Northern Ireland risks losing energy investment and associated jobs to other markets unless ministers accelerate delivery of the region’s energy strategy, according to a report from the Northern Ireland Assembly‘s Public Accounts Committee.
The committee says businesses and investors have repeatedly raised uncertainty over future policy, support schemes and delivery timescales. Evidence gathered during its inquiry suggests projects could be redirected to Great Britain, Ireland or other European markets where the commercial framework is regarded as more predictable.
Released publicly on 22 October following an embargo, the Public Accounts Committee report examines implementation of the Path to Net Zero Energy strategy, introduced in 2021 and led by the Department for the Economy. The strategy envisages affordable, secure and increasingly self-sufficient energy supplies, alongside opportunities for new business activity.
Targets include reducing energy consumption in buildings and industry by 25%, obtaining at least 80% of electricity consumption from renewable sources, and doubling turnover in the low-carbon and renewable energy economy to £2bn. The committee warns that the remaining period to 2030 is shrinking while important delivery mechanisms remain unresolved.
The inquiry identified weaknesses in annual action plans, including insufficient links between actions and measurable targets, unclear timetables and uncertain accountability. Without a clear sequence of decisions, companies considering energy infrastructure cannot reliably assess when a project will receive support, what grid capacity may be available or how returns on investment will be regulated.
Those uncertainties influence boardroom decisions well before construction starts. Renewable generation, grid reinforcement and storage require access to land, planning consent, engineering capacity and capital. Investors may have several locations in which to commit funds, and uncertainty in one jurisdiction can alter the relative attraction of another.
The committee says almost £124m of public money has been spent on energy-related programmes and Energy Group staffing costs since 2020. That figure should not be confused with the total investment required for the transition or treated as evidence that all expenditure has failed to produce benefits.
Committee chair Daniel McCrossan said the strategy offered a major opportunity to attract investment and improve energy security, but warned that it would not remain available indefinitely. Deputy chair Tom Buchanan called for stronger oversight and measurable results, reflecting concern that weaknesses previously noted by the Northern Ireland Audit Office have persisted.
The report makes 11 recommendations. These include regular publication of an Energy Policy Statement and funded plans to address grid, infrastructure and energy storage constraints. Businesses need those commitments to translate into practical timetables if project pipelines are to become bankable investments.
The committee welcomed some improvements in reporting and transparency. It also noted that the department remained confident about the ambition to develop a £2bn green economy. Its assessment therefore concerns the credibility and pace of delivery, rather than proof that the headline ambition is unachievable.
For manufacturers and other energy-intensive employers, infrastructure delays can constrain operational plans as well as future environmental targets. Companies evaluating electrification or the location of new facilities need realistic expectations of connection dates, electricity costs and reliable supply.
Energy storage and grid constraints have direct consequences for investors modelling new generation projects. A renewable plant can have a strong resource and an agreed site but still face poor economics if connection timing is uncertain or curtailment risks cannot be priced confidently. Storage may help the system accommodate variable output, but it too depends on planning, market rules and financing. The committee’s emphasis on funded delivery plans therefore addresses risks that sit between an attractive policy target and an executable investment project, where delays can make a scheme uncompetitive with opportunities elsewhere.
The next test will be whether ministers convert recommendations into funded actions with named owners and clear deadlines. Investors can adapt to demanding rules more readily than to rules whose timing and substance remain uncertain.
You must be logged in to post a comment.