David Honeyford
Lagan Valley · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Ten years ago, the UK voted to leave the EU, and Northern Ireland was removed from the EU against its will. People will have voted for many reasons, but people were lied to.”
“Many families have spent the past decade worse off, and the loudest supporters of Brexit have punished them, while we have the likes of Farage appearing to be prospering personally. <BR /> <BR />Ten years on, the question is not whether Brexit was right or wrong, because the evidence is clear for everyone to see.”
“<BR /> <BR />The biggest cost of Brexit has been instability, which scares off investment. Since the Brexit referendum, the UK has had seven Prime Ministers, and we have had the Assembly collapse twice. Political uncertainty has become normal. However, when politics becomes unstable, ordinary people pay the price.”
“We need to see more happening, because east-west collaboration is already happening. We need more collaboration to grow our economy further, but talk is cheap. People say such lines on the news but then come to the Chamber and vote against collaboration.”
“Two and a half years into the term of this Executive, much of that remains missing. The same applies to waste water infrastructure and planning reform, with delays continuing to block growth and investment. We should do much more to collaborate North/South, as we do east-west, to improve people's lives.”
“The Executive are failing to provide certainty and follow-up on their commitments. My colleague Andrew Muir having had his green growth strategy blocked for over a year is just one example.”
The complete record
Every one of 868 lines we hold for David Honeyford, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 18.
“We need to see more happening, because east-west collaboration is already happening. We need more collaboration to grow our economy further, but talk is cheap. People say such lines on the news but then come to the Chamber and vote against collaboration. The lesson must be that we need less division, more stability and more collaboration. We need to grow our economy, create opportunities for ordinary people and put more money back into their pockets. We need to focus on them, not on ideology.”
“Many families have spent the past decade worse off, and the loudest supporters of Brexit have punished them, while we have the likes of Farage appearing to be prospering personally. <BR /> <BR />Ten years on, the question is not whether Brexit was right or wrong, because the evidence is clear for everyone to see. Rather, the question is how we move forward, because we find ourselves in a unique position, with dual market access, to both the UK and EU markets, and the opportunity to sell the region that we all enjoy. We need to maximise that opportunity as best we can for our people. <BR /> <BR />Members, do not tell me that you want Northern Ireland to work and then do everything that you can to stop that from being the case. We need more North/South collaboration.”
“<BR /> <BR />The biggest cost of Brexit has been instability, which scares off investment. Since the Brexit referendum, the UK has had seven Prime Ministers, and we have had the Assembly collapse twice. Political uncertainty has become normal. However, when politics becomes unstable, ordinary people pay the price. Ordinary people are paying the price for the Brexit parties' decisions in the House, and those parties have been willing to let ordinary people pay ever since. Every decision that has come to the House that has involved any form of collaboration or the benefits that we can gain from having dual market access has been voted down by the DUP, the Ulster Unionists and the TUV.”
“Ten years ago, the UK voted to leave the EU, and Northern Ireland was removed from the EU against its will. People will have voted for many reasons, but people were lied to. They were lied to in that referendum, and, no matter what way people voted, everybody can agree that the decade that followed has been an absolute disaster: a complete act of self-harm; a decade of a failing UK economy; £90 billion of tax revenues that have not been collected and that have come straight off health and education; and ordinary people being hit in their pockets with higher taxation. There has been next-to-no economic growth on a UK scale, so ordinary people are poorer, and we have seen the rise — a real, worrying rise— of the far right and populism in our communities, dividing our communities.”
“Alliance will support anyone who comes forward with opportunities, but, unfortunately, we have not seen very many of those, and there is little that we can support. Our economy needs action, and it needs it now.”
“Two and a half years into the term of this Executive, much of that remains missing. The same applies to waste water infrastructure and planning reform, with delays continuing to block growth and investment. We should do much more to collaborate North/South, as we do east-west, to improve people's lives. <BR /> <BR />The void of delivery is becoming an economic risk in its own right. We do not lack the talent, the ambition or the opportunity. The challenge that we have is not in identifying what needs to be done; the challenge is in having a political system that is willing to make it function and make decisions. The challenge is in delivering actions at the pace that our economy and our businesses require. The gap between ambition and action is costing us in investment, jobs and growth, and that needs to change right now.”
