Debate contribution: Aviation Strategy for Northern Ireland

Debate contribution by Mr Gary Middleton on .

MLA
Mr Gary Middleton
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
29 September 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Aviation Strategy for Northern Ireland
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5139648

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is appropriate that we bring the debate to a close, because we are starting to get carried away with ourselves in some of our contributions. It has been a good discussion. We need to highlight the importance of and need for a comprehensive aviation strategy for Northern Ireland, one that includes a properly resourced route development fund. Of course, as a representative of the north-west, I will touch on our airport in Londonderry, but I stress that it applies to all our airports in Northern Ireland, because the policy oversight is damaging our economy. While other devolved Governments have acted, Northern Ireland, unfortunately, has lagged behind. Scotland has long operated a route development fund, supporting international routes to boost its economy. Wales has invested over £200 million in Cardiff Airport, including route support and infrastructure upgrades. Some £10 million has been committed to Heathrow Airport's route development fund to connect UK regions to global markets. As some Members have said, this is not a constitutional debate or a constitutional issue. We want to see Northern Ireland airports thrive. We want to see local businesses thrive and jobs being secured. We are so vocal about the City of Derry Airport, Belfast International Airport and Belfast City Airport, because we want those airports to succeed. We have no issue with Dublin Airport also succeeding; of course not. We feel no different about Heathrow succeeding. We want to ensure that the best connectivity is in place to support our businesses and airports. CoDA is a vital asset for our region. It connects our businesses and supports our tourism, and it underpins the investment that we receive into the area. Yet, it continues to operate without the strategic support of a route development fund and an aviation strategy. That is why we make the case for it today. The case for City of Derry Airport — the Minister touched on this — is that it delivers £21 million GVA. That argument has been had. We know that the airport succeeds, and we want to see further investment in it. Our motion talks about the need for a strategy that treats all airports equally. Nobody should have an issue with that. We need to support all our airports. We need to see a route development fund with clear criteria. We need measurable growth targets, and, of course, we want to see those within the next three months. Minister, I assume that, if you support the motion, we will see that as a matter of urgency. We look forward to seeing it in due course. My colleague Philip Brett moved the motion and spoke of the need for a strategy to achieve full economic potential. He talked about the US tourism market and the fact that there is an untapped potential there that we need to tap into and how we need to ensure that Departments work together on it. He also spoke about treating airports equitably and the fact that we do not have a strategy. There is no policy and no plan. I look forward to the Minister bringing that forward as a matter of urgency. Steve Aiken highlighted some of the challenges in comparison with ROI — the VAT rate and APD — but also some of the issues around ensuring that we have a level aviation playing field. Pádraig spoke about the Department's airport policy and regional balance. He spoke about the Londonderry to Dublin route, which, of course, we support. We need to ensure that the UK Government continue to fund the PSO to London Heathrow, which is also important. Mr Honeyford spoke in support of the motion, which we welcome. He talked about the need to improve our flight connectivity to GB and Europe. He also touched on the fact that 84% of flights go through Dublin. There is work to be done to ensure that those who fly through there come to Northern Ireland as well. Sinéad McLaughlin spoke about the importance not only of the aviation strategy but of rail connectivity and the need to ensure that our airports in Northern Ireland are connected to one another and to Dublin. Emma Sheerin expressed broad support for the motion and noted that it was important that we strengthen our rail connections as well. She welcomed the commitment to regional balance through CoDA. Peter McReynolds spoke from an infrastructure perspective, noting the benefits for public transport, including increasing the use of buses, and the importance of meeting our net zero targets and of environmental responsibility. The Minister's comments have been well documented. We welcome the fact that she made the time to come to the Chamber. Hopefully, we will be able to follow up with her on the targets laid out in the motion. That is my summary. Mr Butler made a winding-up speech on his party's amendment. We urge people to support the motion, and we look forward to seeing the impact of it.

831 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.92).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.92Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.64
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.36
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification