Debate contribution: Fishing Industry: Ardglass
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew McMurray on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew McMurray
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 26 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Fishing Industry: Ardglass
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4677685
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank Mrs Mason for bringing the debate to the House and the representatives of the fishing industry in the Gallery for attending. The fishing industry is key to the culture and identity of our rural and coastal communities. It is also an important sector of our coastal economy. In 2021, there were 341 fishing and seafood-processing enterprises in Northern Ireland. They had a turnover of £135 million and provided the equivalent of 1,550 full-time jobs. Their activities added a gross value of £55·5 million to the economy. Three quarters of that came from businesses located in and around Ardglass, Kilkeel and, just outside my constituency, Portavogie. Fishing also supports a range of ancillary sectors in the blue economy. Boatbuilding, boat repair and fish markets are obvious such sectors, but there are others that may be less well known. Skippers already use their skills and seafaring knowledge to provide support services to offshore wind farms, for example. That will only become more important. There is also potential for other blue economy sectors to be developed in and around our fishing ports, and those, too, will depend on having a skilled local workforce. In 2021, Ardglass, Kilkeel and Portavogie supported 240 such ancillary businesses with a turnover of £129 million and provided the equivalent of over 1,400 full-time jobs. Those ancillary businesses' economic impact is nearly as significant as the impact of fishing and seafood processing. The Ardglass fishing industry is proud of the contribution that it makes to the food industry in the UK. As one representative of the industry put it to me, it is the last bastion of UK fish, caught in UK waters and sold in UK supermarkets. That shows clearly how important the sector is to the coastal areas of South Down and Strangford and how much poorer, financially and culturally, we would be without it. From conversing with many involved in the industry, it is clear that there are many challenges in the sector. First, there is the price point at which supermarkets place the seafood. The produce is sold at a price point that the supermarkets feel the consumer is willing to spend, but that is not a point that allows the boats to make enough profit to remain viable. It is a Hobson's choice, if you will, where, either way, the industry loses: too high and the produce will not sell; too low and it will simply be an unprofitable business in a declining industry. Secondly, the physical infrastructure of the harbour at Ardglass needs updated in order to address health and safety concerns as well as to protect the structural integrity of boats. We need to upgrade the harbours so that they are fit for purpose and able to support a modern and agile fleet. Thirdly and perhaps most significantly — this is the emphasis of the Adjournment debate — is the reliance of the industry on the employment of non-EU workers and the current impact, and potential further impacts, of the skilled worker visa policy on the Northern Ireland fish-catching and fish-processing industries. I know that the AERA Minister, Minister Muir, is alive to those concerns, which the fishing industry has raised with him. Given the fact that it is a reserved matter, the Minister has written to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Secretary of State to reiterate the immigration policy issues faced across the agri-food sector in Northern Ireland. Although the EFRA Secretary of State, Mr Reed, has rejected the suggested policy changes that were put forward for consideration, I have been assured that the Minister continues to press the UK Government for flexibility on, and alternative options to, the existing policy on immigration. I am also heartened that the Minister has agreed to collaborate with Department for the Economy officials to develop an immigration policy position to be considered by the Executive.
While it is important to press the UK Government for changes, we should also explore solutions within our devolved powers and support the fishing industry to develop alternative sustainable workforce solutions. The industry is also making technological innovations to future-proof the sector. When preparing for this discussion, I was informed of the sea trials of a new prawn tailing and shelling vessel. Likewise, the processing plant in Ardglass is developing innovative processes to help with its productivity. That is not being done to remove the reliance on physical labour; it is to reduce the reliance on the skilled worker visa. We need to support a sustainable fishing industry and develop a diverse marine sector that is able to take advantage of new opportunities. That requires an industry-led vision for the future that can safeguard and sustainably grow that vital sector, ensuring that it supports jobs and thriving coastal communities now and in the future.
799 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: 0.04 (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 (0.99).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.82 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.14 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:36 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.