Debate contribution: Knockmore Line to Belfast International Airport
Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on .
- MLA
- Mr Robbie Butler
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 16 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Knockmore Line to Belfast International Airport
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5112047
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In reality, everybody here tonight has made the case for the delivery of the Knockmore line to include Belfast International Airport. It is simply unquestionable. If we are serious about growing our economy, which is why we are here, boosting tourism, which is why we are here, and putting Northern Ireland on the international stage, the case has well and truly been made, and we must finally connect our main airport to our rail network. I was doing a bit of research today, because I was in London last week, and I wondered when the London underground was built. It was built 162 years ago, and you think about that and how they did that, how they afforded it and who did it, yet we are looking at a rail link that actually exists. We have the line, we are not commissioning land, and we are not vesting land. As has already been pointed out, we genuinely could meet our climate credentials because it is a win-win. It would fulfil the active travel ambition, but there would be tangible benefits from it. I am sure that, 162 years ago, they were not quantifying all that into what they delivered. The longest line on that is 46 miles. Can you imagine if we had an underground tube from Belfast International Airport? We are looking to put trains on a track that already exists. I know that it is not just as simple as that, but, in 2025, we have people — not necessarily in this Building — who complicate it, and maybe we could deliver it a lot more easily than we think. Right now, Belfast International Airport is one of the only international airports in Europe that does not have a rail link. That is a significant disadvantage for business and for tourism. The Knockmore line gives us a ready-made solution by reinstating the line through the Lagan valley corridor, with the potential for increased pick-ups at Knockmore — we know that there is work ongoing with regard to that wider Knockmore piece — and Ballinderry, and then better linking the jewel in the crown, which is Lisburn, by the way. We can transform connectivity for local communities while creating the crucial spine that links our International Airport directly with the rest of Northern Ireland. As has already been pointed out, probably much better by other Members here, particularly the Member for South Antrim John Blair — I thank you, John, for bringing the debate tonight — is that circle line ambition. When you look at the links through to the City Airport, you will see that the opportunities there are probably better than anywhere else in the world, which I will get to in a second. This is not just about convenience; it is about competitiveness. By attracting and embedding new transatlantic routes from Belfast International Airport, we have the opportunity to rival Dublin Airport in attracting long-haul visitors and global investment. Nobody in the Chamber will need to be reminded that, when we came back in 2022, one of the UK Government commitments was to look at pre-clearance for US flights. It is not for the Minister to look at that, but the Executive Office could revisit that, because it is really important to shine the light on the ambition that we have for Northern Ireland and put it truly on the map. Tourists arriving from the United States or Canada would be able to step off a plane and get straight on to a train to Lisburn, Belfast, Londonderry, Antrim, Ballymartin or beyond. That is the seamless connectivity that international travellers expect in 2025. The Knockmore line is the first step in delivering the wider circle line, which is a project that would maximise value by linking our towns, capital and airports in one coherent transport network. I had the pleasure of living within about 500 yards of the track that is the Knockmore line, and the Member for Lagan Valley will agree that it is a beautiful line for the people who would commute on it from South Antrim into Lagan Valley. They could see our three- and four-storey buildings. They are skyscrapers, Trevor. It really is a nice journey. It would be very good. Since becoming an MLA in 2016, I have repeatedly highlighted the Knockmore line's potential to unlock growth right across Northern Ireland, but, as Trevor pointed out, it was going on for maybe 10 years before I was here, when John was a mere boy and a councillor, which is some time ago.
I thank Robin Swann MP, who attends Westminster religiously. He is probably one of the most attentive MPs. He is passionate about this and speaks on this —.
He is giving your Jim a run for his money.
We can be humorous about this, but Trevor hit the nail on the head: do we want the next cohort of MLAs who come back in two years' time to be repeating the lines that we are trotting out tonight and that have been trotted out by Members before us? The time for delay has long passed. Minister, if we are to compete, we should complete, and if we are truly going to level up our transport system, we must deliver the Knockmore line, because it is the track that leads directly to the circle line, to prosperity and to Northern Ireland's rightful place on the global tourism map.
908 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: 0.03 (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 (0.89).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.05 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 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.