Debate contribution: Economic Trends on the Island of Ireland
Debate contribution by Ms Kate Nicholl on .
- MLA
- Ms Kate Nicholl
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 26 January 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Economic Trends on the Island of Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5340395
Read the official Assembly record
Text
There is a lot that I agree with in Diane Forsythe's contribution, especially on the importance of data. I chair the all-party group (APG) on policy and public data. That will sound boring to many people, but it is actually one of the most interesting groups. The issue is so important. Northern Ireland is data-rich. From the minute that we are born until the minute that we die and beyond, data is collected on every one of us, yet, so often, policy decisions are based on a sample of a couple of thousand people. If we had better access to data and if we were to share data across Departments, the better our policy solutions could be not just now but in the future. I therefore welcome the opportunity to talk about the massive importance of data, especially to our economy. Where I diverge, though, is that I think that all data is important. We cannot say that data is really important but we want only some of it. So much of our economy is on an all-island basis: for example, energy, tourism, waterways and agri-food. Our interconnectedness, our interdependence, how we operate and knowing where we diverge and where we are similar are so important. Having a report that looks at that baseline is really important. Highlighting the structural differences between our economies sets a baseline for future monitoring, and that is to be welcomed. The report's focus on data gaps and on identifying those that hinder a North/South analysis of productivity, labour markets and cross-sectoral working is really interesting. As I said, having a better understanding of that would allow us to make policy for the future. We are criticised for all sorts of things, but the one that sticks the most is that we just do not think in the long term. So much of that is structural, because we do not create policies for the long term. The report is really good and really welcome. It allows us to provide a framework for future annual assessments. I hold the Chair of the Economy Committee in high regard. He is an excellent politician. I disagree with a lot of what he says, but he is excellent. The "Alliance tax" line has really annoyed me, and I will call it out every time I hear it. If we are serious about economic growth in Northern Ireland, such silly sound bites are ridiculous and really annoy me. The charge on parcels has come from the EU. We have already said that our solution is to have a UK-EU customs union. Blaming that charge on us will annoy me, and I will pick it up every time that it is said. We in the Assembly should ensure that we use evidence, work together and improve lives; we should not pick on people or make things up.
We need to have more conversations about revenue raising. When we look at our economy and how we operate, we see that there are lots of things that we could do to be more efficient and to save. We need to have honest conversations about how we revenue-raise. For us, as a party, it has to be progressive and fair, and we need to make sure that it will make a tangible difference in people's lives. Alliance will not stand back from those conversations; we are happy to be involved in them. We have to be serious. People who are looking at the Chamber and at what we are doing are saying, "Well, they're not very efficient. They won't talk about how we actually deal with the issues in public finances". We all need to take tough decisions, work together and look at evidence. We need to approach the debates in a good spirit to identify ways in which we can work together and find solutions. So often, that will be about evidence, so collecting more data can only be a good thing. I look forward to seeing how the proposal is taken forward.
670 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: 0.08 (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 (0.80).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.65).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.22 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.80 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.34 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.65 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.48 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.43 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.08 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:23 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.