Debate contribution: A5 Western Transport Corridor Scheme

Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on 22 September 2025.

MLA

Mr Robbie Butler

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

22 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

A5 Western Transport Corridor Scheme

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5123496

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. When the motion came out and the amendments went in, I thought that seeing three amendments that are mutually exclusive should send some message of comfort to the families in that area who have been bereaved. The fact that 50 people have lost their life on that stretch of road since 2007 is quite horrific, and it means something to us all. If nothing else comes out of the Chamber today, let us hope that there is a message of solidarity with the families and of how everybody, regardless of the arguments made, wants to see delivery. Few debates in the Chamber at the moment command the same urgency and carry such moral weight as this one because of those deaths and their impact on families. The facts are stark and unarguable. Too many lives have been lost on that stretch of road. Too many families have been left shattered by preventable tragedies. Every one of us in the Chamber knows and has heard the calls from the A5 Enough is Enough campaigners and the grieving families who simply want a safer future for others. Saving lives must be the first and "absolute priority", and it is from that perspective that the Ulster Unionist Party tabled amendment No 3. It is the most balanced amendment. I ask the Opposition to reconsider whether they will support it. The UUP amendment is grounded not in political one-upmanship or the temptation to point fingers, as is so often the case in the Chamber, but in the clear-eyed recognition of the fact that the Minister has a duty to deliver the project lawfully, competently and urgently. That means, yes, building the road but doing so in such a way that withstands scrutiny, respects those who are affected and aligns with the legislative framework that the Assembly put in law. We must be clear: the A5 will be built. It is a matter of seeing not just whether it will be built but how we will do so. In answering the "How?", it is impossible to ignore the repeated failures of multiple Departments to work together effectively, which speaks to Mr Martin's points. Long before the recent judicial intervention, it was evident that siloed thinking, poor communications and elective collective leadership were undermining delivery. Too often, Departments acted as though their obligations were in conflict with each other's rather than being capable of being reconciled through cooperation and planning. That is simply not good enough. Executive parties and Ministers need to be very aware of that, and we need to see more cross-departmental working. The Assembly writes the laws of Northern Ireland and Departments are bound to apply them. It is therefore simply indefensible when Departments cannot evidence compliance with our own legislation. When they cannot demonstrate that due process has been followed, or when they treat legal obligations as an afterthought rather than as a foundation stone, that is not merely a technical failing: it is a failure of leadership and responsibility. It is precisely that gap that has brought us the repeated delays and the frustration of communities that have been promised so much for so long. We can also not overlook the experience of landowners. Too many of them feel as though they have been left in the dark and treated as an inconvenience rather than as citizens whose lives and livelihoods have been directly impacted on. The UUP amendment puts it plainly: people must be treated "fairly and respectfully". That means having timely communication, honest promises and adequate compensation where there is loss. We cannot, on one hand, call for progress and, on the other, ignore those whose property is directly tied up in that progress. Trust must be rebuilt with landowners because, without it, the legitimacy of the project is undermined from the ground up. The DUP amendment also acknowledges a further truth. If further delays occur, road safety measures cannot wait. Temporary improvements, enforcement and better public transport options for the north-west must be advanced in parallel. We cannot allow the tragic roll call of lives lost on the A5 to continue simply because the legal process takes time. Leadership means acting on every available front to save lives, not standing idly by until the ribbon is cut. Here is where my party's amendment actually distinguishes itself. It grapples with the reality of carbon budgets. Colleagues, it was the Assembly that passed legally binding climate commitments. I accept that people come at that from different directions. However, whether one agrees or disagrees with their pace or ambition, those commitments are the law of the land. Major infrastructure cannot simply be waved through without regard to that framework. To do so would invite only further legal challenge and more years of delay. That is what it would consign it to. We are demanding clarity from the Minister for Infrastructure on how the A5 project will stay within those limits; not as a box-ticking exercise but as a demonstration that the Government are capable of delivering complex projects in line with overlapping statutory obligations. That leadership has been lacking. That must change if the A5 is to proceed without further obstruction. The families who have lost loved ones do not want to hear excuses. The farmers and landowners who see their fields and livelihoods directly impacted on do not want to be kept in the dark. The communities of the north-west do not want another round of promises without delivery. They want action, honesty and leadership. The Ulster Unionist Party amendment strikes the right balance. It insists that saving lives comes first. It insists on fairness for landowners. It insists that road safety measures cannot be paused if there are further delays. It insists on lawful, competent delivery that can withstand further challenge because it has respected the law at every stage.

I am nearly at the end of my remarks, but I will.

I absolutely do. Only for the fact that there is an ongoing legal process, I would say a lot more. I certainly do not want to impact on that, but it is quite astonishing. Given that the Climate Change Act was one of the top pieces of legislation — certainly, the highest profile one — that we passed, and that some parties beat the drum loudly on it, it is very disappointing that the evidence was not provided to the judge or for the assessment of need at that time. As I said, that is evidenced in my submission on the amendment. There is a dearth of cross-departmental working, particularly on what we would call "high-profile" aspects of delivery for the Executive.

We need to send out a clear message on the delivery of the A5 that public safety is of paramount importance to the Assembly but that adherence to our legislation also be respected. That is what the project deserves and what those who travel the A5 deserve, and that is what the Assembly should demand today.

1,166 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:11 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