Debate contribution: Green Energy Transition
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew McMurray on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew McMurray
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Green Energy Transition
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4865273
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome and support the motion. Growing our capacity to produce, store and distribute renewable energy is absolutely vital to our climate, environment and economy. It is alarming to see that the share of electricity consumption that comes from renewables has been steadily decreasing over the past few years. We should be well on our way to achieving the target of 80% by 2030; instead, we are regressing. We know that many of the key growth sectors of the future come with even higher energy demands. We must be able to support them. Renewable energy is not just a means to an end. The renewables sector can make a huge difference to our economy. RenewableNI estimates that as little as 1·5 gigawatts from the Northern Ireland offshore projects installed by 2032 could produce up to £2·4 billion in gross added value for Northern Ireland companies and produce employment up to the equivalent of 32,400 people working full-time for a whole year. Many of those would be highly skilled and well-paid jobs. The offshore sector could give a real boost to coastal communities in my constituency. Much of the work involved in offshore renewables will be centred around the smaller ports and harbours that host offshore maritime services, bases and storage facilities. We already have a healthy and innovative sector of small and medium-sized businesses in Kilkeel that could latch on to offshore projects off the South Down and Northern Ireland coast. It would be absolutely transformative for South Down. The planning system is rightly referenced in the motion. Major planning applications have a 30-week target, but applications for wind farms take, on average, three years to be processed. That is much too long, and there is not enough accountability for those timelines. Our neighbouring jurisdictions, as already referenced, handle it much better. We also need to reform planning policy so that renewable applications stand a chance. At the moment, decarbonisation is not given enough weight, and a revised —.
Yes.
I am not sure why that interjection came to me. I am not the Environment Minister, and I am sure that the Member could raise that by various means rather than interjecting. Anyway, we will carry on. Where did I get to? A revised strategy and policy statement (SPS) for renewables and low-carbon energy should have been published before Christmas to rectify that, yet, three months on, we are still waiting for it. Infrastructure is also a big issue for the grid and for storage. Every year, an increasing share of wind energy is lost because the infrastructure needed to store and distribute it efficiently is not there. The North/South interconnector is a key piece of infrastructure and is absolutely vital to achieving the 80 by '30 target, reducing energy waste and bringing down electricity prices. Eirgrid now estimates that it will not be completed until 2031, which is much too late. I understand that the main delays are rooted south of the border, so I urge the Minister to engage with her counterpart to ensure timely delivery on that essential piece of infrastructure.
514 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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | 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 | 0.99 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| 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 12:13 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.