Debate contribution: All-Ireland Tourism
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 18 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- All-Ireland Tourism
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4497331
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Whether it is from Downpatrick to Dunmore or Malin to Mizen, the island of Ireland boasts almost 33,000 square miles of natural beauty. It has a heritage and history of many thousands of years and a people known the world over for their humour, generosity and kindness. This shared home that we inhabit has words and wonder and music and mythology woven through its rich history and heritage. All across the world, people make their journeys to this island to visit an ancestral home, catch up with family or enjoy a holiday. Regardless of why people make the journey here — for some, it is even a spiritual pilgrimage — one thing is inevitable: they return home changed for the better, such is our impact on them. As custodians of this ancient isle, it is our duty to struggle with that most difficult of dichotomies: how do we manage a landscape that is aged and shaped by its natural surroundings and then package a tourism product that is shaped by poets and dreamers that we can market to outside nations? That is an unenviable task, but it is a worthwhile one. It is because of our ability to do that that we have created such well-known tourism brands in South Down as the legacy of St Patrick, the Mourne Mountains, the 'Game of Thrones' tour, historic golf clubs in Newcastle and Ardglass and the world-renowned Fiddler's Green Festival in Rostrevor. That is a only snapshot of what we have to offer in one part of this isle. There is much more that we can still do, and we will do it through our ability to bring our tourism product to others, whether that is through improved park-and-ride facilities in Newcastle and Downpatrick or access to the wider island by using the Carlingford ferry or what will soon be available through the completion of the transformative development of the Narrow Water bridge. The opportunities for the further enhancement of our tourism product will be limited only by our ambition. By matching our tried-and-tested tourism brands, which have been referenced in the debate, with those in the South, such as Ireland's Ancient East — of which South Down is an essential part — and Ireland's Hidden Heartlands, I have no doubt that we will be able to inhabit, share and grow in the affections of people the world over. To do anything less than that would be absolutely ridiculous. We have the products. We have everything in place, but we just are not doing the marketing and making the connections to bring the two halves together.
In doing that, what will we do? We will enhance the economies on both sides, we will encourage jobs and we will bring prosperity. There is absolutely nothing to be lost by connecting the tourism products and selling what we have in spades and what we do best. That is why I support the motion.
489 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: 0.04 (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 (0.65).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.65 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.44 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.26 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.15 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.08 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.05 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:38 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.