Debate contribution: Dynamic Pricing
Debate contribution by Ms Kate Nicholl on .
- MLA
- Ms Kate Nicholl
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 16 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Dynamic Pricing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4532739
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have to say that I am disappointed by the number of Members who have made Oasis puns during their speeches. I include you in that, Mr Deputy Speaker. I think that we should all be above that. You will not hear any puns from me. Actually, you will not hear very much from me because my colleague Sian Mulholland, despite her numerous Oasis references, was far more articulate and knowledgeable on the subject than I could be. I really appreciated David Brooks's speech just now. Many interesting points have been raised, and I do not have much to add. I too tried to get Oasis tickets and started to feel more stressed than you do when you are trying to get Christmas experience tickets. I gave up when the site crashed, and I am glad that I did. While the issue of dynamic and surge pricing — prices changing according to demand — and whether the Government should clamp down on that is not a new one, it has been highlighted significantly by the Oasis tickets debacle. I welcome the way in which the motion has been framed. The focus is on the core issues, the first of which is the lack of transparency and communication with consumers to ensure that they are fully informed of their rights. It is right that the Consumer Council has a role to play. I await with interest the CMA investigation. Declan spoke really well about how, although most products that are subject to dynamic pricing allow free choice, in the case of tickets, there is no free choice. They are finite, and people do not have the luxury of time or of shopping around. People who have been waiting for hours are then given only minutes to decide whether they want to buy a ticket that is potentially hundreds of pounds more than was originally advertised. The point is that people should know when they are waiting in a queue that the ticket can go up only to a maximum price, that they are not wasting their time and that they know what they have potentially signed up to. It is common practice for companies to charge more for flights, trains and hotels at peak times or at short notice. That is allowed under UK consumer protection law, but what is not allowed is the misleading of customers. David touched on how common the practice is in the US and said that it is becoming more common here. In 2022, tickets to Bruce Springsteen were selling for up to $5,000. That is madness. That led to legislation being introduced on regulation. How the US's legislation progresses is something on which to keep an eye. It is not a new issue, however. I hope that this moment acts as a catalyst for change that delivers a fairer system for consumers.
477 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: 0.02 (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 (0.90).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 0.95 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
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.