Debate contribution: Energy Prices
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 13 April 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Matters of the Day
- Heading
- Energy Prices
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5483094
Read the official Assembly record
Text
There is not much for me to add after my colleague Daniel McCrossan was clear about the Executive's failure to take responsibility on behalf of the Northern Ireland public. Let me be clear, as Daniel McCrossan and Mark H Durkan were, about the Executive's failure to take responsibility for telling the Northern Ireland public how they want to support them. Let me also say that, number one, this is Donald Trump's war. The spike in energy prices is a result of Donald Trump's insane and reckless bombardment of Iran. The Members opposite were not just OK with that but cheered it in the Chamber a few weeks ago. Some of them, including the mover of the Matter of the Day, Mr Buckley, then went and got photographs taken with Mr Trump in the White House.
Tuts are coming from the Chamber, but that is the man whose reckless and illegal bombardment has driven up energy prices and created the problem that we have today. It is true that some of the measures would need to be paid for in part by the British Government, who, yes, need to engage, but what have we seen from the DUP and Sinn Féin, the two Executive parties, collectively today? We have seen theatrical Punch and Judy politics, deflection from their responsibilities and a refusal to take responsibility. I am not aware that, over the past fortnight, the First Minister and deputy First Minister or any other Ministers have convened an urgent meeting with, for example, farmers, hauliers, domiciliary care workers or other affected groups to ask them about the impacts on their businesses and communities and to come up with a package of support or at least to work to develop what such a package might look like, were there to be more financial support from the UK Government. Indeed, those two parties told us that they did not have the financial firepower. As the official Opposition, we said, "We back you. What scheme do you want to deliver?". They got £17 million. We agreed that it should have been more and that we wanted to see more, but it has been stuck in an Executive bank account for more than a month. It is no use the two big Executive parties coming here, throwing digs at one another, writing letters to London, going for selfies with Donald Trump and then refusing to be honest with the public of Northern Ireland about their responsibility. That is deflection. It is one of the reasons why our politics has become broken and why people in this society do not trust those two parties to prioritise the common good, their needs, their communities, their businesses and their livelihoods. What they see is that, when it comes to a time of crisis, those parties will simply prioritise theatrical falling out and their own party political interests. There was nothing stopping the First Minister and deputy First Minister urgently convening a meeting of affected sectors weeks ago. There was nothing stopping the Communities Minister, the Economy Minister and other Ministers coming up with a support package for home heating oil users weeks ago. There was nothing stopping them working with Translink to implement a plan for reduced transport fares. They have done none of that; they have come into the Chamber, rowed with each other and deflected. They need to work with the British Government, who have a responsibility, to support the people and businesses of this society.
580 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: 0.14 (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 (0.73).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.07 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.11 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.24 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.73 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.14 | 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 | 0.89 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.06 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
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.