Debate contribution: Aviation Strategy for Northern Ireland
Debate contribution by Mr David Honeyford on .
- MLA
- Mr David Honeyford
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 29 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Aviation Strategy for Northern Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5139543
Read the official Assembly record
Text
We support the motion. I am laughing at some of the comments that have been made in the Chamber, because we come at the motion with a focus on creating jobs, greater investment, exports for our businesses, connectivity, support for our business community and opportunities for everyone; we are not that focused on the constitutional sound bites that we have heard here today. The facts are unavoidable: we live on an island. Aviation is not a luxury in that regard; it is absolutely essential in order to connect us to the rest of the world. We are the only region without an aviation strategy. That failure needs to be put right. We need that connectivity and frequency of flights to GB and Europe. Essential to maximising the dual market access that we have is connectivity. People here want better job opportunities, higher wages and higher living standards. Public transport network links to the airports are essential. The Ulster Unionist Party left that out of its amendment. Connectivity via, for example, the Knockmore line to link my constituents and those in South Antrim to the International Airport must be part of that wider strategy.
Steve, if it takes you seven hours to get through an airport, I am not sure how long it would take you to get a train to Belfast airport and then get through it. An aviation strategy must be about economic growth. It must be wider than just routes.
Yes.
I was about to say just that. Part of the strategy has to be departmental. It has to be wider than just saying, "We want a route here" or, "We want a route there"; it has to be what our economies and businesses need. Infrastructure, including the all-island transport rail review, needs to be incorporated into it, as does the innovation strategy. It cannot be just some political vanity project. The reality is that 70% of our tourists travel through the South, and 84% of all flights from this island leave from Dublin Airport. There is already a global hub on this island; it might take Steve seven hours to get there on some sort of slow boat, but it is a 90-minute drive for anybody else. In reality, you cannot have a strategy without referencing that. Any strategy needs to be based on the wider context, not just on the three airports here. It needs to look at the wider piece. If we look at Europe —
I absolutely agree: there is an opportunity for us. We should grow the market here, but you cannot take it in isolation; you have to look at the whole. I go skiing every year in the Alps in France, and I fly into Geneva airport. The French are not having an argument about building a new airport because people fly into Switzerland. Putting forward something that suggests that we are two completely different and alien places is bonkers. It reduces the issue to being a constitutional one, rather than it being about the practical delivery of better provision for everyone.
Cork has a regional airport. Cork has Pfizer, Apple and other massive American companies. There is no connection from Cork to America. However, Cork does have connections to Frankfurt, Munich, Paris and Madrid, as well as to London, Manchester, Glasgow and all of those. It is about building connections and growing them as part of a wider strategy, acknowledging that there is an airport on the island that has worldwide links. There are eight million people on this island. There are not airports with worldwide connections for tourists and the business community in every region of France. France looks to Paris and then to Geneva and everywhere else. We have to think a little bit bigger than, "This is Northern Ireland. We have to have our own". The integration of the business community and investment in infrastructure has to be a part of that. We have to share this island. Aviation is an example of an area in which that has to happen. At a time when a constituent cannot get to see a GP, and when delays meant that the Department of Health spent £2·5 billion on a computer system in the past three years, I am not putting my name to a call to fund an air link to America. We do not even have a flight. To put public money into that when people cannot get GP appointments is bonkers. There is no way that I can support the Ulster Unionist amendment, but I will support the DUP motion.
763 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: 0.12 (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 (0.78).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.14 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.78 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.19 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.89 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.11 |
| 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 13:18 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.