Debate contribution: Independent Environmental Protection Agency

Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on 10 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Gerry Carroll

Party at the time

People Before Profit Alliance

Date

10 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Independent Environmental Protection Agency

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5437254

Read the official Assembly record

Text

In the last debate, I commented on how long it is taking the Assembly to implement free parking for people in hospitals. However, from this motion it is clear that we take longer and longer — the years have gone by, quite literally — to put an independent EPA in place. I say clearly that an independent EPA is long overdue, and I appeal to parties to stop blocking it. Obviously, I mean the DUP in this case. I support the motion and the amendment. Executive parties signed up to this in early 2020, but, obviously, they were getting spooked by Timothy Gaston or by some of their own bogus arguments about the environment that they churn out daily. As a general point, agriculture and environment are often pitted against each other. That is a false dichotomy, a false debate. We should challenge that. The Member for Strangford asked for a cogent argument as to why we need an independent EPA.

I can give her several: Lough Neagh is toxic green, the Mobuoy dump was allowed to exist for years, corporate farmers pollute waterways every year and scores, if not hundreds, of people are dying because of air pollution. During the debate, my quango meter was going off, because I lost count of the number of times the word "quango" was used by Members to my right. I am happy to give way if the Members want to describe what a quango is. Is the Education Authority (EA) a quango? Is the Housing Executive a quango? If Members view those organisations as quangos, do they want to end them, or is it only the green and environmental quangos that they are against? There are too many quangos, and it is too late in the day.

That was a good effort, Johnny Timex. Fair play to you on that, but, as I said, there is still a rationale for keeping an independent EPA.

Go ahead.

Yes. I did not realise that the term "quango" would cause such a stir, but we obviously need the organisation. I pay tribute to Friends of the Earth, which has called for an independent EPA since 2004, before I and many others became elected representatives. Friends of the Earth led the way when it was not necessarily in vogue to call for an EPA. If, or rather when, an independent EPA is established, it has to be independent of the Department and the Executive, to go back to the previous point. The body should tackle NI Water and the other public bodies that engage in the nefarious behaviour that has been mentioned. I do not understand the rationale for the position of some Members, who attack the Minister in support of farmers but are not in favour of an independent EPA because it would not look at NI Water and other bodies. I do not bat for the Minister on every issue, but that does not add up, in my estimation. The body should be properly funded, staffed and resourced. It should have the teeth to properly intervene to stop pollution and ideally prevent it from happening. Moy Park obviously comes to mind. There is an absurd state of play in my constituency and, I am sure, other Members' constituencies whereby constituents can be fined if their bins are not collected through no fault of their own. Often, they are not collected through no fault of the council workers either. People who are deprived and live in poverty in working-class communities can be fined quite hefty sums of money. People across the North can be fined, rightly, for dropping cigarettes in the street, but corporate polluters get away scot-free. That is an absurd state of play. I agree with the Member for Lagan Valley who said that an EPA alone will not stop pollution, but I hope that it will be a step in the right direction when coupled with the sea change, or maybe a slight change, in some parties' endorsement of the Going for Growth strategy, which led to so much dumping and pollution. In conclusion, we need to move away from allowing extractive companies to dictate terms to local communities here. We should not let a disgraced former ambassador to the US and former Secretary of State — the prince of darkness — dictate what communities here should do.

Maybe, if I have a second. He should not dictate what mining companies should be allowed to get away with. I refer to Dalradian in that context. There has been a lot of talk about public ownership of Lough Neagh in recent days. We said it last year, as did the Save Lough Neagh campaign —.

It is time for the earl to hand it over.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

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.

Challenge this classification