Minister may pursue A5 appeal pending executive approval
"My priority and my determination is that we find a solution and we get this road built so that no more lives are lost," said Kimmins, at a press conference on Tuesday.
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.More than 50 people have died on the A5 since 2006 and campaigners have called for the road to be upgraded.The dual carriageway scheme was first announced back in 2007, but has been beset by a number of delays.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.
What happened in court?
The High Court judgement blocking the upgrade of the A5 road - because the plans did not comply with government climate change targets - 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
10 hours ago
- The Independent
A day in the life, in photos, of one family's search for food in Gaza
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
The Guardian
16 hours ago
- The Guardian
Scientists slam Trump administration climate report as a ‘farce' full of misinformation
A new Trump administration report which attempts to justify a mass rollback of environmental regulations is chock-full of climate misinformation, experts say. On Tuesday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposal to undo the 2009 'endangerment finding', which allows the agency to limit planet-heating pollution from cars and trucks, power plants and other industrial sources. Hours later, the Department of Energy (DOE) published a 150-page report defending the proposal, claiming scientific concern about the climate crisis is overblown. 'Climate change is a challenge – not a catastrophe,' wrote the energy secretary, Chris Wright, in the report's introduction. The esteemed climate scientist Michael Mann said the report was akin to the result he would expect 'if you took a chatbot and you trained it on the top 10 fossil fuel industry-funded climate denier websites'. The energy department published the report hours after the EPA announced a plan to roll back 2009's 'endangerment finding', a seminal ruling that provided the legal basis for the agency to regulate climate-heating pollution under the Clean Air Act. If finalized, the move would topple virtually all US climate regulation. In a Fox News interview, Wright claimed the report pushed back on the 'cancel culture Orwellian squelching of science'. But Naomi Oreskes, a history of science professor at Harvard University and expert in climate misinformation, said its true purpose was to 'justify what is a scientifically unjustifiable failure to regulate fossil fuels'. 'Science is the basis for climate regulation, so now they are trying to replace legitimate science with pseudoscience,' she said. The attack on the research underpinning the endangerment finding – which says greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare – comes as part of Trump's 'drill, baby, drill' agenda to boost fossil fuels, which are the primary cause of global warming. 'This is an agenda to promote fossil fuels, not to protect public health and welfare or the environment,' said Rachel Cleetus, a director at climate and science non-profit Union of Concerned Scientists who was an author on the sixth US national climate assessment. Asked about scientists' assertions that the new report is rife with misinformation, an energy department spokesperson, Ben Dietderich, said: 'This report critically assesses many areas of ongoing scientific inquiry that are frequently assigned high levels of confidence – not by the scientists themselves but by the political bodies involved, such as the United Nations or previous presidential administrations.' But the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) produces what is widely considered the gold standard compendium of climate science, compiled by a huge multinational team of scientists, peer-reviewed and agreed to by every national government. The latest IPCC synthesis report, released two years ago, was a vast undertaking involving 721 volunteer scientists around the world. It states that it is 'unequivocal' that human activity has heated the planet, which has 'led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people'. By contrast, the Trump administration report was crafted by five handpicked scientists who are seen as having fringe or contrarian views by mainstream climate scientists, with no peer review. The experts behind the report have previously denied being climate deniers. The energy department did not respond to a question about the authors. 'This report had five authors and was rushed over four months, and would not pass muster in any traditional scientific peer review process,' said Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at the climate non-profit Berkeley Earth, who called the paper a 'farce'. Wright, the energy secretary, insisted he had not steered the report's conclusions, while Judith Curry, one of the report authors, said in a blogpost she hoped the document would push climate science 'away from alarmism and advocacy'. Mainstream climate scientists, however, condemned the findings as distorted and inaccurate. 