A5: Judge to rule on future of road scheme
A judge is due to deliver a decision on the future of the A5 road scheme later on Monday.The 58-mile (94km) £1.2bn project was given the green light by Stormont ministers in October last year.However, the following month a group of residents and landowners began judicial review proceedings against the dual carriageway.Preparation work had already started on parts of the long-delayed road scheme and in March this year the Infrastructure Minister visited a location where some advance works were underway.
More than 50 people have died on the A5 since 2006 and campaigners have called for the road to be upgraded.The scheme was first announced back in 2007, but has been beset by a number of delays.A group of local residents, landowners and farmers mounted a fresh challenge against the decision to begin construction work.
Long read: A5 crossroads
The umbrella group, known as the Alternative A5 Alliance, contended it would breach legislative targets set out in the Climate Change (Northern Ireland) Act 2022 to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.Part of the case centred on Planning Appeals Commission recommendations against proceeding with the scheme unless the department was satisfied it would not undermine those goals.
What is the A5?
The A5 is a vital artery of the Northern Ireland road network. More than 58 miles (94km) long, it has more than 200 side roads connecting to it.The road is single carriageway for most of its length, with overtaking lanes in some sections.It links Londonderry with Aughnacloy in County Tyrone and passes through towns like Sion Mills, Omagh and Strabane.It is the main north-south route in the west of Northern Ireland, providing a link between County Donegal and Dublin, via the N2 in County Monaghan.The road has remained largely unchanged since the 1960s, with the exception of some town bypasses, but there has been a huge rise in the number of cars, lorries and agricultural vehicles using it since it was first built.Official statistics show there has been about a 10% increase in traffic on the road in the last 10 years alone. An increase of about 30% is forecast over the next 25 years.
Concerns
A plan for a new A5 dual carriageway was first proposed nearly 20 years ago.It's been at the centre of a raging debate ever since, between those who say a new, modernised road is needed to save lives - and others who worry about the impact on farmland and the environment.Approximately 1,200 hectares of land, impacting more than 300 working farms would be required for the construction of the full 85km A5 carriageway.Groups like the Alternative A5 Alliance (AA5A) have repeatedly raised concerns about losing land that has been in their families for generations.They had called for the existing A5 road to be improved and pointed to the environmental impact of constructing such a large-scale project, as well as unresolved issues about building the new road near potential flood plains.Meanwhile, police figures have shed light on the cause of crashes on the A5, putting focus on driver responsibility.Driver error is the most common cause of fatal road traffic accidents on the A5, but it is also the most common cause of fatal accidents on the majority of roads across Northern Ireland.
A previous investigation by BBC News NI found that between 2012 and 2024, the A5 had the highest rate of deaths per kilometre of any road in Northern Ireland.In April this year Justice McAlinden heard arguments at the High Court from barristers representing the AA5A as well as from bereaved families and the Department for Infrastructure.The judge had previously said it was important the case reached a conclusion "as quickly as possible".A decision is expected later on Monday morning.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
4 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
UK energy and steel to be classed as ‘nationally important' in procurement shift
Britain's steel and energy sectors could be classed as 'nationally important' to UK security under new procurement rules aimed at giving homegrown industry an edge over foreign firms. Public sector buyers would be able to avoid normal requirements to consider overseas bidders and instead give priority to domestic firms under the plans set out in a consultation launching on Wednesday. Ministers would be allowed to designate sectors such as steel, energy and cyber nationally important in order to help grant them more of the £400 billion spent on procurement each year, the Government said. Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden said the proposals would ensure British industry was supported and 'boost growth'. 'The new rules being considered will give us the power to protect our national industries, ensuring more money goes to them as we buy goods and services in Government,' he said. The Government said the new rules will also ensure buyers exclude companies that cannot provide evidence of a good record of paying companies in their supply chains promptly and on time in a move to protect small businesses. New guidance will also require Government departments to consider British steel products for the £725 billion of UK infrastructure spending over the next 10 years announced in the industrial strategy on Monday. UK Steel welcomed the proposals, describing them as 'unequivocally positive news' that would help safeguard jobs in the industry. Director general of UK Steel, Gareth Stace, said: 'These changes rightly recognise the strategic importance of steelmaking to national security and the vital role of resilient domestic supply chains.' It comes as the industry faces uncertainty over the US-UK trade deal finalised this month, which slashed tariffs on aerospace and auto sectors but left levies on steel standing at 25% rather than falling to zero as originally agreed.
