NIW challenges

Following concerns raised by social housing providers about conditions being applied to planning applications on behalf of NIW preventing development the following FOI was submitted to NIW.

“Can you provide, for each council area, the planning reference numbers for each residential development where NIW has recommended refusal on the basis of insufficient waste infrastructure from 1st September 2022.”

The response is attached.

A small number of applications where NIW have recommended refusal have been granted approval after further engagement between the applicant and NIW. The solutions have included small developments of 1-2 properties where the need to connect to the foul sewer is replaced with the use of an STW, the opportunity to do this is limited by the size of the site and need for separation distance.

In major residential developments a considerable developer contribution to the enhancement of the sewage network has allowed the scheme to proceed. The resulting network development will also facilitate the development of further housing schemes numbering in the hundreds of properties. While this is seen as a developer contribution the reality is that the additional investment is reflected in the purchase price of individual properties, essentially a sewage levy. Given that it is paid through increased mortgage payments this represents an additional hidden tax burden which contributes to cost of living pressures and contributes to house price inflation especially where construction is curtailed in other areas. Such approaches are possible in a very small number of larger schemes where the capital investment can be recouped, for small schemes this is not an option. It is also not an option for social housing schemes where the construction is delivered on a fixed contract cost per unit.

Where other approvals have been issued these have been conditioned, some with a requirement to agree a solution with NIW before development starts, alternatively no development above sub floor level without agreement on a solution with NIW or no occupation of completed development without agreement on a solution. In practice, while this allows planning service to process applications, this acts as a barrier to investment. Developer led social housing projects cannot proceed without unencumbered planning permission, small scale development is blocked until a solution is found. While building to sub-floor level or even completion keeps the planning permission live there is no incentive to build without clarity on the return on investment period.

Belfast City Council Planning Department have taken the approach of setting aside NIW concerns about capacity of the system with the following form of words or similar, the recent approval for hotel accommodation in Chichester Street Belfast was despite a NIW recommendation to refuse.

“NI Water has objected to the proposal on the basis that there is insufficient waste water treatment capacity available to service the proposed development. They have also advised that the foul sewer network cannot presently serve this development proposal without significant risk of environmental harm and detrimental impact on existing properties. Importantly, NI Water makes allowance for existing significant committed development across the city. Such development, which includes un-implemented permissions across the city, will not all come forward at once.” LA04/2022/2216/F Centre House, 69 - 87 Chichester Street, Belfast 146 bedrooms

Belfast City Council estimate there are 20,000 properties where approval has been granted and development has not proceeded to completion. This situation will only continue until these are developed or NIW provide a detailed analysis of risk acceptable to the City Council. The potential exists for a significant release of foul water into the environment at a point in the future.

Causeway Coast and Glens Council have now taken the approach that applications will not be accepted without a pre-existing recommendation for approval from NIW. This reduces the time that applications remain in the system, comparable to issuing approvals with unachievable conditions, again designed to meet processing targets.

In the process of assessing these applications it was noted that an application in Mid and East Antrim for a light industrial unit required for an inward investment leading to 60 jobs had recently been approved with a condition requiring NIW approval before construction. A further FOI was submitted based on the original FOI request but focussed on non-residential development and the response is attached.

An application in Fermanagh and Omagh was granted approval subject to the approval of a flood evacuation plan, the granting of applications in high risk areas with flood evacuation plans is something that should be reviewed at Departmental level.

NIW requires significant short-medium term structural investment, without which all development is at risk impacting housing prices, social housing provision, economic development and key infrastructure such as schools and medical facilities in a number of key geographic areas. Options for increasing investment as part of a mutualisation framework need to brought forward.

NIW is neither funded through the rates, nor are its services free, notwithstanding the belief that the third rail of payment cannot be touched politically, the long-term financial certainty it requires must be addressed in some way. An absolute restructuring of the rates system, at neutral cost to business and residential ratepayers may provide options.

A number of developers are considering how to reduce system demand in line with other areas where water supply is limited. Currently NIW estimate a usage level of 145 Litres per person per day. The introduction of grey water systems, low flush toilets, low water usage washing machines, dishwashers and showers has the potential to reduce this below 100 litres. This reduces demand on the sewage system, making their argument for being given access to existing infrastructure. This also reduces the cost to NIW of providing clean water which remains a significant energy using process. In the medium to long term such an approach may need to be regulated through building control regulations/standards. Metering obviously provides an incentive to reduce costs but again, for now, that is not considered a politically acceptable option.

Questions need to be raised with Invest NI and the Department of Economy in relation to the limits on economic development occasioned by NIW to question whether investors are being directed away from those areas with limited or no capacity for treatment of foul water.

