Debate contribution: Coastal Resilience and Adaptation
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 2 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Coastal Resilience and Adaptation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5271939
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The coastal forum met on 19 November and provided a valuable opportunity to review progress that has been made on coastal management issues. I co-chaired the meeting with the Minister for Infrastructure. I am pleased to report that there has been significant progress in delivering the agreed work programme. A major achievement is the high-quality evidence base that is available from the Northern Ireland Coastal Observatory. That milestone follows investment of approximately £2·5 million by my Department and provides a platform that can be used for future policy development and decision-making. In particular, the coastal change information tool provides scientific interpretation of historical coastal change patterns and offers insights into how our coastline may respond to future challenges, such as sea-level rise and climate change. The coastal forum was provided with an update from Ulster University and the National Trust on how €9·6 million from the PEACE PLUS programme will be invested in coastal monitoring and adaptation planning. That funding will ensure that momentum is maintained, and it will provide opportunities for coastal communities to participate in climate change adaptation planning. The coastal forum working group will produce a stocktake report of the current work programme and make recommendations for the 2026-2031 work programme. That will provide an opportunity to set priorities for the next five years and consider new work areas, such as the potential role of blue carbon habitats as nature-based solutions for coastal resilience.
237 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: 0.02 (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).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.58 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:06 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.