion remains relevant over four years later, such as the statement that the Assembly:

"recognises that we are facing climate breakdown and a biodiversity crisis, which are impacting here and now, and will affect all aspects of our lives in coming years" — [Official Report (Hansard), Bound Volume 125, p134, col 2].

We only have to look at Lough Neagh to see the damaging impacts of climate inaction. The previous Assembly made considerable progress on climate legislation through the passage of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, with its emissions targets of net zero by 2050, sectoral plans for key industries, carbon budgets to deliver on the main targets, and plans to have a Northern Ireland climate commissioner and climate action plan. It is essential that that Act is delivered in full. We cannot afford to water down our targets, as we have seen happen in Scotland. Transitioning away from fossil fuel dependency is often mistakenly seen as an economic negative. That is not the case. New sources of renewable energy require new skills to ensure a fair and equitable transition, therefore creating newer and greener jobs. That transition must be fair, and must not impact on households financially, as we all need to be able to heat our homes. Furthermore, as outlined in the Department for the Economy's 'Onshore Petroleum Licensing Policy' consultation document, a ban on petroleum licensing, drilling and extraction would not have a significant impact on jobs or our wider economy. It would, however, play an important role in us meeting our climate targets. We need secure, affordable and clean energy, as was outlined in the Department's previous energy strategy, which looks towards the long-term vision of a net zero carbon economy. Banning petroleum licensing, drilling and extraction has been recommended by international research from the International Energy Agency and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. There is broad support for a change in approach from the Department, and I welcome that the new Economy Minister recognises that that should be the case. As we have mentioned, there are far more fossil fuels than we can safely burn. The more that we extract, the greater the risk of climate catastrophe, so we need to keep them in the ground. Like my colleague Stewart Dickson did, I will touch on one of the most important issues that faces my constituency of East Antrim. In my current role as an MLA, and in my previous role as a councillor for Larne Lough district electoral area (DEA), two projects of huge concern to me and my colleagues have been the oil terminal at Cloghan Point near Whitehead and the construction of the gas caverns under Larne lough. It is clear that the approval of such large-scale fossil fuel projects runs contrary to our climate change commitments and targets, shackling us to fossil fuels for decades to come. I encourage the Minister for Infrastructure to consider how planning legislation can be amended so that climate targets can be a consideration in planning applications, especially those of such scale. The motion refers to the deep concerns that communities have about the environmental and public health risks associated with practices such as hydraulic fracturing. That is more prevalent in East Antrim than in any other constituency, especially as — I am sure that every Member will agree — the coastline of east Antrim and Larne lough is incomparable in its natural beauty and biodiversity. I am very proud of the local community and its work in opposing these unnecessary projects. That includes the work of organisations such as Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal, Friends of the Earth and No Gas Caverns. I am sure that Members will remember the successful Stop the Drill campaign in Woodburn Forest a couple of years ago. Those are local people who are campaigning to protect their local environment for future generations. If we are serious about meeting our climate change and net zero targets, we cannot permit the continuation of such projects, with their potentially devastating impact on local communities. We need to stop them as soon as possible. Although the motion could have been strengthened by greater references to our climate targets and an opposition to wider and cross-cutting projects that will have a disproportionate impact on those targets, I am happy to support the motion. I hope that the Economy and Infrastructure Ministers will do what they can to progress our path towards net zero.

794 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 framing0.03No
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 subject0.96
Another identity-related subject0.02
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.01
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:20 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