Debate contribution: All-island Economy

Debate contribution by Ms Sinéad McLaughlin on 9 March 2026.

MLA

Ms Sinéad McLaughlin

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

9 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

All-island Economy

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5453643

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I propose the motion on strengthening North/South economic cooperation because the reality is that the economic future of this island will not be determined by slogans or constitutional arguments alone. It will be determined by the decisions that we make about investment, infrastructure, skills and how prepared we are to work together where doing so delivers real benefits for the people whom we represent. Too often, discussions about North/South cooperation become stuck in arguments about the constitution or identity before we even reach the practical questions. However, the reality is that the challenges that people face in their daily life do not divide themselves along the border. Economic opportunity does not recognise it. Health outcomes do not recognise it. Poverty does not recognise it. Therefore, it makes little sense for government to act as though the border should define the limits of our ambition. The motion starts from a practical, simple position: stronger economic cooperation across the island makes sense if our focus is on better jobs, stronger infrastructure and higher living standards. It is not about ideology; it is about delivery. The SDLP has long argued that the potential of the all-island economy has never been fully realised, not because the opportunity is not there but because the political will to follow through has been inconsistent. Last week, we launched our paper, 'Success by Design: Preparing for a New Ireland', which sets out clearly that economic outcomes are shaped by choices made over time. Over the last 30 years, the North and the South have taken different economic paths, and the results have reflected those decisions. As a recent Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) report found, the Republic of Ireland has higher wages, stronger economic growth and better living standards than Northern Ireland. All those measures make a meaningful impact on the lives of our people. That is why we believe that a different approach is needed. For the SDLP, that means being prepared to make different choices now. Building a better future also means taking cooperation seriously, not just in speeches but in the work of Departments and the priorities set by Ministers. Progress on infrastructure requires leadership from the Department for Infrastructure; progress on skills and investment in energy require leadership from the Department for the Economy; and long-term planning and funding require leadership from the Department of Finance. Without that engagement, the ambition that we talk about will not translate into results. We can see the consequences of that inconsistency in projects that should have moved much further by now. When cooperation is treated as optional rather than essential, progress slows, opportunities are missed and people are left wondering why the potential of the island is still not being realised. That is why the motion calls for a more structured, deliberate approach. Working together on strategic infrastructure, energy networks, digital connectivity and skills planning should not depend on short-term political priorities. Those are long-term issues that require long-term cooperation. Part of that more serious approach is the proposal for an all-island economic task force. That should be seen not as another layer of bureaucracy but as a practical way to ensure that agreed priorities are driven forward. Too often, cooperation begins with enthusiasm and then loses momentum when attention moves elsewhere. A formal mechanism to keep that work focused would help ensure that projects do not stall and opportunities are not lost. I will address the amendment tabled by Sinn Féin, because it attempts to move the focus away from where responsibility lies. At present, Sinn Féin holds the Finance, Economy and Infrastructure portfolios. Those are the very Departments that the motion refers to, and they have the greatest ability to drive meaningful North/South economic cooperation. Holding those positions is an opportunity that the party has never had before, yet, when we look at what has been delivered, it is difficult to point to the progress that people were entitled to expect. Too many projects have stalled; cooperation has been uneven; and the ambition of what was promised has not always been matched by action. That is not a failure of circumstances; that is a failure of delivery and, ultimately, a failure of leadership. Trying to suggest otherwise or shift responsibility through an amendment is disingenuous to the House and the people who sent us here expecting results. The SDLP believes that the future of this island should be built on partnership, cooperation and careful planning. Any new constitutional settlement, if it comes, will succeed only if it is designed to succeed economically as well as politically. That means doing the work now — strengthening cooperation is not cooperation now — and putting in place the structures that allow progress to continue, regardless of who holds office. Better infrastructure, stronger energy cooperation, closer alignment of skills and more coordinated investment policy all make sense today, regardless of anyone's constitutional view. They improve people's lives now and help to build stronger foundations for the future. The motion simply asks the Executive to approach that work with greater seriousness, greater consistency and greater ambition than we have seen in the past. That is not an unreasonable request. It is what people expect from a Government who are focused on delivery. For those reasons, I urge Members to support the motion.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:06 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.

Challenge this classification