Debate contribution: Net Zero Policies: Cost-benefit Analysis

Debate contribution by Mr John Blair on 14 April 2026.

MLA: Mr John Blair
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 14 April 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Private Members' Business
Heading: Net Zero Policies: Cost-benefit Analysis
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5482496

Text

No. Not so early, and probably not given the time limits. Climate change is not theoretical for the people of Northern Ireland. We already face more frequent and intense flooding, which causes damage to homes, farms and businesses. Our rivers and loughs are under pressure from rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns and ecological stress. There are heavier downpours that overwhelm the drainage and sewerage systems. Just last week, we had reports of blue-green algal blooms appearing again in Lough Neagh. Those are not abstract concerns that we can brush under the carpet; they threaten public health, food security, tourism and our quality of life. Put simply: every delay to serious climate action means greater damage and higher future costs. The motion implies that the Climate Change Act is an obstacle to vital infrastructure such as the A5 and A4, yet the recent court judgement was clear that the problem was not the climate legislation but failures in planning and coordination across Departments. Climate law does not stop infrastructure; it demands better infrastructure that is properly assessed, consistent with emissions targets and aligned with a credible pathway to net zero. Furthermore, the motion attacks the draft climate action plan and implies that DAERA's work is an unjustifiable burden on farmers and households. In reality, the Minister has acted quickly to begin meeting our legal obligations and to place Northern Ireland on a more sustainable footing. From the green growth strategy to the environmental improvement plan, the Minister has shown how climate, biodiversity and green jobs can be integrated, rather than treated as competing priorities. The DUP motion goes further by criticising the legal requirement for a minimum spend on active travel and wrongly presents it as a barrier to road maintenance.
Yes.
Absolutely. I thank the Member for the intervention.
Thank you. I am sure that the Member, like me, has ample evidence in his constituency inbox that shows the demand for high-quality active travel. However, the way in which active travel has been put in the motion misunderstands a modern, efficient transport system that reduces congestion, cuts emissions, improves air quality and relieves pressure on the health service by helping to tackle obesity, heart disease and poor mental health. Alliance is proud to defend investment in active travel and to stand alongside groups, such as the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust, that know that increased active travel options benefit everyone. I turn to the motion's claim about the alleged burden of net zero on ratepayers, householders and farmers.
That is a gross evasion of the facts. The Climate Change Committee reports that each pound invested in net zero generates between £2 and £4 in benefits, including decreased fuel imports, reduced energy costs and the prevention of climate damage. Additionally, the Economy Department has indicated that research shows that there are currently over 100,000 jobs in Northern Ireland's green sector, with a potential to grow another 58,000 by 2035.
Across the EU and beyond, Governments are investing in clean technologies, renewable energy, green skills and nature restoration because they see clear evidence that those investments create resilient jobs, attract investment and future-proof their economies. If we row back now, Northern Ireland will not save money. We will simply fall further behind. Businesses, including farms, are already innovating by using precision agriculture, restoring peatlands, investing in renewables and cutting waste and emissions. Our job is to support and accelerate that innovation, not undermine it with mixed messages from the Assembly.
I cannot, at this point; I really am going to run out of time. A net zero Northern Ireland is a vision for a better, healthier, more prosperous Northern Ireland. The transition will be challenging. It will require upfront investment, new skills, better planning and support for those most exposed to change, but the status quo is not an option. The cost of inaction will dwarf the cost of acting now. Of course, reaching net zero is not the responsibility of the AERA Minister alone; it requires commitment from every Department and, crucially, political will from the Assembly. That means putting a firm stop to the stop-start government that has led to wider delays in climate policy coming forward. While we debate, people outside the Chamber are getting on with it. Businesses are cutting emissions; farmers are adopting more nature-friendly practices; and community groups and young people are campaigning for cleaner air, active travel and restored habitats. The public want greener options and innovative solutions. We must listen to them and act accordingly. Recent research carried out by the RSPB in February clearly indicates public opinion. Some 86% of respondents believe that the Executive should do more, not less, to restore nature and fight climate change. That 86% figure directly contradicts the stance expressed by the DUP in the motion. Therefore it will not surprise the House to hear that we will vote against the motion.

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

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification