Debate contribution: Nutrients Action Programme 2026-29: Opposition

Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on 10 June 2025.

MLA

Mr Eóin Tennyson

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

10 June 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Nutrients Action Programme 2026-29: Opposition

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5001211

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. When Andrew Muir took up office as Minister last year, he made clear his unwavering commitment to improving water quality and turning the tide on the ecological crisis unfolding in Lough Neagh. Indeed, just weeks after the Executive were formed, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister stood by his side on the shores of Lough Neagh, talking about it as a collective priority and about the need for immediate action. The motion exposes those sentiments from the First Minister and the deputy First Minister as mere weasel words, because it is fallacy for any Member to claim that we can improve water quality and tackle blue-green algae in Lough Neagh without a robust plan to deal with nutrient run-off. The nutrients action programme is a core part of the Lough Neagh action plan, to which all parties on the Executive and, I think, in the Chamber signed up. The Office for Environmental Protection has been crystal clear:

"The consequences of failing to address nutrient pollution ... are grave"

for our drinking water, our industry, our agriculture sector and our fishermen, who have already had to deal with the suspension of eel fishing this year. I have heard criticism in the debate about the level of engagement. Aoife Finnegan talked about a lack of consultation. The irony is there for all to see that what parties are calling for today is the suspension of consultation, an opportunity for organisations, farmers and citizens to engage on the issues. They want that to be prematurely shut down so that farmers cannot contribute to the debate about how the proposals could be made workable at farm level.

I will give way to the Member.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. If previous NAP proposals and strategies were so effective, Lough Neagh would not turn green every summer. Perhaps that is a reflection of the reason why the Minister has taken a different approach on this occasion. Mr Buchanan talked about the failure to tackle TB, the failure to deal with ammonia and the crisis that our farmers now face with Lough Neagh. Those are all issues that this Minister inherited from Ministers from Mr Buchanan's party who failed to be honest about the trade-offs and choices that exist. Perhaps the truth is that the DUP and Sinn Féin are uncomfortable with a Minister who no longer allows government policy to be written by only one select group of stakeholders but, rather, chooses to consult openly, honestly and fairly with all farmers, all organisations and all citizens about the way forward. It has been said that the NAP proposals ignore waste water infrastructure, but the Minister has been clear on his intent to remove the statement of regulatory principles and intent (SORPI) arrangements, which is the so-called bye-ball that has been granted to NI Water. Alliance has consistently called on the Infrastructure Minister to take more robust action where she has responsibility. We have heard about financial support, and it is true that financial support and grant support will be necessary in order to make some of the changes practical at farm level. The DUP and Sinn Féin hold the purse strings of the Executive, so I will take today's debate as a firm commitment from those parties that they will make that funding and grant aid available to the farmers who need the support. The parties that are supporting the motion do not have a good story to tell on Lough Neagh and our environment. Through Going for Growth, industrial sand dredging and so many other missteps, they have walked our community, our farming industry and our society into an environmental catastrophe. Earlier this year, the same parties blocked a proposal that would have seen increased fines and penalties for those breaching environmental regulations. What message does that send to the farmers who abide by the regulations and by the law? What message does it send to our constituents who are drinking foul-smelling and foul-tasting water in summer months or the businesses that cannot operate and make a living when there is algae on Lough Neagh? The public are watching the debate. They know that the situation in Lough Neagh will not be addressed through mere warm words and photo opportunities. It will require strong leadership and, yes, difficult decisions. Instead, we hear from parties in the Chamber the same old inertia and neglect that contributed to the situation and the crisis in the first place. MLAs who walk through the Yes Lobby today are wilfully and knowingly signing the death warrant for Lough Neagh

I urge all Members to take their responsibilities to our environment seriously and reject the motion and, instead, engage in good faith in the consultation process so that we can get to a place where we have a NAP that will serve our environment and our farmers fairly while dealing with the issues in Lough Neagh.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:42 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