“The Executive are failing to provide certainty and follow-up on their commitments. My colleague Andrew Muir having had his green growth strategy blocked for over a year is just one example. <BR /> <BR />Not every challenge is within Stormont's control — I acknowledge that — but what we can control and need to control is the creation of the platform that drives growth. Energy is a prime example, just like other areas of our economy. Investors are asking not for miracles but for certainty: a master plan, a clear policy road map and clear timelines and a stable legislative framework that gives private investors the confidence to invest in our future. That investment will not happen to its full potential without that plan and that certainty from the Department for the Economy.”
“A new survey of business leaders should be a wake-up call to all in the House but particularly to the Department for the Economy and the Department for Infrastructure. The message from business that was released last week is stark and clear. Eighty-two per cent of businesses say that Stormont's current policy and lack of decision-making is constraining growth; 74% believe that economic growth is deprioritised in decision-making; just 1% of business leaders rate as "strong" the follow-up from policy announcement to real-world delivery; and 58% have delayed investment. Our biggest economic challenge is no longer lack of opportunity; it is absolutely the lack of delivery. Whatever the constitutional future that people want in this place, this region has to work.”
“Minister, if we are serious about growing aviation and regional connectivity, we need the widest possible pool of talent, including pilots and engineers. Your Department has identified the problem that exists, but what concrete action is it taking with the Irish Government to improve mutual recognition of qualifications and skills across the island?”
“Dilapidation is a major issue that damages our high streets and holds back economic growth and regeneration. I thank the Minister for joining me in Dromore, in my area, to see the regeneration that could take place there. How will the Bill empower councils to tackle dilapidation in the wider community?”
“We can either focus on the dead end of tearing things down, constantly encouraging division, or we can focus on building things up and sharing this place, creating better opportunities and a better future for everyone who lives here. For clubs such as Hillsborough Boys Junior Football Club and others in Lagan Valley and for the future of this region, we need hope, not the scaremongering that we constantly hear in here.”
“Yes, the site also offers the opportunity to tell our story honestly and factually, while welcoming visitors from across the world who want to understand it. The site will never be about glorifying the past, creating shrines or anything else. It must be about building a better, shared future for all of us, and that the hope for tomorrow is better than it is today. <BR /> <BR />What struck me most last week was how quickly a bulldozer can generate headlines. Yet, positive conversations about sharing this place and about jobs and opportunities for tourism and sport never attract the same amount of attention. Have we become so comfortable that we would rather argue about yesterday and score cheap political points than plan and work for a better tomorrow? The choice is really simple.”
“The future of Northern Ireland will not be built by bulldozers, but through jobs, investment, sport and the arts and by creating opportunities for future generations. Ultimately, however, it will be built by sharing this place. No young person at Hillsborough Boys Junior Football Club will get on to a new pitch because we demolish a building. They will get on to a pitch because we choose to build a better future for all of us. <BR /> <BR />The Maze/Long Kesh site offers the opportunity to provide sports pitches for local clubs and facilities for Commonwealth Games teams that we do not have in Northern Ireland. There is a chance to create jobs, attract investment and unlock economic potential. It is a strategically important site on the Dublin to Belfast economic corridor.”
“At the weekend, I attended the Hillsborough Boys Junior Football Club's end of season awards event. The club has more than 500 playing members on boys, girls and adults teams as well as Football for All and walking football teams. The club is at the heart of the community in Lagan Valley, and the awards were a fantastic evening to celebrate players, volunteers and coaches. I want to say "Well done" to everyone concerned. <BR /> <BR />One message came through really clearly, however, which was that as the club continues to grow, it needs more facilities and pitches. Club members urged us to get on with developing the Maze/Long Kesh site. That brought me back to a statement that we heard in the Chamber last week. I want to be really clear about this.”
“Thank you, Minister, for your response. The Knockmore line is already there. It links communities in Ballinderry, Glenavy and Crumlin and, as you say, connects to the airport, which is really important and is part of that all-island review. Is there a timeline in the business case for that work coming forward? What will the next stage be in seeing its objective realised?”