'This is a report written by a couple of scientists who are outliers in their arguments for climate change,' said Natalie Mahowald, a climate scientist at Cornell University. 'This document does in no way depreciate the value of previous assessments, but rather just cherrypicks the literature to pretend to create a new review.' Mahowald said the lack of peer review meant it was 'obviously not as robust' as the IPCC report or the US government's periodic national climate assessment, which the Trump administration recently took offline. The latest national climate assessment, compiled by a dozen government agencies and outside scientists in 2023, concluded that the 'effects of human-caused climate change are already far-reaching and worsening across every region of the United States' 'If almost any other group of scientists had been chosen, the report would have been dramatically different,' Andrew Dessler, a climate researcher at Texas A&M University, said of the new report. 'The only way to get this report was to pick these authors.' Hausfather agreed that the authors' work 'might represent their views but is not consistent with the broader scientific literature on climate change'. He was among the scientists whose work the authors cited. The new paper includes a chart from a 2019 report which he led, claiming it demonstrates how climate models 'consistently overestimated observations' of atmospheric carbon. But Hausfather's research actually showed that climate models have performed well. 'They appear to have discarded the whole paper as not fitting their narrative, and instead picked a single figure that was in the supplementary materials to cast doubt on models when the whole paper actually confirmed how well they have performed in the years after they were published,' he said. The energy department did not respond to a request for comment about Hausfather's concerns. That approach to research seems to underpin the entire paper, said Hausfather, who is also the climate research lead at tech company Stripe. 'This is a general theme in the report; they cherrypick data points that suit their narrative and exclude the vast majority of the scientific literature that does not,' he said. Dessler said scientists are obliged to engage with the full range of evidence, even if it contradicts their initial assumptions. Ignoring this principle 'can rise to the level of scientific misconduct', he said. 'The report they produced should be thought of as a law brief from attorneys defending their client, carbon dioxide,' Dessler said. 'Their goal is not to weigh the evidence fairly but to build the strongest possible case for CO2's innocence.' The lack of peer review in the administration's report led to conclusions that deviated, sometimes wildly, from the scientific literature. Many of its claims are based on long-debunked research long promoted by climate deniers, said Mann. 'It is shop worn, decades-old, discredited climate denier talking points, dressed up in the clothing of some sensible new set of revelations,' he said. 'What's different is that it has the imprimatur of the EPA and the federal government now.' The report, for instance claims that warming trends have been overstated, despite evidence to the contrary. It was published as extreme heat is affecting millions of Americans. 'They're literally trying to tell us not to believe what we see with our own two eyes … and instead buy into their denialist framing that rejects not just the science, but what is plainly evident if you look out your window,' said Mann. The authors also write that ocean acidification is occurring 'within the range of natural variability' and is beneficial for marine life despite the ocean's acidic levels currently being the highest since 14m years ago, a time when a major extinction event was occurring. And the report references the apparent health of Australia's Great Barrier Reef, which it says 'has shown considerable growth in recent years'. The reef was recently hit by its sixth mass bleaching event since 2016, a devastating phenomenon for corals in which they whiten and sometimes die due to high sea temperatures. No widespread bleaching events were recorded on the reef before 1998. The report is 'tedious' and at times 'truly wearisome', according to Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University. Kopp recently worked on a paper showing how rising temperatures and drought will worsen crop yields, counter to the report's claims that crops will flourish with extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. 'Carbon dioxide fertilization is largely irrelevant to how increasingly extreme heat and intense drought will impact crop yields,' Kopp said. 'As a former department of energy fellow, I'm embarrassed by this report.'