Further enquiries were made of DAERA and NIW in relation to testing for Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances (PFAS). The responses are attached, while NIW has been testing for these for a few years DAERA (NIEA) have not yet commenced testing. This may be due the underinvestment in environmental testing under pervious Ministers and as such we do not have sight of problem areas if they exist. It is possible that NI has not had the history of particular manufacturing which would lead to the production of these substances though a number of sites would come to mind for investigation. It is likely the public awareness of the health concerns about these substances will require additional investment in both NIEA (or independent successor) and NIW. Under this Government there will be divergence between EU and UK on the assessment of risk and limits of PFAS in water. Northern Ireland should take the view that protecting public health is the key imperative.

Rates next steps

1 / 2

Following the rates decision by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council there are a number of actions I believe are required to restore confidence in the administration of the council and those elected to office.

There must be a full analysis of the circa £7 million overspend identified in the latter half of 2023. This must include a line by line cost centre analysis of where expenditure deviated from the projected budget allocations in 2021/22, 2022/23 and 2023/24.

It is not enough to simply state that cuts of several million pounds will be made to lower the rate set, there remain significant issues when such reduction still results in a rate increase of nearly 10%. A comparison of each cost centre detailing initial projected budget, final agreed budget, total reduction and percentage reduction should be made available. For any reduction over 5% a brief explanation of impact on service delivery should be attached. Elected members must be clearly advised of the level of service proposed for each service area following budget reductions. Members are both responsible and accountable for the decisions they take.

Moving forward elected members should be provided with quarterly reports detailing the projected budget, actual expenditure and percentage deviation for each cost centre. All deviations of 5% either underspend or overspend should have an explanatory note. (This should involve limited additional work for staff as in the current financial situation the internal budgetary oversight the organisation should be carrying out should be more frequent)  

Moving forward, for each new revenue proposal councillors must be advised of the implications of additional costs on future rates setting. For each capital project councillors must be advised of the repayment costs, including interest per annum and the implications for future rates over the repayment term. Capital development also creates additional annual revenue costs to be added to the rates and these must also be considered at the point a decision is taken to proceed.

Normal economic activity will generate rates increases through interest rate increases, pay increases, supply chain inflation, legally required expenditure and projects council is already committed to. This means even on a do nothing trajectory future increases are inevitable, though now based on a higher baseline arising from the setting of this years rates. To limit further increases consideration must be given to limiting future borrowing to a lower headline capital borrowing limit and new revenue spending to be approved only where savings made elsewhere negate the proposed expenditure.

These initiatives will not reduce the likelihood of poor financial management decisions from previous administrations continuing to work their way through the system but they will begin to transfer responsibility for budget setting from council staff to elected representatives. Councillors will have been involved in the financial management decisions taken throughout the year and will not be faced with a catastrophic take it or leave it moment in future years.

This means a change in attitude from being spenders of the public purse to protectors of the public purse. This requires a change in the mindset of officers to understand the need for greater openness and transparency about financial governance with those elected to govern. It also means a change in mindset amongst some councillors, this is the job, previous administrations told you the job was to cut ribbons, it is not, for the foreseeable future your job is to understand the detail and cut rates.  

The problems will only be solved if councillors accept the challenge, if they do not then the problems will become worse and greater challenges and tougher decisions will lie ahead.

---

2 / 2

---

"The law is our servant, not our master" Jenrick

When Robert Jenrick MP stated in the House of Commons, during the debate on the Rwanda Bill, "The law is our servant, not our master" he raised an interesting question about who the law serves. When he states it is our servant is he referring to it serving Parliament, the Conservative party or that small neoliberal wing of right wing ideologues seeking to take power. Shouldn't the law serve the people and have the capacity to protect the public from the abuse of power by a small cabal. His comments coincided with an excellent article by Sophie Hill in Computer Weekly and Byline Times "www.computerweekly.com/news/366565690/Russia-hacked-ex-MI6-chiefs-emails-what-they-reveal-is-more-Dads-army-than-deep-state"

The idea of retired Colonel's, spies, civil servants and Spad's sitting around in gentlemen's clubs plotting the subversion of democracy isn't really as shocking as it should be. It's almost as if the 1960's and 70's Lower Sixth from Eton feel they haven't quite realised their perceived potential and still want their turn. It's not surprising to see some of the names, although the mention of David Burnside and Graham Gudgin does illustrate that the tentacles reach far and wide. This may be considered an old man's fantasy, acted out like a game of Dungeons and Dragons, it takes on a more serious tone when one realsises that they still seek to interfere in the governance of our society. James O'Brien's latest work "How They Broke Britain" tells another side of the same story, manipulation of society to deliver for a small selfish group of individuals. When you consider this in the context of Jenrick's statement it's very clear that such a group would find having the law serve them to be a useful weapon in their war on society.

