Stormont's infrastructure minister is to appeal a judgement that ruled construction of the new A5 dual carriageway should not go ahead in its current form.
The 58-mile (94km) £1.7bn project was given the green light by Stormont ministers in October last year.
In June, a court found the Department for Infrastructure's plans for the road did not comply with climate change targets.
The road is the Northern Ireland part of the major arterial route that connects the north-west of the island – Donegal and Londonderry – to Dublin, via towns including Strabane, Omagh and Aughnacloy.
On Monday, Liz Kimmins said she had taken the decision to instruct legal counsel to seek the appeal ahead of the deadline for doing so this Friday.
She said staff had been "working night and day" to ensure the appeal was robust.
Kimmins had said on 1 July that she was looking at "pursuing" an appeal into the ruling.
More than 50 people have died on the A5 since 2006 and campaigners have called for the road to be upgraded.
Speaking on Monday, Kimmins said she did not want to get into the detail of the grounds for her appeal until it was "formally lodged".
She also said she advised executive ministers of her plans to appeal the judgement at its last meeting, but that the decision to take another legal challenge was hers.
She said officials in her department had been working with staff in the Department for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (Daera), which holds responsibility for climate change targets contained in the Climate Change Act.
"It's important we do appeal the judgement. In relation to the ruling, a huge amount of work went into it. We were confident going into the case we had done as much as possible but it wasn't to be," she said.
"From the next day we were back to the drawing board, and I will not be found wanting in terms of the work that will go into this to get things done."
The minister added that she was "fighting tooth and nail" to ensure the road was built as quickly as possible.
Benny Hurl from the A5 Enough is Enough group, which has campaigned for the new road to be built, said they fully supported the minister's decision to appeal the judgement.
They said they were "optimistic" that the department would ensure every base was covered this time around and that would lead to a successful outcome.
Stormont's official opposition, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, said it was "deeply regrettable" that the decision had been taken at the "last minute".
West Tyrone assembly member (MLA) Daniel McCrossan said: "From the hour the judgement was issued I have been urging the minister to lodge an appeal and address the court's concerns, and there is a real sense of anger and frustration in this area that there has been relative silence since.
"The judgement was clear that there were outstanding concerns around climate targets that must be addressed.
"I cannot understand how despite several meetings with Daera, the Department for Infrastructure and the previous minister still failed to adequately address this. There can be no repeat of this incompetence during this appeal process."
Deborah Erskine, DUP MLA for Fermanagh and South Tyrone and chair of the assembly's infrastructure committee, said Kimmins' decision to appeal was a "valid legal route to take, but one that will inevitably take time".
"The infrastructure minister must level with people. The reality is that work on the A5 is not going to commence any time soon," she said.
"These legal processes are lengthy, and the minister should also be looking urgently at what other steps can be taken now to make the A5 safer for all road users, and how to deal fairly with landowners impacted by the failures of DfI."
Mayor of Derry and Strabane Ruairí McHugh said the decision to appeal was "a significant and welcome development" for the north-west region.
Upgrading the A5, he added, was "about more than just a road, it's an investment for future generations".
What happened in court?
The judicial review proceedings that culminated in Judge McAlinden's decision on 23 June, involved a group of residents, landowners and farmers who mounted a fresh challenge against the decision to begin construction work.
The umbrella group, known as the Alternative A5 Alliance, contended it would breach legislative targets to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
The High Court judgement blocking the upgrade of the A5 road shows the reach and impact of Stormont's climate change legislation – but the judgement is clear that shortcomings in the project can be remedied.
A solicitor for the Alternative A5 Alliance campaign group, which brought the successful case, said his clients' efforts had been "vindicated" and it was an important day for the environment.
Safety campaigners from the Enough is Enough group said they were disappointed with the decision but added the judgement provided a "roadmap" for how the upgrade could proceed.
What is the A5?
The road is the Northern Ireland part of the major arterial route that connects the north-west of the island – Donegal and Londonderry – to Dublin, via towns including Strabane, Omagh and Aughnacloy.
The dual carriageway scheme was first announced back in 2007, but has been beset by a number of delays.
by Gemofabirdy
14 comments
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgv5wnd9gjo](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgv5wnd9gjo)**
*****
^(I’m a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
About the same chance of this succeeding as me winning the euromillions. One last desperate throw of the dice from an inept department.
If they are not going to meet the demands of CCA then they are just wasting more tax payers money. Why would the judge rule differently?
Fuck me is it really that hard to put together a report that says it’ll be technically bad for the environment if traffic increases but it can’t be helped and traffic is increasing whether it happens or not? This is the kind of shit you could write in a week for an undergraduate thesis.
Surely they need to break this down iinto different phases and not one single massive project. Will never get passed with its scale.
This is beyond a joke . How can a road upgrade to improve public safety be stopped due to a breach of climate change legislation when hundreds of bonfires are lit every year ? If they block this upgrade will they apply the same rule to all road works and building sites. 🤔
Just keep blowing more money on this, could of vastly improved that road by now and saved life’s, without destroying the environment.
So climate targets outweigh saving lives? Surely emissions would be reduced due to travelling at a more optimum speed? These climate emissions policies are the biggest load of shite anyway when you have the US, China, Russia, India et al all putting 2 fingers up to them. We’re only stunting our own growth.
The appeal will be “that isn’t what we (MLAs) intended the climate act to do” and the court will strike it down again because that is the law that they passed.
Chancers never want to take responsibility for anything.
Plant hundreds of trees along the route as carbon capture devices 🌲🌳🌴
I wish them every bit of luck, they’re going to need it. I’m from Down but have the misfortune to have to drive to Omagh a few times a year for work. It genuinely shocks me how badly thought out that road is given the nature of the traffic that uses it.
Overtaking lanes that swap direction every other mile, hidden dips and bends, junctions where the visibility is obstructed by hedges and trees, lack of opportunities for safe overtaking when a large proportion of the vehicles using the road are low speed agricultural or HGVs and zero room for error for overconfident drivers.
The naive part of me wonders how a tiny group of landowners can hold back progress for the entire west of NI.
I hope they’ve got a strong case, but they’re up against it with the CCA.
I reckon this will be another long, drawn out waste of time that will do nothing but waste millions of pounds, and the only ones who’ll benefit will be the barristers and “consultants”
This road is lethal in it’s present configuration. Cannot believe that “environmental considerations” trumps saving lives.
If the gov makes a bad law can’t they like, you know remove or edit the law lol
Comments are closed.