Debate contribution: Hospitality and Tourism: East Antrim
Debate contribution by Mr Conor Murphy on .
- MLA
- Mr Conor Murphy
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 11 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Hospitality and Tourism: East Antrim
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4496147
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I thank the Member for securing the Adjournment debate, and I thank all those who contributed, particularly the representatives from the constituency. They spoke with passion about East Antrim and the tourism offering there. I have, on several occasions, stayed in Cushendun and Cushendall, so I can attest to all the attractions. As has been outlined, there is much that contributes to the tourism offer in East Antrim, such as Carrickfergus Castle, the Gobbins and Glenarm Castle estate, as well as its stunning coastline and, of course, the glens of Antrim. The area is an integral part of the Causeway costal route, which, for many years, has been a key attractor for local and international visitors. It is strongly promoted by Tourism NI and Tourism Ireland. Those tourism experiences slow visitors down on their journey and encourage them to spend more time and, in turn, inject additional revenue into the local economy. Since 2020, Tourism NI has invested over £1 million in the Mid and East Antrim and Antrim and Newtownabbey council areas as part of their experience and market development funding programmes. The investment has helped to fund experiences such as the new visitor centre and trails at Glenarm Castle, the development of Glenarm marina and the provision of bikes and tours in villages such as Whitehead, Glenarm and Islandmagee. Businesses in the constituency have also benefited from the initiatives that Tourism NI put in place to support the industry's recovery from the impact of the pandemic. Tourism NI regularly promotes the east Antrim area through its seasonal marketing campaigns across the island, and the Causeway coastal route features heavily in Tourism Ireland's promotion of the island to overseas audiences. In recent times, my Department and Tourism NI have been working closely with Mid and East Antrim Borough Council on the development of the new Gobbins phase 2 project as part of the Belfast region city deal, which was mentioned by a number of Members. The contract for funding that was signed last month with Mid and East Antrim council will see my Department contribute £12·6 million towards the cost of delivering the project. That will result in a newly engineered staircase, creating a circular, closed-loop pathway that will unlock the full potential of the existing attraction and enhance overall visitor experience. Once complete, the project should see visitor numbers increase to over 400,000 per year, bringing with it a substantial increase in tourism spend right across the constituency. Tourism NI has also been providing ongoing advice and support to the £42 million Carrickfergus regeneration city deal project. That will see much-needed investment in Carrickfergus Castle, enhancing the visitor experience in the castle, as well as delivering improvements to the public realm around Carrickfergus town. Last year, a joint application by Tourism NI, Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland to the Shared Island Fund was successful in securing €7·6 million as part of a brand alignment project involving the Causeway coastal route and the Wild Atlantic Way, which was referenced by Philip McGuigan during his contribution. Pre-development work has already begun, and that brand alignment project will help improve the discovery points and visitor experience along the Causeway coastal route. It will also ensure that a consistent and high-quality driving route sits alongside the Wild Atlantic Way. Members will be aware that discussions are ongoing to progress the extension of brands such as the Wild Atlantic Way and Ireland's Ancient East into the North. Tourism has a major role to play in delivering a greener, regionally balanced and productive economy that provides good jobs, and my officials and I look forward to working with the councils and the wider tourism industry in East Antrim to ensure that the area can fully benefit from the realisation of the economic plans. I will refer to points that were made by Members, and I will try to pick them up in order. Hospitality support was mentioned, and Gordon Lyons expanded on that when talking about the skills needed. We are working closely with the hospitality sector on a tourism strategy, but we also had a direct meeting last week about the skills agenda and how the sector can try to tap into that. There is a very strong need for that in the hospitality sector. We can attract all the tourists if we do that well enough, but we need to have people working in the sector in order to be able to service it. Issues that relate to town centre dereliction, the back in business scheme and dilapidation are, of course, as people acknowledged, another Department's responsibilities, but I believe, having been in that Department once, that rates relief for dereliction should be revisited. That is because, while it might take some time to bring legislation through to try to enforce disposal of those properties, the lack of a rates bill for derelict properties certainly does not encourage anyone to do anything with them. Other rates issues and VAT were raised. Again, air passenger duty is an issue for the Department of Finance. During my time there, we raised those issues consistently with the British Government. I hope and expect that the current Finance Minister will continue to do that with the incoming Government to see whether we can get some more joy on it. Of course, I recognise that, while those are other Departments' responsibilities, we have collective responsibility in all those areas. I am very happy to work with the Finance Minister, the Infrastructure Minister and others on the issues that have been mentioned in order to ensure that we work together to try to promote the tourism industry, which is a key part of our economy here. I never suspected that I would hear the name of Timmy Mallett associated with East Antrim in all my days in the Assembly, but there you go. I am very interested in the Communities Minister's experience as a tourism promoter, particularly his experience at Carrick-a-Rede bridge. I have to think that coaxing people from positions in which they find themselves reluctantly should serve him well in his political life as he goes forward.
I will undertake to promote East Antrim. I must check the record for how often Newry and Armagh was promoted while you were in this position, but I assure you that I will reciprocate on that. Electronic travel authorisation was mentioned. I have raised that with British Government Ministers. Of course, we will take the opportunity to continue to raise it with the incoming Government. I do not think that the impact that such a policy would have on this island is fully understood. Clearly, the tourism industry, as a whole, is very exercised about the issue, and we will continue to raise it. I thank Members for raising those issues. I have learnt more about East Antrim in the past hour than I had previously, even though I have stayed in it. I assure people that not only will we continue to work with you on promoting tourism in all our areas, including East Antrim, but we will work collectively as an Executive — I am sure that the Communities Minister could concur with that — in order to try to ensure that we do our best for the tourism sector, which is, as I say, a key part of our overall economic product here, and particularly for East Antrim, which the Member who brought forward the Adjournment topic raised.
1,249 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: 0.03 (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 (0.79).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.12 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.09 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.79 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.70 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.27 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
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.