Times
16 hours ago
- Times
Times letters: PM's backing for a third runway at Heathrow
Write to letters@ Sir, Your leading article ('Cleared for Takeoff', Aug 1) and the cogently argued business commentary by Alistair Osborne ('Heathrow runway is an expensive folly', Aug 1) both admit that Heathrow should not be there in the first place. Indeed, and if one is in a hole any sensible reaction would be to stop digging. We all know that the costs of £21 billion for the runway and £12 billion on top of that for another terminal will end up hugely inflated, and that the upgrades necessary for transportation to and from Heathrow will incur further enormous expenditure. Sooner or later there will be a catastrophe when an aircraft crashes on London, made all the more likely when power failures and control systems can cause such mayhem. Ministers' lip service to environmental considerations is further exposed as James Stevens CurlHolywood, Co Down Sir, You report that 'work is under way within the government to curb the ability of environmental groups and other campaigners to bring legal challenges against national infrastructure projects' ('M25 could be relocated 'overnight' to build a third Heathrow runway', Aug 1). One can only wonder what Labour would have said had the Conservatives tried to bring in such HartRickmansworth, Herts Sir, Old campaigners against a third runway at Heathrow will now have to dust off their posters and letters of protest: clearly we are all going to have to go through the old arguments again. Nothing appears to have happened to change the Department for Transport's own study. This suggested that if more airport capacity were really needed then on both economic and environmental grounds it should be at McLuskeyAshford, Middx Sir, Proposals for a third runway at Heathrow and another at Gatwick are misguided. The skies over southeast England are already overcrowded and new runways will simply increase the problem. The answer is to build a five-runway, state-of-the-art airport in the Thames Estuary, with fast rail links. This would serve our needs for the next century. Heathrow and Gatwick could then be closed down, freeing up land for much-needed PrattStorrington, W Sussex Sir, It astounds me that whenever the disruption and cost of expanding Heathrow is discussed there is never any mention of Birmingham airport. It is located in a relatively unpopulated area with a mainline rail station and good public access: it is next to motorway links and is about an hour from the capital by car or train. But of course, it's not London — silly JohnsonWolverhampton Sir, I wonder if my children will have retired by the time the third runway at Heathrow is operational? In China, or indeed France, the planning and construction would be rapidly accomplished. No one would expect that in the ValePewsey, Wilts Sir, Having seen the PM's plans for a third runway at Heathrow, perhaps Sir Humphrey should whisper in his ear: 'Remember HS2.'Martin WrightChinnor, Oxon Sir, Italians will be aware that most of the projects Edward Lucas praises in his article were actually initiated before 2022, the year Giorgia Meloni became prime minister ('Confident Italy shows us how to bounce back', comment, Jul 31). She inherited a €198 billion loan from the EU, which I suspect Rachel Reeves would welcome and do good things with. If Lucas were to come further south on holiday he would find unemployment in the eight provinces of southern Italy 10 per cent higher than the richer north that he visited. A total of 18.9 per cent of Italians live in poverty, and the figure is increasing. GDP per capita has not increased since Meloni became PM and government debt as a share of GDP has increased under her Gozi MEPFormer Italian secretary of state for European Affairs Sir, Edward Lucas's overenthusiastic assessment of Italy's thriving and booming economy overlooks the simple and very sad fact that Italy still offers very few opportunities for young people, even those with university degrees. They find it easier to find a job in a café in London than in Milan or Rome. It's still pretty impossible to get a position at an Italian university if one lacks a powerful backer. Bright scientists and academics instead flock to the US or the UK. Nasa, for example, has many Italians working there as do many Ivy League universities, as well as Oxford and Salvatore Santagati (PhD, LSE)London W1 Sir, Sydney Sweeney and Jacob Rees-Mogg may have better luck than my wife (TMS, Jul 31). A couple of years ago my wife was dropping off a bag for her brother at the Cavalry and Guards Club. The doorman took one look at the jeans she was wearing and before she could say a word politely pointed out that the RAF Club was next door.J Martin ScottShaftesbury, Dorset Sir, The fall in numbers of students studying modern languages is indeed dire (news, Jul 31; letter, Aug 1). I agree with Nick Hillman of the Higher Education