Debate contribution: Lough Neagh

Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on 9 September 2025.

MLA

Ms Claire Sugden

Party at the time

Independent

Date

9 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Lough Neagh

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5086786

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for your grace on the time. We know that Lough Neagh is one of our most important natural assets and that it provides almost half of Northern Ireland's drinking water. It supports wildlife, fishing and farming, and it underpins businesses, tourism and recreation across the region. Although it is inevitable, the return of blue-green algae is deeply concerning. It is about not just the environment but people's daily lives. In my constituency recently, businesses at Benone and Castlerock spoke to customers who are staying away because of the warnings. Families are unsure whether it is safe to swim, bring children to the beach or even let their dogs near the shore in case it poisons them. Local charities in my constituency, including Sea2it, have found that the blooms make their clean-up work on the Bann more difficult, and many people want reassurance that the water that comes out of their taps is safe to drink. We have been given that reassurance, but public confidence will last only if we see the source of the problem being addressed. We know the sources. Too many nutrients are entering the lough from waste water treatment, septic tanks, industry and agriculture. I agree with Mr McCrossan on his point about the fines. In my constituency, someone was convicted recently of polluting the water. That was the second time, because the fine probably was cheaper than changing the way that he does things. We need to address that. It is not good enough. Climate change and invasive species also make the condition worse. Waste water, however, is where the Government must take the lead. The Northern Ireland Audit Office has highlighted that years of underinvestment have left our system under strain. Phosphorus levels in our waters have worsened over the past decade. The Office for Environmental Protection has also warned that Northern Ireland is not on track to meet its water quality obligations, pointing to the lack of pace and urgency in current plans. We can compare that with England, where every storm overflow is now monitored, data is published and regulators can impose penalties, and with the Republic of Ireland, where most urban waste water now has nutrient removal and performance is regularly reported. Northern Ireland, as usual, is behind. As others have said, part of the answer lies in how Northern Ireland Water is funded, because, unlike companies in other regions, it depends on the block grant, so its budget rises and falls with the wider political context and pressures, of which there are many. Households already contribute to their water charges through regional rates, but that money is not ring-fenced in the way that water revenues are in England and Wales. Government must be honest about how we can close that gap. Realistically, it would be difficult to ring-fence that money from the regional rate without consequence, because, if that money is directed into water and waste water, it has to be found elsewhere, or cuts will have to be made. However, if we are serious about fixing the problem, that is a conversation that we cannot avoid. Septic tanks and industry also contribute to the problem, and stronger oversight is needed there too. Agriculture is part of the picture as well. Farmers recognise that nutrient run-off is an issue, and they know that they have a role to play in fixing it. Many of them are taking steps, such as not spreading when rain is forecast, using low-emission spreading equipment and adopting better practices. However, they have told me that they feel blamed, and, sadly, the motion blames them as well. It refers to an earlier motion as "misguided", but it was not; it was a fair reflection of what farmers across Northern Ireland are feeling. I heard a story about a farmer who took his own life, not necessarily because of this issue but because of the compounding pressures that are being put on farmers, not least by the Labour Government across the water but also by some of the proposals that are being put forward here. That is desperately sad. Farmers must be treated as partners. They want to be listened to, and they want workable measures because, as others have said, they care about the environment. It is part of their job, and it is who they are. If we do not listen to farmers, we will create a new crisis. It may not be for the various Ministers in the Executive, but it is something that we should be concerned about, as farming is our biggest industry in Northern Ireland. We should have published a timetable for waste water upgrades across Lough Neagh and the Bann system, so that we can see what is happening and when. We should expect full transparency on overflows, with proper monitoring and public data, as is the case in other parts of the UK. We need stronger enforcement around septic tanks and industry because they too play their part. We must work in partnership with farmers to support the good practice that many of them have already adopted. We need measures that are practical, understood and fair. Right now, we are at an impasse, and we are doing nothing. That will not fix the Lough Neagh issue, and it is certainly not going to help our farmers. I appeal to Members across the Chamber: let us work together, let us listen to one another and let us not blame. This is an issue that will not be fixed this year or next year, maybe not even in the next 10 years, but we need to start somewhere.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:05 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