Debate contribution: Hospitality and Tourism: East Antrim
Debate contribution by Mr Philip McGuigan on .
- MLA
- Mr Philip McGuigan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 11 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Hospitality and Tourism: East Antrim
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4496136
Read the official Assembly record
Text
This is a timely opportunity to debate tourism as we head into the busiest time of the year for our tourism and hospitality sector. I thank Ms Brownlee for securing the debate, which is specifically about East Antrim. Obviously, I am not an East Antrim MLA, but I am my party's tourism spokesperson and I was elected to represent the neighbouring constituency of North Antrim. I will not get into a bunfight with Stewart Dickson on which part of the north coast is the most beautiful; we will leave that for another time. It is interesting that, in 2003, when I was first elected to the Assembly, Cushendun, Cushendall and Glenariff were in the North Antrim constituency and helped to get me elected. Those places have been lost to East Antrim.
I am disappointed that Slemish has gone in the same direction. Most people are not politicians and so do not care about electoral boundaries and see no difference. From a North Antrim perspective, my club, Dunloy, had many a clash at all ages in hurling with clubs from the glens, and I am pretty sure that they consider themselves to be North Antrim in spirit. As well as being lucky enough to represent any part of County Antrim as an elected representative, I am lucky enough to be healthy enough to be able to cycle on a regular basis to some of the places that we have talked about, covering all parts of County Antrim and along the north coast. I am not going to argue with anything that anybody has said about the unique landscape and nature of that part of County Antrim. I have no intention of going into the detail that constituency MLAs went into. I am my party's tourism spokesperson, so I will say just a few words. Obviously, East Antrim has plenty to offer in tourism. Some of that has been talked about, including, to name a few, the Gobbins cliff path, the Causeway coastal route, the 'Game of Thrones' filming locations and Glenariff forest park. Golf tourism has some potential, and I know, from discussions that I have had, that there are exciting additional golf tourism opportunities in East Antrim. As we know, tourism in general has a key role in driving economic growth, addressing regional imbalance and creating jobs. It can also be an enabler for community wealth-building, giving communities ownership of their economic development and ensuring that tourism is sustainable and in harmony with the local community and environment. It is therefore important that we continue to keep a focus on tourism and explore all possible opportunities to ensure that it realises its full potential in East Antrim, North Antrim and across the North. One such opportunity that I have spoken about before in the Chamber is the compelling case for the extension of the Wild Atlantic Way to the north coast, including East Antrim. A recent report by Fáilte Ireland on the economic impact of the Wild Atlantic Way found that it is worth more than €3 billion per year in tourism revenue to communities along the west coast of Ireland, leading to an additional 35,000 jobs and supporting 80,000 jobs in total. The success of that brand is something that we can benefit from and build upon to enhance our visitor numbers. Why should we in the North, in areas such as North Antrim and East Antrim, miss out on the opportunity to extend the Wild Atlantic Way from Donegal through Derry and the north coast and along the glens of Antrim through East Antrim towards Belfast? The case for expanding the Wild Atlantic Way to incorporate the Causeway coastal route is compelling.
We know, from a recent report on tourism on the island of Ireland, that there has been a significant increase in day trippers and short-stay visitors from the South to the North. Growing numbers of international visitors flying into Dublin are adding destinations across the North to their holiday itineraries. As others have said, we should be ensuring that all parts of the North can benefit from that. The potential for growth is clearly there. The natural, historical and unique attractions that we have need to be shown. They are innovative and resilient. As others have indicated, there are challenges. The electronic travel authorisation policy from the British Government increased the cost of overheads in the recruitment and retention of staff. I welcome the Minister's recognition that the tourism and hospitality sectors require investment support when he announced his intention to put together a tourism implementation group and create a tourism partnership board. I commend all who contribute to our fantastic tourism and hospitality offering, particularly as we head into the peak holiday months of July and August. I hope that we see many tourists and our businesses see many benefits, and would it not be great if we got the weather to match?
818 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: 0.08 (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 (0.75).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
- Subject area: Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies.
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.12 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.75 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.72 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.20 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.07 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:47 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.