“If we are serious about growing our economy, creating good jobs and building opportunity across Northern Ireland, manufacturing must be at the heart of that ambition. I thank Manufacturing NI for the outstanding work that it does to highlight and celebrate the manufacturing industry and businesses that we have here. I congratulate the workers who create those businesses and make them thrive and grow, and I wish them all the best for the future.”
“We need to look at the areas in which it makes practical economic sense to work together, and then do so to deliver better for everyone. Manufacturing has been recognised as being central to the South's success, economic growth and regional prosperity. Some 85% of the jobs in manufacturing sector in the South of Ireland are outside the Dublin area. If you tackle the issue, jobs will spread naturally across the region. The South's success did not happen by accident; it came about because it created the conditions for businesses to invest, grow and succeed. We need to do exactly the same. <BR /> <BR />Manufacturing is not an industry of the past; it is one on which the foundations of our future are built.”
“It is about delivering skills, making things and creating opportunities for people to build a better future in this place that they call home. Alliance believes that we need to be much more ambitious. Despite the importance of the sector, we still lack a dedicated manufacturing strategy. We need a strategy that is focused on removing the barriers to growth, addressing skills shortages, reducing energy costs for manufacturers, supporting innovation and export opportunities, and tackling planning delays and waste water connection constraints. Most importantly, it must contain clear priorities, actions and timelines. <BR /> <BR />We should also be collaborating across this island on a range of issues, including skills, energy, supply chain opportunities and human resources.”
“Over the month of May, Manufacturing NI rightly shone a spotlight on one of our greatest economic strengths. Manufacturing contributes more than £6 billion to our economy, directly supports over 100,000 jobs and creates opportunities across the region. Too often, however, our focus on future economic growth can be on attracting the next major inward investment rather than on looking at growing our economy, backing the businesses, workers and innovators that we already have here and helping them to scale. <BR /> <BR />Our manufacturers invest in innovation and R&D. They create high-quality jobs, and they export their products around the world. Manufacturing is ultimately about people and opportunity.”
“Thank you for giving way, Paul. You are portraying it as if the countryside as a whole thinks that. I live in the countryside, and I do not agree with you. Many others do. You say that the people in the hunts do not go out to harm anybody. I have met farmers in my constituency who have been terrorised by hunts trashing their land, ripping up fences and going through their land. They are a law unto themselves. You are giving us a sad story, but you are not portraying two sides. We are talking about hunting with dogs, but you are talking about everything but that.”
“Minister, people are really struggling with their energy bills. I appreciate that any further reductions to those would need UK Treasury involvement. The other way to look at this is to reduce the amount of energy that we use in the first place. Is the Minister looking at grants or interest-free loans that would incentivise people to improve their houses to use less energy and, therefore, keep more money in their pockets?”
“<BR /> <BR />The end of the scheme will be music to the ears of everybody outside here, but the ghost of RHI must not hold the Department back as we move forward. We have to move forward now with the freedom of the AME budget and be able to transition away from fossil fuels to renewables. The Department needs to move at pace. As the closure of the scheme comes through, we need to see action. I know that that is the Minister's view as well, and she has committed to that. I hope that the past will not overshadow the future. I want to see a better future in which we can transition to renewables at a faster pace to allow everybody to be free of RHI and move forward. I am happy to support the Bill's Final Stage.”
“I thank the Minister and the Department for addressing those issues and for creating extra bands that allow for flexibility. I understand the need for flexibility in the system in order to allow it to operate for the next 10 years. However, this is also about making sure that the taxpayer is protected and that we are not giving away money for burning, which is what originally happened. I put on record my thanks to the Department for taking that away and looking at it. I also thank the groups that gave evidence to us and stood up for the people who had boilers. Andrew Trimble from RHANI, the UFU, Professor David Rooney and others gave evidence to help the Committee through the process, and it is only right and fair that we acknowledge them.”
