Debate contribution: Nutrients Action Programme 2026-29: Opposition

Debate contribution by Mrs Deborah Erskine on 10 June 2025.

MLA

Mrs Deborah Erskine

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

10 June 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Nutrients Action Programme 2026-29: Opposition

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5001296

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I have little time, but, at the outset, let me say that no one in the Chamber denies the environmental and water quality issues that we face. However, we are entitled to question why one section is being demonised without proper account being taken of others. A blind eye is turned to others that constantly create problems in our waterways. The algal blooms choking Lough Neagh and the pollution that I see there are symptomatic of wider issues. I have just come from a briefing by the Fiscal Council on the sustainability of Northern Ireland Water. What did they raise? Major pollution incidents caused by NI Water. The NAP proposals risk devastating our agriculture community when many in that community are operating on razor-thin margins, and our agri-food sector is a cornerstone of the community. They are not the enemy in the conversation. We cannot afford to have any more top-down diktats that ignore the reality on the ground. I will quote the chief executive of Northern Ireland Water, Sara Venning, who, at her first Infrastructure Committee meeting, said:

"We have more overflows per head of population, and per kilometre of pipe, than is the case in other parts of the UK".

I asked the AERA Minister about the monitoring of overspills, which create pollution, and, indeed, about SORPI. Northern Ireland Water confirmed that more than 20 million tons of untreated sewage and waste water spill into our waterways annually. There are 76 waste water treatment works around the inner edge of Lough Neagh and 10,000 septic tanks that, I should add, NI Water is aware of. The Minister knows that we are not monitoring overspills effectively, and I raised that with him last July. Back then, there were 724 storm overflows, and only 60 of those were deemed satisfactory, and only 260 had been assessed. I asked the Minister whether he would jointly fund event duration monitors so that we can truly monitor overspills, which would arrest the pollution incidents that result from our waste water treatment works, rather than skewing the data. Has the Minister followed that up with the Infrastructure Minister? The moves to end the SORPI arrangements are not happening quickly enough. In fact, NAP provides no details of the water quality measures that are proposed for river catchments. We cannot scapegoat one sector while allowing other sources of pollution to persist unchecked. Therefore, like my colleagues, I call on the Minister to immediately withdraw the current public consultation on NAP. The Minister must know that it is not just the DUP calling for that: over 4,000 people have done so via our petition. There is a strength of feeling in the Chamber today. People from my constituency have come to show their frustration —

— at the NAP proposals.

464 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