Debate contribution: Green Growth: Removal of Barriers
Debate contribution by Mr Justin McNulty on .
- MLA
- Mr Justin McNulty
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 17 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Green Growth: Removal of Barriers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4537400
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Members who sponsored the motion for bringing it to the Floor. I support the motion and the amendment. It is particularly important to speak on this issue, given the events of recent days, but my support is not without reservation as there is a lot of self-back-slapping and a degree of buck-passing inherent in the motion. The shameful state of our environment is not something that we can be proud of. In February 2020, the Assembly declared a climate emergency, and yet, since then, we have let our environment deteriorate even further. According to the 2023 State of Nature report, Northern Ireland is one of the most nature-depleted areas in the world. The abundance of farmland and bird species has, on average, fallen by 43% since 1996. We have seen a 14% decrease in the number of flowering plants since 1970. In addition, 12% of species assessed across the North are under threat of extinction. We are also seeing blue-green algae blooms in several of our waterways, and stale tasting and smelling water has been pouring out of our kitchen taps over recent weeks, which is frightening. We have some of the most beautiful areas of natural beauty, but we are allowing them to deteriorate, year-on-year. So, while work from the Minister to bring forward a green growth strategy is welcome, it is shamefully overdue.
That is a question for the Minister. We have some of the most beautiful areas of natural beauty, but we are allowing them to deteriorate, year-on-year. So, while work from the Minister to bring forward a green growth strategy is welcome, it is shamefully overdue. The delays in our planning system are known to us all and pose one of the biggest barriers to sustainability and sustainable economic growth. It is shocking that provisional figures for renewable energy applications up to quarter 3 in 2023-24 showed a 30·8-week processing time. The Minister has spoken on multiple occasions about his commitment to improving the planning system through the work of the planning improvement programme and to publishing a revised regional planning policy for renewable and low-carbon energy, but it concerns me that we are yet to see concrete details on precisely what actions will be taken to reduce the processing time and the burden on overworked planners who cannot cope with their caseloads. However, that is not the first, or only, barrier to green growth. I welcome the work to bring forward a green growth strategy and the mention of green growth in the draft Programme for Government, but, again, the lack of concrete action and timescales is an area of serious concern. One of the key commitments of the green growth strategy is to develop the North's first climate action plan. How come there is no mention of that in the motion? We are getting too comfortable with throwing out aims and objectives and empty, hollow motions without any actual actions or time frames to measure progress against. That is, arguably, the biggest barrier to green growth. We can talk about the issue as much as we like, but without effective leadership, we will be talking about it for years, with no action, and we will reach the point of no return. Let us not look back on this moment in shame because we did not do enough. We must take decisive action now to put the necessary measures in place to heal our environment. We must show some real ambition, not hollow motions, on green growth. Demonstrate your ambition by committing to targets and timelines. Without committing to targets and timelines, it is just blah, blah, blah.
606 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 (0.91).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:11 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.