Act of Disunion

As machinations continue within the Democratic Unionist Party on the return to devolution outside influencers will, no doubt, return to demands about the relying on the Act of Union to copper fasten Northern Ireland’s position within the United Kingdom.

Before unionism becomes distracted by such commentary a better understanding of the origins of the Act and its limitations would aid the debate.

At the end of the 18th century Ireland witnessed the birth of the Orange Institution and the United Irishmen uprising, nationally Britain constantly fretted about the intentions of France. It was feared that turmoil in Ireland would provide an opportunity for a French invasion with a welcoming population and ultimately a serious threat of an invasion of England from two directions.

In London the answer was clear, if Catholic unrest in Ireland was an opportunity for France addressing that unrest would reduce or remove the risk of a French invasion of Ireland. The strategy to achieve that was to introduce Catholic emancipation, a policy with limited impact in England in terms of the population affected but a significant impact in Ireland.

Achieving this was problematic, at the time the Parliament in Dublin was a Protestant Parliament, more specifically a Church of Ireland Parliament which would never vote for Catholic emancipation. The answer was an Act of Union subsuming the Parliament in Dublin into the Parliament in London allowing for the passing of Catholic emancipation laws. To achieve this there were 2 Acts of Union, one to be presented to the Dublin Parliament the other to Westminster.

The Acts were designed to facilitate the change in Governance covering the number of MP’s from Ireland in the House of Commons, seats in the Lords, the merger of the Church of Ireland and Church of England, tax payments to the Exchequer and the now infamous Article 6 on trade.

Passage of the Bill in Ireland did not progress smoothly with the Parliament in Dublin voting against it. Not to be outdone the Governent set about persuading Members of the Dublin Parliament to support the Bill when it returned to be considered, there were of course seats in the Commons and Lords and various additional positions available to those who supported the Bill. 

It wasn’t only within the Dublin Parliament that opposition to the Act surfaced, members of the recently founded Orange Institution had grave concerns about the implications and expressed these views robustly when Grand Lodge took no position. Dr David Hume provides some interesting context to the correspondence lodges sent to Grand Lodge. For many the concerns centred on the recognition that having ceded authority to Westminster there was no protection against any future decisions taken by Parliament. 

The Bill passed and in the 223 years since it’s provisions have gradually been eroded and removed. Once passed the Government introduced a customs border in the Irish Sea for 10 years to address issues arising from the level of trade France had with Ireland and to limit French goods passing through Ireland to England. The newly created Unified Church of England and Ireland would eventually split back to their constituent parts. Partition saw the end of the majority of Irish seats in the Commons and Lords and Irish contributions to the exchequer. 

The initial point of the Act, to facilitate the introduction of Catholic emancipation was blocked by King George III as he felt it was contrary to his coronation oath. It was eventually introduced and progressively the issue of Home Rule came to the fore, with the Act of Union providing the legal authority to Westminster to take a decision but for the outbreak of World War I. The Government of Ireland Act 1920 then led to partition. 

The Act of Union provided the authority for partition, the suspension of Stormont, Anglo-Irish Agreement, Protocol, Windsor Framework and whatever follows, only the ultimate decision on the creation of a United Ireland falls outwith Parliament.

Parliament is sovereign, as those on the right wing of the Conservative Party express loudly in challenging the legal interpretations of courts. While the absence of a formal written constitution is considered a flexible, quaint historical feature of our Government the clarity and certainty from developing a codified constitution provides the opportunity for renewal. A constitutional process detailing the rights of citizens, the responsibilities of Parliament and the limits of Government would provide unionism with far greater security than centuries old legislation.

Unionism can spend its limited political capital in trying to interpret centuries old legislation in its favour or alternatively it can argue for a constitutional process to improve the protection of rights of all our citizens across the UK. Making a better union is the best protection unionism has.

lnitial thoughts on council budgetary crisis.

Given the recent announcement of a £7 million shortfall it is clear that the financial management of the organisation has still not been stabilised. The major financial management issues were flagged from the time the organisation was first brought into being and those raising them, both staff and elected members, were side-lined and ignored. From the big issues of not understanding capital financing nor the revenue tail arising from development to relatively small issues which demonstrate a lack of financial controls significant change was always going to be needed.

One small example is that of oversight of the Mayoral budget. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council makes available a Mayoral allowance of £20000 to cover the costs associated with the Mayors term in office. It’s a significant sum of money and on occasions the use, by some, has led to further and ongoing investigation by outside agencies.