“I rise to welcome the closure, finally, of the RHI scheme. It was an episode that will live long in the memory of this place, but it is now something that we can put to bed and move on together to try to make things better for people. I also acknowledge that the Minister has managed to bring all parties together in order to bring this to a close. That is something to thank her for and to welcome. <BR /> <BR />At the outset with this legislation, my priority and that of the Alliance Party was fairness to people who had gone into the scheme legitimately. We wanted to make sure that people were treated with respect and were looked after so that they would not be wiped out by a change in government policy. During the Bill's progress through Committee and through the House, I raised some issues that I had around banding.”
“We will work in the Committee to do whatever we can to make sure that the Bill is strengthened to be what the people here need. Energy and the transition is the defining challenge of this generation. We need to get on with delivering it.”
“They challenge costs, yet they champion oil companies that are making billions of pounds of additional profit. Meanwhile, families here have to heat their homes and go to the BPs of this world to fill their cars, and we do not have a plan from the Department for the Economy to get us off fossil fuels and to make that transition. That is what I want to see. We need a delivery of energy transition, but there seems to be a complete lack of vision coming through from the Department and a culture in that energy section that needs to change. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is not the programme that we need, but it is a step forward. I acknowledge that, and I support its going to the Committee Stage. However, the Utility Regulator needs real powers, not permission slips. We are running out of time in the mandate.”
“Yet, when we look at the Department for the Economy and what it has delivered over the past decade, we see that it is unbelievably slow, which is really concerning. The Bills that were promised have not appeared. Timetables do not get met. When you ask the same questions two years later, you get the answers that you got two years ago. I do not say that to be difficult. I do not want to be difficult. I want to work for a transition, but I make the point that people whom we represent are paying the consequences for that drift. <BR /> <BR />We are paying the price for being tied to fossil fuels and world oil and gas prices, literally every week. Yesterday, we heard from Members in the Chamber — they are not here at the minute — who champion Trump's ideology and challenge transition away from oil and gas.”
“None of that can happen without a plan: not a strategy document or a mid-term review but an actual master plan with milestones, accountability and a legislative programme attached so that it tells investors, the regulator, the consumers and the Assembly what is coming and when in order to give confidence, certainty and function to what the energy Department delivers. <BR /> <BR />Energy is at the heart of everything that the Assembly is trying to do. It is central to our economic competitiveness, our cost-of-living crisis and our climate obligations and to working together in sharing this island through the North/South interconnector, the single energy market and the shared ambition for offshore wind.”
“It requires regulatory certainty so that businesses can plan. It requires consumer protection so that households can transition. It requires offshore development, interconnections, heat decarbonisation, new technologies and storage units all moving in parallel and all requiring legislative underpinning. It requires smart meters so that consumers can benefit from flexibility in pricing, rather than dispatch rates rising or staying steady with that waste of energy. Rural communities need assurance that areas of environmental sensitivity are given protection. However, we have no timeline, no visibility and no certainty on what is coming forward or whether it is coming forward at all.”
“I really fear that we are missing out on huge potential and opportunity that will cost every household in their pocket every year into the future. The current framework was not designed for net zero. Even hydrogen does not fall within the definition of "gas" under the Gas (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.The regulator cannot act on hydrogen because the law does not even recognise it. The regulator has identified specific areas where it needs proper legislative cover, but the Bill addresses none of them directly. It simply enables the regulator to talk to the Department about those things without legal risk. <BR /> <BR />If we are to become energy secure on this island, we must move away from fossil fuels. That requires infrastructural investment, building grid capacity ahead of demand and a stop to reacting to things.”
“In the South, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities has a dedicated decarbonisation division. It has developed offshore grid policies, reviewed large energy user connections and actively aligned its regulatory framework with the climate action plan. <BR /> <BR />Here, John French, our Utility Regulator, has publicly said that he does not have a statutory duty to support the Government in meeting their legal duties on net zero. The Bill will go some way towards that, but it does not come close to what other jurisdictions have. That is the gap. What does the Bill do to close that gap? Very little. It gives the Utility Regulator the permission to give advice if asked. That is the distance between where we are and where Ofgem and the CRU are.”
