Debate contribution: Energy Security: Renewables

Debate contribution by Mr John Blair on 24 March 2026.

MLA

Mr John Blair

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

24 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Energy Security: Renewables

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5463859

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Principal Deputy Speaker, thank you. With your permission, I will begin by addressing the issue of Members here being called "zealots" for daring to have a difference of opinion with a Member over there. I make it clear, through you, Principal Deputy Speaker, that having a different opinion does not make me a zealot. It means that I have a different opinion, and the Member would do well to celebrate democracy and the freedoms within it, including difference, in the way that some of us can. At the heart of the Alliance motion is the removal of our dependence on volatile imported fossil fuels that are driving fuel poverty and the climate crisis. I am sure that all of us have been contacted in the past few weeks by constituents who are not only concerned about the rising cost of fuel and what that means for their families but incredibly frustrated by the inconsistency of bills and the resulting inability to plan for the future because of that. While the focus on bills is, of course, important — no one here will deny that — what is arguably more crucial is addressing the underlying cause behind them, because, if we continue on our current path, we will face this crisis or similar crises again and again and our energy supplies will become pawns on the global stage, if they are not that already. Our dependence on fossil fuels is not just an economic vulnerability but an environmental and climate emergency. Despite the denials of some, it is not renewable energy that is driving climate breakdown but fossil fuels: coal, oil and gas, the very fuels on which we remain overdependent. The motion recognises that reality. It reaffirms that greater generation of renewable energy is the clearest and lowest-cost pathway not only to protecting our climate but to enhancing our energy security and deliver more stable and, ultimately, lower costs for consumers. That is why it is right that the motion prioritises renewables, North/South collaboration on infrastructure and interconnection and a credible comprehensive plan to end our reliance on fossil fuels. A system that is dominated by domestic renewables shields us from volatile global fossil fuel markets and the geopolitical crises that drive price spikes. It reduces the air pollution that still damages public health in our towns and cities and cuts emissions in line with our legal obligations.

I thank the Member for the intervention. I will come to that and some aspects of his comments that, I think, should bring cross-party support if they do not already. Whilst the Alliance Party is not suggesting that we pull the use of fossil fuels overnight, the DUP amendment frames fossil fuels as an inevitable reality of our future. By describing fossil fuels as an ongoing and essential part of the energy mix, it risks locking us into long-term dependence on the very fuels that cause the climate breakdown and expose our constituents to repeated price shocks. From both a climate and energy-security perspective, they can no longer be treated as a permanent pillar of our future system. On the other hand, the Sinn Féin amendment rightly and undeniably emphasises the role of the Department for Communities as the body responsible for addressing fuel poverty and managing fuel support schemes. Supporting that amendment does not detract from the motion's core environmental goals; on the contrary, it reinforces them by reminding us that a just transition must bring people with it, especially those on lower incomes, those in poorly insulated homes and those already in or on the brink of fuel poverty. I turn now to comments made by other Members. I will try not to repeat reflections that were made in the previous winding-up speeches. In proposing the motion, my colleague Kate Nicholl ably addressed the dependency on fossil fuels. That point is worth repeating right through the debate and beyond. In moving amendment No 1, Phillip Brett talked about other parties having an obsession with net zero. I will venture to suggest that Hansard would probably back me up in saying that Mr Brett's party has mentioned net zero more often than any other party in the past days and weeks. I am sure that he would not, for a moment, expect me to be able to rectify that obsession.

Not at the moment, Mr Buckley, no. I am sure that Mr Brett, being the reasonable guy that he is, would not expect me to try to solve that obsession for him. In responding to an intervention from one of his colleagues, he mentioned the need to deliver the North/South interconnector: that is the issue on which cross-party support should be available. He also mentioned that 30% of renewable energy is not reaching the network. Again, that is something on which, we should all agree, every effort should be made. In moving amendment No 2, Colm Gildernew talked about the global scenario and the ongoing war in the Middle East. Diana Armstrong said that her party shares the concern about rising energy prices. She referenced overexposure to global energy markets and said that it was stark. It is bizarre that she could not support the motion, which is trying to address that over-reliance on fossil fuels and global markets. Mark Durkan referenced fuel poverty, including that in his constituency of Foyle. He said that there was a need for a modern and resilient system. Sian Mulholland addressed similar points. Pádraig Delargy reminded us that:

"All parties in the Executive signed up to the climate action plan".

In the Minister's response, she talked about the financial assistance that was recently announced by the UK Government as being simply insufficient. She also informed us that the renewable economy is worth over £1·4 billion. The Minister went on to acknowledge that it will be difficult to achieve targets but stressed that a number of strands of work can assist us in doing that. Perhaps all of us should be ambitious when it comes to those targets. The Alliance motion is not just about meeting our legal climate targets; it is about the kind of society that we are trying to build, one that chooses clean air over pollution, resilience over vulnerability and long-term security over short-term convenience. Renewables are cheaper, cleaner and more secure. Fossil fuels are costly, polluting and unstable. For those reasons, we hope that others in the Chamber will join us in urging:

"the Minister for the Economy to deliver a comprehensive plan to end Northern Ireland’s dependence on planet-killing fossil fuels and deliver a green energy transition."

1,097 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:16 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