The A5. Two Roads – One Destination…

What do Jamie Bryson and Liz Kimmins have in common? Yes, you guessed it! Both have recently had reasons to celebrate significant legal developments involving two of Northern Ireland’s most controversial roads, although in very different circumstances.

In our Infrastructure Minister’s case, it was the Court of Appeal’s monumental decision that cleared the way for the Department to progress the long-awaited A5 Western Transport Corridor – after losing a previous High Court battle in June 2025.

Minister Kimmins deserves considerable praise for having the guts to take the A5 case to appeal as, if her department had lost, the political downside would have been immense. Instead, the Minister and her department will rightly receive the plaudits.

As for Mr Bryson and the ongoing dispute over the Garvaghy Road, perhaps that is best left to another occasion. And just to be clear, I’m not poking fun at either community. It’s the political irony of these two very different court cases that I’m taking aim at here. I know this is a deeply serious and sensitive subject, and I sincerely hope a resolution can be found as soon as possible so that local people can get on with their everyday lives.

But back to the A5 and that consequential decision. The actual judgment summary is full of legal jargon, but I’ll try to break it down to make it easier to understand.

The fundamental error identified by the Court of Appeal was the High Court’s failure to consider how the A5 decision fitted within Northern Ireland’s overall climate targets. Importantly, this doesn’t mean that climate change legislation can be ignored.

In basic terms, there were three main points.

The first was that it was for the Department, not the court, to decide whether the road should proceed. The court’s role was to decide whether the Department had acted lawfully.

Secondly, the court shouldn’t substitute its own assessment for that of the technical experts without good reason.

And finally, it was ultimately a policy decision for the Minister and the Department to make, not the court, provided they acted within the law.

Whilst most of the press attention has understandably focused on what the judgment means for the A5 and other road and infrastructure schemes, I believe there could be a significant impact on infrastructure investment across Northern Ireland, particularly in relation to public and sustainable transport.

I was privileged to be invited onto the BBC Radio Talkback programme a few hours after the judgment was announced, and my first thoughts and comments related to the families who had sadly lost loved ones on the road and the relief that they would now be feeling.

After this, I was asked about what the consequences of the A5 decision might be for future infrastructure projects in Northern Ireland.

My initial thoughts were with regard to a decision to give the go-ahead for the A1 Junction Improvements Scheme, which will upgrade the road from Hillsborough to Loughbrickland. Along with former councillor colleagues, I had been involved in this road safety campaign, so I was particularly interested in whether this might get the green light too.

However, on reflection, I later started to think of the other impacts that this court decision could have on other road projects, or on school or health projects, and on the climate change legislation and targets themselves.

It occurred to me that, whilst the judgment may make it easier for departments to progress major infrastructure projects, it certainly doesn’t remove their obligations under Northern Ireland’s climate change legislation.

Indeed, this could place even greater pressure on the Executive and individual departments to demonstrate how they intend to meet our overall emissions reduction targets.

This may affect how the public estate is run and managed. It may affect government buildings and assets, heating and renewable energy policy, housing policy, and it could affect the programme for future road projects and the balance between road investment and sustainable and public transport projects.

Could the Department for Infrastructure face greater pressure to define how its investment in road projects aligns with its commitments to public transport, active travel, electric vehicles and charging stations, and reducing car dependency?

In other words, if a number of major road schemes are given the go-ahead, potentially increasing emissions, how will the transport sector deliver the reductions needed to comply with Northern Ireland’s Climate Change Act 2022 and meet our legally binding emissions targets for 2030, 2040 and ultimately net zero by 2050?

The carbon-budgeting part of the Climate Change Act 2022 also limits the amount of greenhouse gases Northern Ireland can emit over a five-year period, so careful planning will also be required to balance this against future road and sustainable infrastructure schemes.

This could become a substantial challenge for the Department for Infrastructure and indeed the wider Executive. It raises important questions about the balance of future investment between roads, public transport and active travel, and whether we have a sufficiently ambitious, properly funded strategy for making our entire transport system more sustainable.

This will require considerable work over the next few years, at a time when departmental budgets are already under enormous pressure. This presents another challenge. How do we find the investment for public and sustainable transport, deliver these major road projects and still meet these legally binding climate change commitments?

Of course, improving road safety and investing in public and sustainable transport shouldn’t be seen as one or the other. Both are needed, and therefore the real challenge is where the Executive will find the resources to deliver safer roads and invest in a more sustainable transport system that helps us meet our climate change commitments.

I started this article with a reference to two roads and one destination, and therefore I believe it fitting to end with a reference to one of my favourite Robert Frost poems, ‘The Road Not Taken’:

“Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less travelled by”

Perhaps the wider significance of the A5 judgment is that it challenges not just the Executive, but all of us, to think differently about the roads we build, the transport choices we make and the direction we want Northern Ireland to travel in the future.