Debate contribution: Investment Strategy for Northern Ireland

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .

MLA
Mr Matthew O'Toole
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
14 October 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Investment Strategy for Northern Ireland
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5180543

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. When we became the Opposition in February 2024, we were clear that we would be a constructive Opposition. We meant it then, and we mean it now. Being constructive does not just mean never criticising the Executive: it means criticising the Executive for the right reasons. Being constructive also means building and delivering things for the people of Northern Ireland. That is what today's motion is all about: delivery, delivery, delivery — and building real things that will improve the lives of people whatever their background, constitutional perspective or class. A health system that works, with modern hospitals that can treat them. A functioning water system that can give them clean drinking water and allow homes to be built. Infrastructure that can allow them to get safely and sustainably from their houses to their place of work or leisure. Those are the basic things that any society should want to deliver for its people. The Executive, it must be said, are failing at that. They are failing at delivery and failing to build. They are failing to build for the people of the North. Our motion is clear about that, and we make no apology for being robust in our criticism of the Executive. That is what "constructive" means.

I will in one second. Yesterday, the deputy First Minister accused me of being — I think that this is the phrase that she used — "moaning Matthew". I am more than happy to take that moniker if it means standing up for the people of the North, who were promised better than this and who deserve better than this. We in the Opposition make absolutely no apology for being robust in demanding better for the people. I give way.

I appreciate the commentary from the Chair of the Executive Office Committee. In many ways, her intervention was politicking, and that is fine, because she, like me, is a politician. She, I think, agrees that dragging to the Chamber debates such as the one on dual language signage, when there are people out there who are on a waiting list or who are waiting to find out whether social homes will be built in their community, is petty politicking. That is what I am talking about. Back to my remarks, however. Why do we need an investment strategy? First of all, what is an investment strategy? All the major economic and business representative groups are clear that Northern Ireland needs an investment strategy. It is, in effect, a road map for how the Executive intend to deliver critical infrastructure, not just transport infrastructure — although road and rail is an important part of it — but in schools, hospitals, waste water investment and stadia such as Casement Park, which Gaels and the people of west Belfast have been waiting for now for pretty much a generation. The most-recent finalised investment strategy was in 2011. That document set out clearly what the Executive intended to do and build. They certainly did not deliver everything that was in that programme, but some of it was delivered, and it had a critical role in showing people in the public, private and third sectors what the Executive intended to deliver so that the public could hold them to account. They will not be able to do that now. We are more than a year on from the publication of the draft Programme for Government, and 10 months on from publication of the final Programme for Government, which promised an "upcoming investment strategy" that was going to set out how we were going to see prioritisation of road, rail, water, stadia, schools and hospitals. There is still no sign of when it is going to come. I asked the deputy First Minister the other day when it was going to come. She would not give me an answer — she who calls me "moaning Matthew" for doing my job and holding the Executive to account. I make absolutely no apology for moaning about failure. I make no apology for moaning about the state of our health service or the abysmal state of our public transport infrastructure compared with other regions. I will give credit when progress is made, when we finally see phase 2 of the Glider delivered and — as I am sure that Mr Brett would agree — night buses in Belfast. I will give credit for the opening of the wonderful new Grand Central station, but I am not going to be shy about complaining and demanding better for the public of the North.

I come to the focus of our motion. Our motion is clear that the Executive have failed, not just to publish an investment strategy but to make progress on flagship projects. We name them in the motion. The A5 is a life-saving project that people, particularly west of the Bann and in County Tyrone — it is also hugely relevant to people in Donegal, Monaghan and Derry — have been promised for decades. Not only is it not making progress, it is stalled, in limbo and chaos, because of what appears to be unacceptable ineptitude from the Infrastructure Department and a Sinn Féin Minister. Casement Park is a landmark stadium project in the heart of west Belfast, which is totally in limbo. There is no sign of progress. It is not even clear that it is being discussed properly at the Executive. The Finance Minister and the Communities Minister bat it back and forth between one another. Extra money has come from the Irish and British Governments, but there is no plan for delivery from the Executive. The all-island strategic rail review is an opportunity to decarbonise our economy and connect this island after the destruction of large parts of our rail network post partition. How many people in the Infrastructure Department are working on the all-island strategic rail review? I found out when I asked a question for written answer: it is 0·3 of an official. One third of a person is delivering what is in many ways the most important decarbonisation and public transport project on this island. That is shameful, so I will not apologise for being robust in calling out the Executive. I come to waste water infrastructure. When I ask the Finance Minister and the Infrastructure Minister about that, they dismiss me. They ask, "Ah, but what is your plan? What is your plan?". We are the Opposition. They will not say what their plan is. There was talk for months about a developer levy. I do not know where we are on that plan or where we are on long-term investment in our waste water network, but every large business organisation and outside investor is clear that failure to invest in the waste water network will cost us progress. It will not just cost us theoretical economic growth; it will stop homes being built. A report said that it could stop 6,000 homes being built annually. It is preventing people from living their lives and having homes. It is preventing job creation. It is pathetic. Does it have to be like this? No, it does not. As the Opposition, our job is to call for and demand better. An investment strategy that sets out clear prioritisation of investment is absolutely critical. We all know that resources are finite and that the Executive have decisions to take and priorities to set: that is the point of an investment strategy. That investment strategy is urgent now, because we are going to have a multi-year Budget, we are told, by the end of this year. It will set out three-year plans for resource but, critically, four-year plans for capital. How can that four-year capital Budget be set if we do not have an investment strategy alongside it? Genuinely, I would love a Minister or some other member of an Executive party to tell me how. Here is another thing. Those of us who want to build a new Ireland — who are serious about that — need to use every lever that exists in the North to illustrate the kind of new Ireland that we want to build. Sinn Féin holds the key strategic economic Departments: not just the First Minister post but the Economy Department, which is in charge of our all-island electricity market; the Infrastructure Department, which is in charge of delivering — or not delivering — the all-island strategic rail review and, indeed, the A5; and the Finance Department, which is supposed to be pursuing greater fiscal powers and more devolution and independence from London but is not doing any of those things. None of those Sinn Féin-led Departments is doing anything to deliver on that agenda. All of that could be part of the investment strategy, but we do not know because it has not been published. I am not here to be negative, but I am also not here to do the power of positive thinking or to clap and cheerlead an Executive who are demonstrably failing to deliver for the people of the North. Our motion is about demanding better for the public in Northern Ireland. We are going to keep doing just that, because it does not have to be like this. Our job is to build something for the people who sent us here. I say to the Executive and all parties today: support our motion if you want to finally get down to building something.

1,587 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.10 (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 (0.92).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.85).
  • 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

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 framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.03No
Dog-whistle messaging0.09No
Controversy escalation0.10No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.92Yes
Overall judgement0.10At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.85
Reports or questions it0.07
Criticises or condemns it0.06
Adopts it0.02
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.51
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.33
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies0.09
No identity-related subject0.03
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.02

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:35 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.

Challenge this classification