In 2017/2018 Cllr Paul Reid spent £24332.31 an overspend of over 21%, the risk of overspend was highlighted by staff in advance of the end of Cllr Reid’s term yet spending continued well past the amount budgeted.

In 2021/2022 Cllr William McCaughey spent £23276.52, an overspend of over 16%, according to a recent FOI request no one in the organisation raised the potential overspend as an issue. When asked to detail the financial controls put in place after the 2017/2018 overspend the council responded

“The overspend in 2017/2018 would have been absorbed within the overall Corporate Services budget as previously explained with no additional financial controls required.”

The sums involved may be relatively small in terms of a £7 million shortfall but the lackadaisical attitude to a 21% and 16% overspend is illustrative of a general institutional attitude to ratepayer’s money. It is no surprise that both members are representatives of the Democratic Unionist Party, from the creation of the new council there has been a sense from that party that being in power means taking no responsibility and not being accountable. To change that view requires a change in governance, a change in attitude from taking the public for granted to taking responsibility to truly manage the organisation in the best interests of the ratepayer not individual councillors.

A shortfall of this scale did not happen by accident, to determine the cause a proper investigation must take place overseen by an outside body not simply a consultant reporting to the council on findings and if necessary criminal proceedings should follow. But, to be clear, the issue has arisen within a culture and attitude manipulated and encouraged by the Democratic Unionist Party, their hands are not clean in any of this.

 

Lough Neagh

We have become used to hearing the term anthropogenic climate change used to define the human activity which is leading to the progressively catastrophic changes in climate. There are other challenges quickly coming to the fore, with the realisation that many have already occurred, anthropogenic ecological and environmental collapse will define our future as much as climate change. Lough Neagh is showing every indication that, if it hasn’t already passed a tipping point, anthropogenic ecological collapse is imminent.

I grew up only a few hundred yards from Lough Neagh, regularly traversing Rea’s Wood from the area behind the Deerpark Hotel to the mouth of the Sixmilewater. Later, when an elected representative, I was a member of the Lough Neagh Partnership and I pay tribute to the work of the Partnership and especially Gerry Darby in trying to highlight the many issues facing the Lough and its environs.

It appears that the current situation has arisen due to a number of factors coalescing at the same time. Increased nutrient levels, particularly phosphates in the case of algal blooms, from human waste, farm effluent, soil run off and possibly disturbance of the nutrients captured in the Lough bed by sand dredging. The increased water temperature from climate change is directly related to human activity and the use of fossil fuels, a trend likely to continue for many years. The impact of zebra mussels in clarifying the water and allowing photosynthesis to occur at greater depth is also considered a factor in the current algal bloom. 

But these issues and the associated algal bloom are only symptoms of a wider decline which has been known about and disregarded for many years. In the 1970’s the increasing levels of chlorophyll-a (the measure of algal growth) in Lough Neagh led to a phosphate reduction programme at waste water treatment plants feeding into the Lough. This led to a reduction in chlorophyll-a in the 1980’s but by the early 1990’s the chlorophyll level started to increase steadily. I’ve asked about the levels of chlorophyll-a and phosphorous in the Lough since 2001 but it is clear that the wide agricultural catchment area is a factor in nutrient levels increasing during the 1990’s.

The eel fishery in Lough Neagh has produced around 500 tons of eels per year and is world renown. However, in the early 1980’s the number of glass eels (juvenile eels) returning from spawning in the Sargasso Sea dropped by 90%. The fishery collective began at that stage to buy millions of glass eels annually to restock the Lough. In terms of economic sustainability this has ensured that a level of economic activity has continued, in terms of ecological sustainability it is an entirely unsustainable method of addressing the long-term survivability of the ecosystem. This becomes more challenging with the threat to the chironomidae (Lough Neagh fly) population upon which eels and the various fish species feed. 

How much the arrival of zebra mussels has contributed to this requires detailed scientific assessment, as does the impact of pesticide use in the agri-food sector. In general, the number of insects in the UK has decreased by over 60% in the last 20 years. We hear lots about the loss of pollinators but the impact of insect loss in general has a devastating impact on the survival of many species. One thing is clear, the loss of chironomidae of the scale feared will cause an ecological collapse of fish species in the Lough Neagh system.

Over 40% of Northern Irelands land area drains into Lough Neagh, most of this land is agricultural sustaining a sector heavily dependent on grassland. Northern Ireland has 3% of the UK’s population, 6% of land area yet 17% of the UK’s total cattle herd. That means 17% of cattle waste is disposed of over a small area with even this supplemented by artificial fertilisers. In environmental terms much of this activity is unsustainable in its current format. While there are concerns about the demand for continued unlimited growth of the intensive agricultural sector the current moratorium due to concerns about inaccurate figures on pollutant levels represents an opportunity to engage with the sector about the significant changes in practice that must occur.

