Debate contribution: Independent Environmental Protection Agency
Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .
- MLA
- Mr Eóin Tennyson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 March 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Independent Environmental Protection Agency
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5437008
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
It is with some incredulity that I propose the motion. For three years, we have all watched as Lough Neagh turned green in what is now a seasonal spectacle, as the largest fresh water lake in these islands and the source of over 40% of Northern Ireland's drinking water is being choked by putrid pollution. We have grappled with the fallout from Mobuoy, the largest illegal dump in Europe, at staggering environmental and financial cost, and we have witnessed the real impacts of climate change on our communities. Flooding, wildfires and extreme weather have upended lives and livelihoods, not to mention the plight of biodiversity loss and, indeed, the deteriorating air quality that many of our communities contend with. Those are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a deeper, systemic inertia that has characterised the approach of successive Executives to environmental protection. However, these are not only questions about our commitment to environmental protection; they are questions about fairness, equality and social justice. When our natural assets are allowed to die in plain sight, the people and communities whom we represent pay the price, and that price is not paid equally. Generations of families who have worked the waters of Lough Neagh as fishermen with pride now find their boats idle. Their identity, income and heritage, all inextricably linked to the lough, are now threatened by toxic blue-green algae. Across our rural economy, the picture is the same. Farmers struggle with adverse and unpredictable weather. Tourism and recreation businesses lose visitors. Businesses that are the backbone of our rural communities are too often left to carry the burden of environmental degradation and failure. Clean air, safe water and healthy land are not privileges; they are rights, and they must be safeguarded by a body with the independence and authority to hold all of us to account — government, businesses and wider society. An independent environmental protection agency (EPA) would not only act as a watchdog and a deterrent to polluters; it would be a catalyst for restoration, investment and rebuilding public trust. For 30 years, report after report has concluded that our system of environmental governance needs fundamental reform. The case for change is irrefutable. We need an agency that is independent of politics, can take decisions on the basis of scientific evidence, can enforce compliance robustly and is properly empowered and resourced to do so. In 2020, every party signed up to establishing an independent environmental protection agency as part of 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA). Yet when Alliance sought to amend the Climate Change Bill to secure an agency in the previous mandate, the Assembly rejected it. We were told at that stage that there was not enough detail on the structure, functions or powers of a new agency. That is why, when the Executive returned, as a top priority, Andrew Muir commissioned an independent review of environmental governance. That review, which included a member of the Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU), has now provided the detail, recommendations and road map necessary to move forward. The model proposed would improve transparency, accountability and consistency, and yet that proposal is being blocked at the Executive. It is no surprise that the DUP would renege on commitments made in 'New Decade, New Approach'. We are all well accustomed to their snake oil salesman approach. It is, however, a staggering display of arrogance and disrespect not just to their partners in government but, more important, to the people of Northern Ireland, that they have not kept their word. Nor is it surprising that the DUP takes a reckless approach to environmental stewardship. Many of the challenges that we face today stem directly from the policies that they championed and pursued in office. What I find baffling, however, is that a party that professes to be vehemently opposed to a trade border in the Irish Sea — a border that they created — is now determined to build a sea border for environmental governance brick by brick. It is bizarre that the DUP, as a unionist party, would argue that citizens in Northern Ireland, drinking mouldy water and breathing poor air, are not entitled to the protections and safeguards enjoyed by citizens in England, Scotland and Wales. It is a perversion of democracy that clandestine sectarian vetoes are being deployed to prevent the issue even reaching the Executive table. The supposedly "Democratic" Unionist Party is running down the clock and deliberately frustrating the democratic will of the Assembly and the Executive. The abuse of cross-community protections and the joint nature of the Executive Office to block an EPA exposes just how warped these institutions have become and just how far we have fallen from the spirit and intention of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. The perilous state of our environment is not an orange or green issue. The establishment of an independent EPA will not have a differential impact on nationalists or unionists. All our people have suffered and will continue to suffer if the Assembly fails to act. Of course, while it falls primarily to local parties to honour the commitments made in 'New Decade, New Approach', it is not solely the responsibility of local parties. The UK and Irish Governments have an obligation to ensure that the deal that they brokered is honoured and delivered. Indeed, when the DUP previously reneged on New Decade, New Approach commitments to the language and identity Bill, the previous Government stepped in and legislated to ensure that it could be delivered. The evidence for the need to reform the institutions is clear and has been well rehearsed. If dysfunction, deadlock, delay and the endless cycle of ransom politics are allowed to continue, the Secretary of State will condemn the institutions to death by a 1,000 collapses or death by a slow bleed of public confidence as institutions in which parties cannot deliver on their democratic mandates or even deliver on the least controversial of issues for which there is widespread public support. We must act now to protect our environment for future generations and to protect those whose livelihoods rely on it. We know that an independent environmental protection agency is not the entire solution. Work is under way in a range of areas, such as peatland restoration, the nutrients action programme, the river basin management plan, strengthening penalties and, indeed, ending the bye ball on pollution for NI Water, but an independent agency is the foundation on which the progress must rest and be measured. I commend the motion to the Assembly.
1,093 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: 0.27 (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 (0.89).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.59).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- 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 | 0.13 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.29 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.52 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.18 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.27 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.24 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.59 |
| Adopts it | 0.16 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.87 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.12 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:13 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.