The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ministers in talks over welfare concessions as Labour rebellion grows
Ministers are discussing the prospect of further concessions to win over a growing list of Labour MPs poised to rebel against planned welfare reforms ahead of a crunch vote next week. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said talks between backbenchers and Government were 'ongoing' on Thursday night as Downing Street seeks to head off what would be Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat. It came as six more Labour MPs added their names to an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks, arguing disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. The new signatories include the Commons Environmental Audit Select Committee chairman Toby Perkins, Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Gareth Snell, Newcastle upon Tyne MP Mary Glindon and Tamworth MP Sarah Edwards. North Ayrshire and Arran MP Irene Campbell and Colchester MP Pam Cox, both of whom won their seats in the party's 2024 landslide election victory, have also added their names. The new names takes the total number of Labour backbenchers supporting the so-called 'reasoned amendment,' tabled by Treasury Select Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hiller, to 126. The Prime Minister has insisted the reforms are set for a Commons vote on Tuesday as planned, but ministers are locked in talks with backbenchers about the possibility of making changes to soften the impact of the Bill as a major revolt looms. Asked what concessions could be offered to convince rebels to back the Government, Ms Rayner sought to reassure backbenchers that they would not be expected to betray the party's traditional values. 'I'm not going to get into that on your show tonight,' she said in an interview on ITV's Peston programme. 'Those discussions are ongoing around making sure that the welfare reforms that we're bringing in support people into work who need that, and we're putting a huge amount of investment into doing that, but also protecting the most vulnerable.' She acknowledged that 'a lot of people are very scared about these changes' but added: 'I haven't changed my Labour values and we're not expecting our benches to do anything that isn't in check with them. 'What we want to do is support people, and that is the crucial bit around these reforms of what Labour are trying to achieve, and we're discussing that with our MPs.' The plans restrict eligibility for personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit. The Government hopes the changes will get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year. Existing claimants will be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support, a move seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. But the fact so many Labour MPs are prepared to put their names to the 'reasoned amendment' calling for a change of course shows how entrenched the opposition remains. One backbencher preparing to vote against the Bill told the PA news agency: 'A lot of people have been saying they're upset about this for months. To leave it until a few days before the vote, it's not a very good way of running the country. 'It's not very grown up.' They said that minor concessions would not be enough, warning: 'I don't think you can tinker with this. They need to go back to the drawing board.' According to the Government's impact assessment, the welfare reforms as a whole could push an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into relative poverty. Asked whether she thought there were hundreds of thousands of people claiming disability benefits who were not disabled, Ms Rayner said: 'No, what we're saying though is that the welfare system has to be able to have longevity.' Earlier on Wednesday, Sir Keir defended his leadership against accusations he had misjudged the mood in his party, insisting he is 'comfortable with reading the room'. At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, the Prime Minister said: 'Is it tough going? Are there plenty of people and noises off? Yes, of course, there always are, there always have been, there always will be. 'But the important thing is to focus on the change that we want to bring about.' Later on Wednesday, armed forces minister Luke Pollard echoed the Deputy Prime Minister, telling Sky News's Politics Hub show that 'of course' the Government was in talks about possibly making changes. 'Of course we are, and I think there's a concern that's very valid and real for lots of my colleagues. They're not doing this to cause trouble or be argumentative,' he said. 'They're doing it because they have a genuine, heartfelt concern about some of the impacts. ' He said some of the reforms would be supported across the party but 'where there is concerns… those discussions will continue until the vote and beyond.' Speaking to BBC Newsnight, Mr Pollard said the Government had 'between now and Tuesday to listen to those concerns' and 'to address them' before making the case for reform in the Commons debate next week. Asked whether the Government would listen to calls for it to change course over planned cuts to Pip, he said: 'I think that's for many colleagues where the real concern is.' Other senior Labour figures outside Parliament, including Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, have publicly expressed their opposition to the plans. Meanwhile, the Tories seem unlikely to lend the Government their support, with leader Kemi Badenoch setting out conditions for doing so including a commitment to rule out tax rises in the autumn budget and further cut the benefits bill.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Stop Labour's betrayal of our SAS heroes: Ex-Special Forces chiefs and MPs demand veterans who battled IRA are protected from prosecution
