Debate contribution: A5 Western Transport Corridor Scheme

Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on 22 September 2025.

MLA

Mr Timothy Gaston

Party at the time

Traditional Unionist Voice

Date

22 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

A5 Western Transport Corridor Scheme

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5124017

Read the official Assembly record

Text

My thoughts are with the families and those who have lost loved ones. They continue to be let down by the political fallout from net zero, which now puts all future infrastructure projects in Northern Ireland at risk. The A5 motion is a strange one for the "constructive Opposition" to table on its first Opposition day of the new term. The motion exposes the hypocrisy of the mad environmental zealots by delivering to them a good dose of reality. The SDLP has tabled a motion complaining about the fallout from the very climate change legislation that it so enthusiastically endorsed at every stage in the Assembly. Let us roll the clock back a few years. The record shows that the SDLP repeatedly argued that there was urgent need for a climate change Bill. One Member even attacked others in the House by claiming that the overwhelming scientific consensus supported the SDLP's position. Now, however, as the Climate Change Act drags the A5 project below the waterline, the SDLP is the first out of the traps to propose a non-binding motion to demand that construction begin before the end of the mandate. Justice McAlinden did not invent section 52; the SDLP and its climate change mates made sure that it was enshrined in law. The High Court did not block the A5 for fun but enforced the very provisions that the SDLP supported. Where is the honesty from the SDLP and, indeed, Sinn Féin and Alliance? A few years ago, they were tripping over themselves to pass that legislation.

I am happy to give way.

Thank you very much, Mr McCrossan. Yes, I know where west of the Bann is. Following the next election, hopefully, it will have better representation from this side of the Chamber from people who will actually stand up for the people there. My goodness, the Member talks about net zero, and he mentioned figures. The problem is with net zero and the climate change fanatics. Let us look at it. Why did the project fail to withstand legal challenge? It failed because of section 52 of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. If one takes the time to read the judgement, one will see that Justice McAlinden reproduced that entire section in his decision. In contrast, the TUV has always been clear that the Climate Change Act's emissions targets are not practical. They are detrimental not just to Northern Ireland's infrastructure but, importantly, to its agriculture industry. I will not support the motion, and I see no reason why the A5 project alone should be exempted from an Act that, as my party warned at the time, set the Province on the wrong path. It is the height of hypocrisy to cheer that into law and then to come here and complain when the very law that they championed rightly dispels the A5. It is a product of the made-in-Stormont mess, and the SDLP cannot wash its hands of it. I ask myself when we will see that happen, as it inevitably will. First, we have the A5, and, next, the Act will begin to bite on farming. Will the SDLP come back to the House to look for special treatment for farmers, or is it only the A5, Mr McCrossan?

I think not. Judging by the SDLP's support for the nutrients action programme (NAP) proposals in the House a number of weeks ago, it wants to decimate the agriculture industry. Is it only when the West Tyrone farmers dare to use the SDLP's own legislation against it that it suddenly gets exercised about the A5? The motion should not be about seeking special treatment for the A5. It should recognise the folly —

— of the Climate Change Act in relation to all future infrastructure projects —

— and the impact that it will have on farming. I am happy to give way.

I am sorry, Mr McCrossan, but I started my contribution by saying that my heart goes out to the families of every victim of the A5. Let me tell you, Mr McCrossan, that this is not the only infrastructure safety upgrade that will fall because of your climate madness. You could not wait to get through the Lobbies and bring it into force, and now, when it has come back to bite you in your own backyard, you are saying, "We should set it aside for the A5." All lives matter, and the A5 should not be prioritised over other future upgrades —

— that will ultimately fall because of your climate madness.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:13 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