Debate contribution: Green Growth Strategy
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 3 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Green Growth Strategy
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4986076
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As I said, the draft green growth strategy was updated to reflect accuracy and relevance. It was shared with my Executive colleagues in December last year. Ministerial colleagues have come back with feedback, except for those from one party. I am still waiting for feedback from one partner in government. Once I receive that feedback, we can, hopefully, get agreement on the strategy, but it has been outstanding since December last year. It is important that we get it agreed because it gives us the opportunity to create good green jobs and increase decarbonisation. There are many papers that I will continue to engage with my Executive colleagues on to get agreement for, including the climate action plan 2023-27. Essentially, all that I need is agreement to consult on the action plan. We are under an obligation to proceed with that plan, and it is important that we do it. We are also under an obligation to adopt the river basin management strategy, and agreement on that is outstanding. Agreement is also outstanding on the dilapidation Bill. I will continue to engage with my Executive colleagues on that, and I know that there was commentary yesterday about the dilapidation Bill's not having been presented to this place. Hopefully, we can get agreement on it at the Executive meeting on Thursday. I also need to get agreement on a legislative consent motion on welfare requirements for cats, dogs and ferrets, and I need that by Thursday. I also need agreement on the peatlands strategy. I will continue to engage respectfully with my Executive colleagues. It is a power-sharing Executive, and I respect that we have different views. Hopefully, we can come to a common and agreed place.
286 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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.62).
- 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 | 0.04 | 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 | 0.62 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.92 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.05 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:46 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.