Member's statement: Impacts of Climate Change: Donaghadee
Member's statement by Ms Connie Egan on .
- MLA
- Ms Connie Egan
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 9 February 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Impacts of Climate Change: Donaghadee
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5369005
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Today I press for urgent action to protect our coastal communities from the impacts of climate change, including the erosion of our sea walls and the increased frequency of flooding. Last week, the need for robust measures was again brought into sharp focus when extreme weather conditions deteriorated and partially collapsed Donaghadee's sea wall along the Parade, where the shore front meets critical infrastructure, including the A2. That posed an immediate risk to both public safety and essential infrastructure in the surrounding area, with the potential of strong floods threatening homes and causing local businesses to close. As we know, sea levels are rising worldwide, leaving coastal towns and villages at risk during high tides and storm surges. Clear warnings have been issued by the community with a sustained evidence base, as collated in the 2024 report, 'An Iconic Harbour Under Threat'. The report was produced by the Donaghadee Sailing Club and Donaghadee Community Development Association. It highlighted that, when considering the harbour's design and the impacts of climate change, action must be taken to prevent further hazardous disruption. It was published as a foreboding tale two years ago, and its predictions are now manifesting at an even greater scale and quicker speed than had been imagined.
To quote the report published by Donaghadee Community Development Association and Donaghadee Sailing Club:
"While some politicians continue to voice doubts over climate change and its potential impact, there is now a substantial body of research material from central government, statutory agencies and academia which should leave the reader in no doubt that the threat is real and that action must be taken now before more costly interventions are required at a later stage."
Acting now is exactly what my colleagues and I have been doing. My colleagues in Ards and North Down Borough Council have been pressing the council to take action. There is a pressing need for strategic coastal protection measures, but the scale of the required works extends beyond the council's available resources, despite its ownership of the harbour. It is a predicament that other coastal communities across Northern Ireland find themselves in too. The Department for Infrastructure, which is responsible for flood risk management and assisting councils on how to bring forward local development plan proposals that take account of climate change adaption, must step up to the plate. I have submitted a series of questions to the Infrastructure Minister, asking what steps are being taken in the short and the long term to plan for the impacts of climate change and future major weather events and when the sea wall in Donaghadee will be repaired. We need immediate intervention to protect the coastline in Donaghadee, and we need to look to the future. I am heartened by the progress that the Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister, Andrew Muir, has made on that, but we are still the only part of these islands without a climate adaption programme. We cannot afford for our coastal defences to fail. There is too much at risk.
505 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: 0.03 (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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 14:31 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.