Member's statement: Road Projects
Member's statement by Mrs Deborah Erskine on .
- MLA
- Mrs Deborah Erskine
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 28 April 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Road Projects
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5509527
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The A5 is "an absolute priority" for Sinn Féin, and the First Minister has said:
"we will leave no stone unturned in making sure that the A5 is built."
That was her line on Saturday. On 1 July 2025, the First Minister said in the Chamber:
"All options are on the table ... I stand by that. All options must be on the table, including appeal, amendments to the legislation and, potentially, new legislation. Let us look at all the options." — [Official Report (Hansard), 1 July 2025, p60, col 2].
Well, there is a massive stone sitting unturned on the A5. We are not talking about stones that are poured onto landowners' land for preparation works; it is the rock of net zero climate change targets that Sinn Féin, the Alliance Party and the SDLP are so beholden to that they cannot take the speck out of their eye and realise that that stone is holding back infrastructure projects. I can only conclude that those fine words are nothing but sound bites. Friday was another day, with another speech and another sound bite from the Infrastructure Minister. There is still no plan to deliver. As Liz Kimmins, Michelle O'Neill and Mary Lou McDonald took to the stage at Sinn Féin's party conference in Belfast, they all had the chance to outline real action on our crumbling roads and what they will do to solve the problem with our major roads project; instead, we got deflection, excuses and a great reel of blame. Blame the Brits: check. Repeat the line that the A5 must be built: check. Make a vague promise about regional balance for rural roads: check. Of course, there was no explanation of how major road projects will actually go ahead, especially when climate change targets are not being fixed to allow progress. Addressing regional balance is a lovely little line that might sound reassuring, but it is so disconnected from reality. I have not forgotten that £6·6 million for the A4 Enniskillen bypass was handed back to the Minister's colleague, Finance Minister John O'Dowd. Some £8 million has been spent on that project to date, not to mention the more than £150 million that has been spent on the A5 without a single bit of tarmac laid. It is a privilege for me to be elected to this place, and it is incumbent on me to stand up and shout for Fermanagh and South Tyrone. I will not tire of doing so, but it is time for those who have the power to do so to overturn the stones —
— that are holding up major road projects. It is hard to escape —
— the conclusion that Sinn Féin —
— is not doing delivery.
459 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: 0.12 (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 (0.80).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.96).
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.06 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.15 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.80 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.04 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.77 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.12 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:27 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.