Debate contribution: Great Britain to Northern Ireland Trade

Debate contribution by Mr David Honeyford on .

MLA
Mr David Honeyford
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
16 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Great Britain to Northern Ireland Trade
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4532598

Read the official Assembly record

Text

We tabled an amendment to the motion to say that the issue is a direct result of Brexit, but it was not accepted. Alliance never called for trade barriers or asked for Brexit. We campaigned against Brexit. At the time, we highlighted what its consequences would be and said that there would never be a good version of it. Since then, we have worked constantly to help mitigate the consequences of Brexit — the hardest of Brexits — that other parties in the Chamber have helped to deliver. Nevertheless, Members, we need to look at solutions. It is not helpful to highlight problems continually. Forcing everything to be viewed through the lens of a constitutional position may play to a certain gallery, but it is really not helpful to the businesses that need support from us all. This place works best when we all work together. Everything that we do and implement must stand up, in our law and in international law. Every agreement that we have made should be honoured. Alliance has always called for those agreements to be honoured. We are now in 2024, which is eight years after the referendum. We should be looking at achieving solutions for local businesses. We should be working to support and help local businesses, in which I totally include the road haulage companies. Steve talked about the green lane. His tone of voice made me think that it was Darth Vader talking about some doomsday thing. We have to mitigate and help, rather than dramatising it and making it out to be something that it is not. We welcome the UK's efforts to try to deliver an ambitious sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement with the EU. That would go a long way to removing the barriers for all our road haulage companies. The sooner that that can be agreed, the better for all of us and our economy. With Brexit, Northern Ireland lost three of the four freedoms from being in the EU. I regret that we lost the freedom of movement and the freedom of finance and services. We must do all in our power to take advantage of the freedom of movement of goods within the EU. It gives us dual market access. I have said several times that there is a window of opportunity, and we need to seize it. Having access does not mean that you get greater business; you have to move into that. We need to look at how we expand and grow our economy here.

The Member talks about concerns and keeps putting forward problems, but they are not highlighted by any of the main official industry bodies. That matter is not being highlighted: if you searched for it, you would not find it. Look at our local economy. It has been said in the Chamber that trade is down. That is absolutely not true. Trade between GB and Northern Ireland has risen overall. Look at the HMRC figures: the absolute black-and-white figures show that trade between GB and Northern Ireland has increased. It is up by 13% from the most recent figures to 2022 to £14·1 billion. You were selling yourself short at £12 billion; it is £14·1 billion. That is an increase of 13% on the year before. When you break those figures down, you see that motor vehicles are up 34%. If you look at minerals, fuels and oils, you see that those are up 55%. However, there are elements of a decrease: miscellaneous edible preparations are down by 32%. I think that that is the one that you were quoting. You quote one figure, but you do not quote the whole vision of what is happening. We are seeing a change in our economy. Businesses are just getting on with what businesses do, which is supplying their customers, providing jobs and growing themselves. A realignment is happening in businesses. They are taking advantage of different rules. Our focus should be on growing our economy. We have come from a low base. Our focus should be on getting jobs and creating prosperity for people locally. A local haulage company in Lisburn has exploited the situation. The business is looking to expand. It used to come from GB to Northern Ireland. It then changed its model and went to goods from Europe coming to Northern Ireland, and it has now gone back to GB. It is expanding threefold what it is doing. It has signed a contract to supply Marks and Spencer. That is a great news story.

I have already given way, and I am running out of time. You cannot have it every way. You chose Brexit, and you got realignment. Businesses will work. We must bring solutions, not problems. We need to provide solutions and help. Business is way ahead of where we are at politically. We need to move forward and help to make life as easy and streamlined as possible. I totally agree with that. There will always be a bit of heartache at the start, but we need to learn from experience and help to make the situation better.

853 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: 0.10 (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 (0.74).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.94).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • 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 framing0.08No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.04No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.13No
Controversy escalation0.08No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.74Yes
Overall judgement0.10At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.94
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.04
Adopts it0.01
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.93
No identity-related subject0.07
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:03 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