Member's statement: Active Travel Scheme: A2 Clooney Road, Ballykelly
Member's statement by Mr Alan Robinson on .
- MLA
- Mr Alan Robinson
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 30 September 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Active Travel Scheme: A2 Clooney Road, Ballykelly
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5142824
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In early autumn 2024, the then Minister for Infrastructure, John O'Dowd, announced a £2·6 million active travel scheme for the A2 Clooney Road in Ballykelly. The scheme commenced in late 2024. The 2·6 kilometre-long scheme was touted as one that would improve facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Furthermore, the carriageway was to be resurfaced. Minister O'Dowd said that the scheme would increase opportunities for walking, wheeling and cycling. He also asked road users for their patience while the scheme was being carried out. To facilitate the work, temporary traffic management measures were to be in place for a period of 33 weeks. The scheme removes what was once a hard shoulder that, on many occasions, has been used by vehicles to pull over to allow ambulances and other emergency vehicles to pass on that exceptionally busy and key route in the north-west. The scheme is to create a cycle path on a road that has an estimated 18,000 vehicles on it every day. There is not a day that passes that I or any other public rep does not receive complaints from road users about the traffic delays on the Ballykelly to Greysteel road. In my 20 years in public life, I cannot recall so much frustration and anger at a road scheme. So many members of the public have described it as a total waste of public money. The huge tailbacks are hurting the people of Ballykelly, Greysteel, Londonderry and everywhere in between. With recent news indicating that the scheme had been extended into early 2026, it is incumbent on the Department to act now to put measures in place to mitigate further daily delays for fed-up drivers. I ask the Sinn Féin Minister why the completion of the Clooney Road active travel scheme cannot be done in the evenings. Unlike other traffic schemes carried out in the evenings that subsequently met with objections due to late-night noise, the scheme does not impact on any populated residential areas and would therefore not face similar public anger. The public anger in the region is palpable. Public representatives are in post to act in the best interests of the public. The Minister's Department said recently that it will assess the traffic management: the Sinn Féin Minister needs to do more. She needs to listen to the people of the region and act urgently. Rather than have more active travel schemes, we need our potholes fixed.
404 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.07 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.07 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.85 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.12 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:16 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.