Debate contribution: Energy Prices
Debate contribution by Mr David Honeyford on .
- MLA
- Mr David Honeyford
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 13 April 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Matters of the Day
- Heading
- Energy Prices
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5483042
Read the official Assembly record
Text
For weeks, I have been raising people's concerns about the cost of energy. My constituents feel it when they fill their oil tank, at the petrol pump and every time that they go to the shop. Right now, those costs continue to rise at an absolutely scandalous rate because of one simple truth: we are absolutely exposed to global oil and gas prices and shocks. This morning, we have heard the DUP's big idea, which is to bury our heads and rely further on oil and gas, the price of which only ever goes up. What is driving that shock? It is the reckless escalation of the Middle East conflict, driven by Donald Trump and his actions, with fuel instability driving up global oil prices and pushing inflation back on to the system. Who pays for that? It is not Donald Trump, the Governments or the oil companies but ordinary working people here. Here is the part that people will not miss. Just weeks ago, the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party sat with, lined up for their photographs with and cosied up to their cheerleader, Trump, busting to be seen with him and get their clicks on social media — the same Donald Trump who is now driving the decisions that are pushing up our fuel prices and hurting every family in Northern Ireland. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot stand beside the man — a deranged man who, today, compared himself to Jesus — and then come back here and complain about the price and consequences of his actions. That is not leadership: it is hypocrisy and gaslighting people. While you chase your headlines, clicks, TikTok and everything else, people here pay the price. What should we do? We need to look to solutions. Alliance calls for the UK Government to act and to act now. We need a cut to VAT on domestic energy. We need to reduce fuel duty to ease the pressure at the pumps. The VAT rate has already gone up. By the cost of it going up, that is cost-neutral. There needs to be a rise in the windfall tax on energy companies. Again, the DUP wants to champion all the companies making massive excess profits. They need to be taxed in order to make further reductions to people's costs. We need the Minister to put targeted support in place to help struggling households. When prices spike, we cannot stand back. We must step in. Alongside that, we need to get serious in the long term. If we do not reduce our dependence on oil and gas, that will happen, as day follows night, again and again. There will be more shocks and more pressure on our own working people. Yes: let us talk about the cost of living, but let us be honest about what is driving it and not gaslight people. Let us stop the distractions, focus on what will actually help people and bring forward action to help people now and in the long term, because people out there deserve better than this.
515 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: 0.11 (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 (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.07 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.18 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.43 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.88 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.09 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:17 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.