Debate contribution: Defence Industries
Debate contribution by Mr Philip McGuigan on .
- MLA
- Mr Philip McGuigan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 20 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Defence Industries
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490709
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Sinn Féin wants to deliver an economy that is based on creating good jobs, increasing productivity, tackling regional imbalance and transitioning to net zero to help improve the quality of life for workers and families who live here. Given years of Tory austerity and their attacks on public services, and our budgetary challenges and limited powers, that will not be without its challenges. It will require a strategic and focused approach if we are to make a meaningful impact on people's lives. That impact must be positive. It must be about improving people's quality of life. It has to include reducing poverty and addressing the existing skills deficit, and it should mean investing in all geographical areas of the North. Utilising and building on the potential of the all-island economy, we can grow our tourism and hospitality sector, our manufacturing sector and the green economy, which, as we have said in the Chamber on many occasions, has huge potential for our SMEs, our economy and our population. I recognise the highly skilled engineering jobs and workforce in the aerospace and shipbuilding sectors, the employment and apprenticeship opportunities that they have created and the significant innovation, research and development into aircraft and shipbuilding as well as cybersecurity. However, it is the shifting of the focus in this motion, and therefore the limited economic resources towards strengthening Britain's arms industry, that I must take issue with. We can build a strong economy without endorsing or helping to grow the arms trade, an industry that, let us face it, depends on and, in fact, needs profits from the perpetuation of conflict, destruction and death. We can see that with devastating effect and, tragically, its impact on human life every might watching the news. Sinn Féin is clear in its view that the USA and Britain must stop arming Israel, and it is also clear in its view that Invest NI government policy should not be supporting anything that ends up being used to carry out genocide. We cannot ignore Britain's track record in conflicts across the globe. In Britain's case, defence can mean intervening in conflicts or attacking nations around the world whenever and however it decides. Looking back at recent decades, let us not kid ourselves that any of these conflicts were about defending the shores of Britain. At the beginning of my contribution, I stated that Sinn Féin wants to deliver an economy based on creating good jobs, increasing productivity, tackling regional imbalances and transitioning to net zero to help to improve the quality of life for workers and families here. I want to add to those factors and state that ethical procurement and ethical investment should be a key focus of policy. There are many ways to grow our economy that do not make the North complicit in the promotion or expansion of Britain or any other nation's war machine.
480 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: 0.11 (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 (0.84).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
- 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 | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.11 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.09 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.84 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.95 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.03 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.80 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.10 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.01 |
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.