Policy Institute that the withdrawal of the compulsory study of languages was 'probably the worst educational policy of this century'. A wider grasp of the heritage of Europe (and at degree level, training in cogently assembling a wide range of facts) is useful in many professions. Megan Bowler is right that a 'linguistic mindset fosters vital skills'. Indeed, many of my students leave university for successful careers in journalism and the law and are destined for the higher echelons of management and government. We will not re-establish meaningful relationships with our neighbours with the 'island mentality' that, at present, inhibits those in secondary education from an understanding of the cultural infrastructure and substratum of Bourne-TaylorAssociate professor of French, and fellow, Brasenose College, Oxford Sir, I have no doubt that AI has a part to play in making prisons safer ('AI predicts risk from violent inmates before jail attacks happen', Jul 31) but removing drugs from jails by using drug wands, sniffer boxes and DroneGuard, while disabling mobile phones and reducing overcrowding, will have a greater effect. Tasers will have an impact during riots and concerted acts of indiscipline but not on immediate acts of violence as they won't be to hand. The most effective way to reduce the risk of violence is by staff developing good relationships with prisoners. Inexperienced staff in overcrowded prisons are merely BerryRet'd prison governor, Countesthorpe, Leics Sir, Martin Samuel is right ('Rushing this Test series off stage has robbed it of the players we pay to see', Aug 1). Test matches — the pinnacle of the sport — are being wrecked by the thoughtless compression of scheduling and now we will have no cricket for a month, all to make room for a spectacle said to be crowd-pleasing and money-making, although it is curious that no other cricketing nation has shown the remotest interest in the Hundred. The ECB has done a fine job of destroying our national DykeLondon N21 Sir, I agree with David A De Saxe (letter, Aug 1) that modern bats improve batting. But surely the main reason batting has improved is the use of helmets, which enable batsmen to face fast bowling without risk of serious EvansTunbridge Wells, Kent Sir, Contrary to Raymond Gubbay's suggestion ('Albert Hall seats', letter, Jul 31), the National Lottery were on the ball. Like all seat holders, while I did gain from the lottery funding improvements I was obliged to pay a proportionate share of the GilbertMarlow, Bucks Sir, Aside from pay erosion, the incentives for resident doctors to change tack career-wise are well described (letters, Jul 28–31), but there is a new one. Why wouldn't a recently qualified doctor with a huge student debt and possibly a young family consider switching to one of the new physician assistant roles? The pay is considerably better, the post comes with job security and comprehensive senior medical supervision, and there is no need for regular exams or to move around the country every couple of years while working nights and weekends as a matter of routine. That is regardless of the intense work pressure endured by these young resident doctors daily, hundreds of whom are now finding that there are no NHS jobs for them anyway after their first two years of hospital practice (news, Jul 30). The only downside is that the NHS would soon run out of GPs and hospital RP ColeNHS consultant surgeon, Salisbury Sir, Katie Glass raises hopes for many in making a few quid from renting her home ('I'm sleeping in a caravan so I can put my cottage on Airbnb', Times2, Jul 28). Potential followers of her advice would be well advised to check with local planning requirements and their home insurance policy before proceeding. Such moves may be below the radar but not above the planning HoweRhossili, Gower Peninsula Sir, Every good wish to the new Archbishop of Wales ('Church elects gay, female archbishop', Jul 31). As well as being informed of her employment history and views on sexuality, I'm sure some of us would be glad to know whether she speaks CorkettBangor, Gwynedd Sir, My Uncle Charlie worked on the Cowes chain ferry in the 1950s and had an index and middle finger missing (letter, Aug 1). As he explained: 'I was trying to pick a stray fag packet out of the chains while we were crossing the river. I just thought I could do it, quick like.' I relayed this story to the newly promoted chain ferry master when I met him in the 1980s. 'Oh yes?', he said, holding up his three- digit right hand. 'You mean like this?'Suzie MarwoodLondon SW6 Sir, I can definitely support the theory of ditching a flashy car for a small hatchback to woo women (news, Jul 31). I owned an MG Midget in the 1960s and had no luck in attracting the right sort of woman, but on the day I swapped it for a Hillman Imp I met the woman who is now my wife. We are still happily married RussellHarpenden, Herts Write to letters@