“That was 18 months ago, and when we are four years — I stress: four years — from an 80% renewable electricity target, we need a plan on how to get there. There is a difference between a review and a decision; a strategy and a plan; a "range of stuff coming forward" and an actual legislative programme. We do not have those. I want to put that in context, because we deserve to have what other jurisdictions have. <BR /> <BR />In GB, Ofgem was given statutory net zero duties under the Energy Act 2023. There is now an explicit legal obligation to support the Government in meeting their net zero targets. It delivers renewable energy schemes worth more than £10 billion a year and is actively involved in the National Energy System Operator. It is delivering a clean power plan.”
“We are almost 18 months later. I asked that same question last week in Committee. I asked what the next step was, and I am still waiting for an answer. There were words, but there was absolutely no answer about a timetable, a commitment or a plan. They talked about steps but could not tell us what the next step was. That needs to go on the record, because we do not get answers at Committee from the energy section of the Department. <BR /> <BR />In 2024, I asked the Department directly whether there was a master plan for energy, and the answer was an outright no. We talked about this yesterday in the Chamber. We were told that we are working towards a midterm review of an energy strategy — not a plan but a review of a strategy that is already five years old.”
“"A range of stuff", in November 2024, was the assurance to the Committee. When pressed on what that range would look like, it was said that the "range of stuff" was:”
“I am trying to get answers from the Department, because we do not get answers from the Department at Committee. What caused that additional delay? With a 2030 renewable electricity target bearing down on us — it is four years away — we cannot afford to waste time, and, from where I sit, that is exactly what has been happening. Recently, we have seen movement but not in the years before. <BR /> <BR />When officials briefed the Committee in 2024, they were asked directly whether the Bill should go further. I will quote what was said:”
“Let us look at the timeline and put it on the record. In December 2021, the energy strategy was published. In June 2022, we had the Climate Change Act, which compelled every Department. I agree with Sinéad and Phillip: this is compelling only one Department. We then had two years of DUP collapse, so nothing happened. Take that as a gap. We returned in February 2024. In May 2024, the Executive agreed the draft Bill to go to public consultation, and that was completed in August 2024. In November 2024, officials briefed the Economy Committee and told us that the intention was to introduce the Bill before the summer recess in 2025. We need clarity on why we are here. It will be May 2026 later this week. Why did that not happen? I am not trying to score points; I am not interested in any of that. I genuinely want to push the transition faster.”
“Four years on from passing the Climate Change Act, we are legislating for a conversation.”
“Again, I question that wording and what it means, in practice. That is it; that is the entire Bill. <BR /> <BR />I draw the Assembly's attention to something that the Department acknowledged at the Committee back in November 2024. Some respondents argued that the Bill was not necessary and that article 12(5)(c) of the Energy (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 already provided the Utility Regulator with adequate cover to give advice to the Department on energy-related obligations in the Climate Change Act. The word "may", in clause 1(1), does not compel anyone to do anything: it does not direct; set targets; give the Utility Regulator any new enforcement powers; or update the regulator's statutory duties, which, as has been said, are decades old. We are, in essence, therefore, legislating for a conversation.”
“The word "may" is pretty ambiguous. Clause 1(2) states that:”
“We need to be, and should be, at the front and centre of the curve for energy security, which reduces costs for households, and not be held hostage to world oil prices. To achieve that, we need a plan that sets out a legislative pathway to delivery. I have talked many times in the House about the economy. It is our role to create the conditions and the platform — the pitch, if you like — for others to play on. We do not deliver any of this — it is the people in business who provide the outworking. We need to provide the platform and pitch for research and development, skills and opportunities to flourish and drive down costs for people and businesses. <BR /> <BR />Look at what the Bill does. Clause 1(1) states that:”
“We have had two pieces of energy legislation in two days. I thank the Minister for bringing this forward. I rise to support the Bill at its Second Stage. Alliance supports its proceeding to Committee Stage. However, I will spend some time to make my remarks, because supporting the Bill moving to the next stage is not the same as endorsing the pace, ambition or vision that has brought us to this point. The Bill has two clauses. We have to be honest about what those are there to do. I will take my time, because energy is too important to have legislation on it rushed through the House. <BR /> <BR />Europe, collectively, is actively recalibrating towards home-grown energy security. That provides green jobs, skills and opportunities. I met the Canadian high commissioner last week. Canada is in a similar place to us.”
