Member's statement: 'Game of Thrones' Studio Tour
Member's statement by Mr Doug Beattie MC on .
- MLA
- Mr Doug Beattie MC
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 14 October 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- 'Game of Thrones' Studio Tour
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4589517
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On Friday, I visited a fantastic tourist attraction just outside Banbridge. My colleague might talk about it as well because she also visited. I am talking about the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour, which is probably one of the largest indoor tours and tourist attractions in Ireland. It was brought about by a £48 million investment by a US firm, and it employs about 70 staff, full-time and part-time. It is the only official 'Game of Thrones' tour, although there are many unofficial tours. Yet this fantastic tourist attraction does not feature in Tourism Ireland or Tourism Northern Ireland's 100 places to visit. It is an incredible site, and it is working to have up to 400,000 visitors a year in the next five years. Sometimes, you can look at that and think, "Are we too Belfast-centric in Northern Ireland?". This tourist attraction is on the link road between Dublin and Belfast. Yet when people jump on the tour buses and leave Dublin, because it is not in the 100 places to go and see, they shoot up to Belfast to go to the Titanic Belfast visitor attraction.
It is first class, and I have been to it as well, but I have to say to anybody who is here or listening that the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour really is world-class. It needs to be on the map. Tourism Ireland, Tourism Northern Ireland and Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council need to do more. I recommend everybody here to give it a wee visit.
256 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: 0.05 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.50 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.88 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:13 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.