The challenges facing the lough are such that concepts of community ownership are incompatible with delivering the robust legislative framework to manage the changes needed. The same applies to private ownership or rights to extractive commercial activity. Only a public body, properly funded and with a legislative framework based on protecting the ecological and environmental foundations of the entire system can begin the generational process of undoing the damage caused.

Commercial fishing is no longer viable or sustainable and in the face of ecosystem collapse it must be ended. A buy out of existing licences for eels and coarse fish must be a priority action.

Sand extraction has been permitted without a robust environmental understanding of the impact on the entire ecosystem. Current proposals to extend extraction must be refused and a negotiated end to extraction within a short period of time must be implemented in line with the transfer of ownership of the lough bed to the public sector.

Changes in agricultural practices are vital in reducing nutrient leakage, whether this is the end of surface dressing with slurry on agricultural land or other more acceptable treatment becoming the norm with many farmers, a three-year programme of supporting farmers to purchase the equipment necessary before introducing a ban on the activity will assist in meeting environmental and climate change targets.

Across the United Kingdom under investment in waste water infrastructure has created an ongoing environmental crisis. Northern Ireland is fortunate that it does not have the financial asset stripping of the private sector in the rest of the UK to contend with, but lack of political responsibility locally to invest in infrastructure remains an issue. A robust independent assessment of NIW contribution to pollution levels and nutrient levels is required as a priority.

The number of overwintering birds at Lough Neagh have collapsed in the last few decades, wider ecological collapse puts the remaining populations at risk. There must be an end to recreational wildfowl shooting on Lough Neagh.

The current limitations on environmental protection caused by the departmental structures in Northern must be removed by the creation of a fully funded, legislatively powerful independent environmental protection agency outside the reach of potentially sectorally partisan government Ministers.

There is no doubt that various economic interests are already preparing campaigns to influence key politicians that whatever actions are taken should not interfere with their business. There can be no longer, in any field, an economic justification to continue taking actions leading to anthropogenic ecological and environmental collapse. Lough Neagh is no longer an economic opportunity based on asset stripping the resource.

Meat

In his book Ravenous Henry Dimbleby points out "With or without UK companies on board, the protein transition is coming." (Ravenous 2023 pg226) On the 21^st June 2023 CNN reported

"Cultivated meat, also known as lab-grown meat, has been cleared for sale in the United States.

Upside Foods and Good Meat, two companies that make what they call “cultivated chicken,” said Wednesday that they have gotten approval from the US Department of Agriculture to start producing their cell-based proteins." (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/21/business/cultivated-meat-us-approval/index.html)

In 2019 KFC announced a partnership with a company in Moscow to produce 3D chicken products from plant protein and cultivated chicken.

Finnebrogue a well known artisan food producer in Northern Ireland has announced a partnership with Ivy Farm Technologies to work together on laboratory grown Wagyu beef burgers.

The changes that will follow this new technology will be highly significant and will change the face of agriculture, particularly in areas like Northern Ireland where the growth of the chicken processing industry has seen massive investment and where the production of beef is such a fundamental part of the farming landscape.

Consider the production of the standard broiler chicken from egg to supermarket shelf. An entire industry exists to ensure the production of genetically suitable eggs before incubation and hatching. Transportation to farmers who have made significant investment in sheds capable of supporting 10's of thousands of chicks to finish point at around 6 weeks. Transported then to slaughter and butchering in processing factories. Much of the meat will be minced and used to create nuggets, goujons, Kyiv's and other processed products. 

The opportunity exists and is proactively being developed by the food processing industry to replace all of the activity in the previous paragraph between "Consider" and "factories" with a "lab grown" product. Large vats will produce chicken meat, grown from chicken cells, in vast quantities ready for processing and onward sale. Current breeding is based on quick growth rates, future product can be sourced based on taste or other preferred qualities.

Processors do not exist for the benefit of farmers, in a world where 2/3rds of all birds in the world are chickens the potential to save many of the costs of production will appeal to their economic models. They will welcome the opportunity to market their "real chicken" products as Environmentally friendly, Climate friendly, Chicken friendly healthy protein.

The outlook for beef will follow, imagine if McDonalds was to move to a similar model. There will still be beef from cattle, there will still be chicken from chicken's but the current model of production will have changed and such beef and chicken will come at a premium and the market will be much smaller.

Pretending that change won't happen isn't the answer, preparing for such changes will be fundamental to many peoples lives.