Debate contribution: Non-Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme: Closure
Debate contribution by Dr Caoimhe Archibald on .
- MLA
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 13 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Non-Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme: Closure
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4947863
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On 30 July, the then Economy Minister announced that the Executive had reaffirmed their commitment to close the non-domestic RHI scheme. That was consistent with the aim in 'New Decade, New Approach' in 2020:
"RHI will be closed down and replaced by a scheme that effectively cuts carbon emissions."
I am committed to a closure arrangement that will ensure fairness to people who entered and participated in the scheme in good faith and, at the same time, achieve fairness and value for money for the public purse. A business case for the closure of the scheme is with the Department of Finance. Subject to the approval of the Department of Finance, Treasury and the Executive, the Department intends to close the scheme through primary legislation, which will provide the powers for the Department to bring forward the closure regulations. Subordinate legislation — regulations — setting out the detail of the closure arrangements will then be subject to consultation. The Department continues to engage with key stakeholders on the design and details of the closure of the scheme, and a proposal will be brought to the Executive for agreement. A consultation will then be launched on the draft regulations that will give effect to the closure arrangements.
206 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 (0.83).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.83 | 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 | 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 12:35 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.