“I thank the Minister. Beyond the requirement for nursing provision that he mentioned in relation to the Department of Health, is he confident that enough adequately trained staff are available for the schemes to proceed?”
“We have led on renewables before, and the potential is there for us to do so again. We need to get on with delivery and then see it through for people on the ground. I appreciate that it is in the Minister's inbox, but some sort of timetable would be helpful. I am happy to support the Bill's Second Stage.”
“There is a year left in the mandate, and people need to see delivery. We need legislation that improves their lives and that transitions us to using renewable energy. The legislative timetable is tight, but all parties have signed up to at least 80% electricity consumption from renewable sources by 2030 and to the 2050 targets. The same cross-party consensus can ensure that the REPG goes through at the same pace, unlocking investment and delivering energy security.”
“Closing one door is progress, but leaving the other door stuck is not good enough. <BR /> <BR />Alliance supports the Bill unreservedly; it is long overdue. I am happy for the Bill to progress, but I want to make the point to the Department that closing the door to petroleum is only a fraction of the job. The work that matters to ordinary people outside the Building is what comes next.”
“<BR /> <BR />We do not need the backwards step of moving towards the GB energy market at a time when GB is moving towards Europe. We need to see a sustainable way to drop prices for people and get more renewable generation online quickly in Northern Ireland. We need that plan-led approach from the Department; we need the interconnector built with the South; and we need direct interconnection with Europe and the Celtic interconnector, which is coming online in the next year or so. We need to share on this island and work together in the long term for the people who live on it. Offshore planning needs brought together, and every delay costs households in their pockets. Ending petroleum licensing is the right economic call, but the economic dividend flows only if we accelerate the alternative.”
“We need to see a master plan that takes a plan-led approach to all of the policy areas and gives communities confidence about what is happening in the area. For transition, we urgently need a firm legislative timetable for a renewable electricity price guarantee (REPG) scheme Bill. If the Minister can outline today a timetable for that and can give a categoric commitment on when that full option will be delivered, that would be really useful. We need to bring energy security in Northern Ireland and across this island, working together to deliver for everybody. More home-grown renewable energy means that families and businesses are less exposed to the shocks in global volatility that we have seen in recent weeks. Consumers do not see the difference. They only see their bill going up; they never seem to see it coming down.”
“This is a tidying-up exercise, as licences were not being issued anyway, and it simply brings the legal framework up to date with what has been happening in practice. That is long overdue. Alliance has been calling consistently for that, and we welcome it. We have called for a ban on the licensing of drilling and extraction for years, and I am glad to finally debate the legislation to deliver it. I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill forward, but I hope that it is only the start of what we need to see. <BR /> <BR />Tomorrow, we are debating another piece of legislation, again on transition. However, we are not seeing coming through to the Committee the ambition on energy policy from the Department.”
“Alliance fully supports the Bill, and I am glad to speak in favour of it. The debate is also an opportunity to highlight the fact that the Department needs to match the ambition of the legislation with the pace of transition to renewables as we go into the future. Repealing petroleum licensing is absolutely the right call, but, in practice, it has already been happening, and it simply brings the legislation up to date with the day-to-day. Removing fossil fuel exploration is one side of the issue of transition, but we urgently need to fill the other side of the space with clean, affordable and home-grown energy. <BR /> <BR />The Bill removes the Department's statutory powers to issue licences for petroleum exploring or extraction, but, as has been said in the Chamber, we need to be honest about this.”
“Minister, you have talked about the assessment, but assessments are one thing, and businesses need action. Mr Kearney talked about high-intensity users, and transport and manufacturing are two sectors that have been mentioned. You have just talked about the UK Government bringing that support through for manufacturing and said that we will see it next year. It is a year ahead of schedule. What work is being done now, what will that look like in practice for our businesses and when are they likely to see that?”