Debate contribution: Lough Neagh Rescue Plan

Debate contribution by Mr John Blair on 13 February 2024.

MLA

Mr John Blair

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

13 February 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Lough Neagh Rescue Plan

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4206356

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I rise to support the motion and the amendment that colleagues and I have put forward. I share others' frustration at the incredible delay in progressing meaningful action to tackle our Lough Neagh crisis. While the Assembly remained collapsed over the summer of last year, the largest fresh water lake in these islands — a vital strategic asset for biodiversity, tourism, recreation, fishing, culture and drinking water — experienced algal blooms at a rate never before witnessed on these islands. As if we have not already have enough warnings about the state of our ecosystems and the associated threat to nature over recent times, the Lough Neagh ecological crisis most certainly serves as notice that we must do things differently and must do better. All the policies and practices that have led to this devastating situation should be on the table for review as a matter of absolute urgency. When the blue-green algae issue was at its worst over the summer, I sponsored an event upstairs in Parliament Buildings which was led by Lough Neagh Partnership. Some of those who are in the Chamber today joined us at that event, and I am sure that they would all agree that there was a tangible sense of anger and frustration in the room about the limits of what could be done at that time without a Minister in place. I am glad that, in the restored Assembly, we can now get on with trying to tackle the many issues we face at Lough Neagh. Last week, after only a few days in office, the new Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs was on a boat in the middle of the lough to see at first hand the work that needs to be done. It is reassuring to hear the Minister say that the Lough Neagh crisis will remain high on his and the Department's agenda. We must be under no illusion, however: the restoration of the Assembly will not and cannot lead to a quick-fix solution. This valuable natural asset can be saved, but it will take a concentrated and coordinated effort over a long period by us as elected representatives, as well as by various Departments and agencies. There is damage that has been done over a large number of years to be put right. If you will allow me, Mr Speaker, I will use the opportunity and take a moment to highlight some of the work that I have done with colleagues to address the issue in the long term. My colleague Sian Mulholland deserves particular mention for her work on this. Our five-point plan for Lough Neagh clearly details the actions that need to be taken now. The first is the establishment of an independent environmental protection agency, which is a long-standing policy of the Alliance Party. The new body would have the authority to oversee and enforce environmental laws. It would have powers beyond DAERA, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) and the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP). Our plan for Lough Neagh also details increasing fines and penalties for polluters. That is a must. The fact is that it will take at least 20 years for the phosphorous sediment on the bed of the lough to rectify itself naturally or even begin to do so, but we will never achieve that if we continue to pump the same substances into the lough at the same rate as we are pumping them in now. It is clear beyond doubt that the bacterium in the lough is due to nutrient overload. The figures are out there: about 64% results from farming practices, 24% from water treatment and sewage and 12% from septic tanks. Therefore, we must look —

Yes, I will.

I am happy to respond. I confirm that they are not my figures but those of the Department, as presented in the cross-party updates that have been given on Lough Neagh. I do not have a list in front of me of all the contributors, but I assume that the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), for example, and others will have contributed. Those are the figures that were stated at those briefings. The point is that we must look at this seriously in light of the figures so that, as well as doing what I outlined on pollution, we secure investment in our waste water infrastructure and support more nature-friendly farming practices. The required DFI role and commitment on that further reinforces the need for the interdepartmental and inter-agency approach that we often reference. The final point of the plan closely aligns with the motion: creating a new legislative duty to cooperate on developing an integrated management plan. A myriad of public bodies hold some level of responsibility for the lough and its shores, but we lack effective, coordinated governance. For that reason Alliance supports the motion's call for a cross-departmental body and a new management structure to include input from communities and organisations with an interest in the lough's welfare at heart. On that point, I have tabled a minor amendment to ensure the inclusion of "relevant non-governmental organisations" to have a vital role to play on Lough Neagh and the planning of the actions for the future. Northern Ireland Water is perhaps the best example of those NGOs; there will, of course, be others. We must take the responsibility of those bodies seriously and ensure that feedback and action from them is guaranteed. Further to that, as our five-point plan clearly highlights, any new duty to cooperate must lead to tangible, measurable and fully resourced outcomes. Alliance will continue to press hard on Lough Neagh, because the future of our waters depends on this. For that reason, on behalf of the Alliance Party, I am content to support the Lough Neagh rescue plan motion with, of course, our amendment.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:35 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.

Challenge this classification