Debate contribution: A5: Delivery
Debate contribution by Miss Nicola Brogan on .
- MLA
- Miss Nicola Brogan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 5 March 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- A5: Delivery
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4252982
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the opportunity to have the debate. I thank the Infrastructure Minister, John O'Dowd, for being here and for his ongoing commitment to the delivery of the A5 project. The A5 road upgrade is a hugely important issue for the people of West Tyrone and, indeed, for people across the north-west of Ireland. It is, without doubt, the topic that I am most often asked about by my constituents, who really want to see the road developed. I am really glad to bring it to the Floor of the Assembly. I will continue to raise the issue until we see the project's full delivery. The upgrade of the A5 road network offers wonderful opportunities for the entire north-west of Ireland. It will improve connectivity to the region, it will boost economic growth and business development in the area, and it will mean that local people have better access to opportunities such as education, training and employment. As I said, those are wonderful opportunities that will be important developments for the area. For me and for many in West Tyrone, however, the most important reason for the upgrade of the road is to make it safer and to protect lives. I secured an Adjournment debate on the safety of the A5 in January 2022, following the deaths of three young men who lost their lives on the road over Christmas 2021. I am sorry and saddened to say that, since then, the road has taken even more lives. More than 50 people have been killed on it since 2006. It is a heartbreaking reality that, until the A5 is upgraded and made safe for users, it will continue to take lives.
Those tragic losses are completely devastating for families and communities. We heard about the impact of those losses during the recent public inquiry into the A5 road scheme. Families who lost loved ones on the A5 shared powerful and moving testimonies about their losses, which illustrated the reality that people face because of the dangers of that road and the importance of completing the scheme. I again thank the families for their powerful and poignant contributions to the public inquiry. They have shown great strength and dignity through some very difficult times. It is unfortunate that, owing to legal challenges brought by a small minority, there have been significant delays to the project. I join others, including the Infrastructure Minister, in urging those objectors to reconsider their continuing legal challenges, to consider instead how deadly the road is and to think of the many lives that have been lost and the many people and communities who have been left devastated by the death of loved ones because the road as it is now is simply not fit for purpose. I welcome the commitment from Michelle O'Neill in her inaugural address as First Minister to the delivery of the A5 upgrade as a strategic priority for the newly established Executive. I welcome the Infrastructure Minister's commitment and determination to progress the road and make its delivery a priority. I was also really pleased to hear the Irish Government announce last week that they will provide €600 million towards the A5 project. It is hugely important that we come together and work to ensure that this project is completed. We cannot accept any more delays to the A5. I look forward to working with the Executive and my colleagues across the House to ensure that the A5 project is completed.
579 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: 0.03 (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 (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.98 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:50 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.