SAS veterans are being hounded with the threat of prosecution decades after their service thanks to a shameful betrayal by Labour. The Mail today launches a major campaign with ex-Special Forces commanders and senior MPs to protect the soldiers who bravely defended this country. We are demanding that ministers U-turn on their bid to repeal the Tories ' Legacy Act, which shielded Northern Ireland veterans from historical 'witch hunts', or else produce a proper alternative. It comes as former SAS soldiers face possible murder charges after a judge in Northern Ireland ruled that the shooting of four IRA terrorists in 1992 was not justified. Those behind the campaign have warned of a dire threat to national security if this process is permitted to continue. One ex-SAS commanding officer said ministers had to wake up to the need to protect serving and retired personnel from 'this creeping lawfare' or it would prove 'calamitous' by hobbling operations and hitting recruitment. The campaign has already generated £250,000 in fighting funds in a single donation from ex-SAS soldier-turned-entrepreneur Sir Mike Gooley, founder of travel company Trailfinders. A petition on the Parliament website demanding protection for Northern Ireland veterans has, meanwhile, reached 136,290 signatures, meaning a parliamentary debate will be held on July 14. The campaign team includes two former SAS commanding officers and a Regimental Sergeant Major. Other senior soldiers involved in the call for action served in undercover roles and faced being murdered by IRA terrorists every time they deployed. The political dimension of the campaign is being led by Conservative MP Sir David Davis, a former SAS reservist. He said last night: 'What we have seen so far has been a travesty of justice. This is not just about those who served in Northern Ireland. 'It is about giving protection and certainty to the entire Armed Forces family. Our veterans deserve our respect, not relentless legal pursuit decades after the events in question.' At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, the Mail yesterday asked Keir Starmer why he was opening veterans up to a possible legal witch hunt by repealing the legislation. The PM replied: 'I worked in Northern Ireland for five years so I know just how important and significant these issues are. We are in talks and discussions about how we resolve this issue.' SAS veterans have suffered emotional trauma from their hounding by lawyers. This included a suicide attempt by a former Special Forces soldier last year. Former SAS Regimental Sergeant Major George Simm said: 'As a result of these evidence-free accusations, soldiers are realising they have no legal rights. This has to change, out of necessity, for national security reasons. They have never been so exposed. 'On operations, to be compliant with the Human Rights Act, soldiers need their own lawyer on speed dial to advise them if there's a chance they might have to kill someone. The situation is beyond absurd. Soldiers didn't sign up to defend activist judges or a European legal system.' The case at the centre of the campaign involves the 1992 shooting of four IRA terrorists by SAS soldiers in Clonoe, County Tyrone. Following a police investigation and inquiries by the coroner, the RUC concluded at the time that there should be no prosecutions. The soldiers stated their use of lethal force was reasonable due to the threat posed by the IRA. However, last year they were ordered to appear before a new 'legacy inquest'. Coroner Mr Justice Humphreys ruled in February the soldiers' use of force was excessive, despite the terrorists having a heavy machine-gun and other guns. He claimed there was no attempt to arrest the four IRA men and determined, more than 30 years after the incident, that the soldiers should have waited for the IRA gang to disassemble the machine gun. The Ministry of Defence has vowed to challenge his verdict. But in the meantime, files have been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland. This could trigger a criminal investigation. Last night, former SAS CO Aldwin Wight said it was absurd that the soldiers who confronted the IRA at Clonoe 'should have to face the possibility of criminal action based on a subsequent flawed inquest three decades later, under a law that didn't exist in 1992.' He said it 'will prove calamitous for national security. Nobody is going to volunteer to expose themselves to this sort of legal nonsense. 'When are ministers going to wake up to the need to protect serving and retired personnel from this creeping lawfare?' Relatives of the IRA terrorists brought the 'legacy inquest' citing Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1998 Human Rights Act. The previous Tory government brought in the Legacy Act to protect Northern Ireland veterans from prosecution and endless investigations. But Labour's manifesto included a pledge to repeal the 'unlawful' Act. The Northern Ireland Office has pledged to replace it 'in a way that is lawful, fair and that enables families, including military families, to find answers'.
