Committee for Infrastructure

OFFICIAL REPORT (Hansard)

Greenways Strategic Plan: Department for Infrastructure

14 September 2016 NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY

Committee for Infrastructure

Greenways Strategic Plan: Department for Infrastructure

14 September 2016

Members present for all or part of the proceedings: Mr William Humphrey (Chairperson) Mr George Robinson (Deputy Chairperson) Ms Kellie Armstrong Mr Alex Easton Mr Paul Girvan Mr Declan McAleer Mr Fra McCann Mr Eamonn McCann Mr Daniel McCrossan Mrs Jenny Palmer

Witnesses: Dr Andrew Grieve Department for Infrastructure Ms Claire Mulvenna Department for Infrastructure

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Good morning. I welcome Dr Andrew Grieve, the head of the cycling unit, and Ms Claire Mulvenna, who is also from the cycling unit. I take it that you will make a presentation and that members will then be free to ask questions.

Dr Andrew Grieve (Department for Infrastructure): Yes. Sorry for keeping you waiting.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): No problem. We are early.

Dr Grieve: That is uncharacteristic of me. Thanks for the opportunity, Mr Chairman, to talk to the Committee about ongoing work to develop a strategic plan for greenways in Northern Ireland. I expect that all members will have a copy of the presentation.

The Department's bicycle strategy for Northern Ireland, 'Changing Gear', was published in August 2015, just over a year ago. Behind the strategy was the vision of Northern Ireland as a community in which people had the freedom and confidence to use a bicycle for everyday travelling. In general terms, freedom is about providing good infrastructure, and confidence is about providing the necessary skills and training for people who want to use a bicycle.

It might be worth underlining the point that the work that we have been doing — this is not the whole family of cycling — focuses on using the bicycle for everyday travelling, active travel, although there are many reasons for using a bicycle. The objective of everyday cycling is seen in the ambitions of the bicycle strategy to increase significantly the number of shorter journeys that are cycled. Around

1 one third of the journeys we make in Northern Ireland each year are shorter than 2 miles, and, for most people, that distance could be walked or cycled relatively easily.

The bicycle strategy specifically referred to the development of greenways, and it made the link to supporting local authorities in the work that they have been doing on greenways. A lot of the development of greenways has already been taken forward in local authorities. The strategy also made a commitment to look at proposals for developing greenways: in other words, to develop a strategic plan for greenways. The potential for greenways to provide a feasible and attractive travel option was also highlighted in the bicycle strategy.

This slide is entitled "Political commitment". Perhaps what is most noteworthy about the development of greenways is that it has significant political support, and members may be familiar with some of the words on the slide, all of which are supportive of the creation of a greenway network or at the very least of exploring the creation of a network of greenways.

The benefits of greenways are many and extend far beyond travel and transport. Many of the areas in which benefits accrue are highlighted in the developing Programme for Government. The provision of infrastructure to encourage more activity has real benefits for physical and mental health and well- being; there is a lot of literature on that subject. It is complementary to the Fitter Future for All strategy of what is now the Department of Health. There are economic benefits, in particular for local communities and through providing access to opportunities in communities where car ownership is fairly low. There are also important environmental and social benefits through the development of greenways.

A couple of years ago, we began work on developing a strategic plan through a working group that brought together various stakeholders, and the greenways working group brought forward ideas and opinions about a greenway network. At the start of this year, we appointed AECOM to produce a report, and it engaged Sustrans, the sustainable transport charity. They have a lot of experience in the area, so they were engaged in that work as well. AECOM and Sustrans undertook a lot of consultation, particularly with councils, which were very enthusiastic about the idea. The report that AECOM and Sustrans produced was provided to the Department at the end of July. At the minute, we are trying to finalise a plan for publication, and the Minister hopes to publish that shortly.

One slide shows a map of the current greenways and illustrates the extent of the challenge fairly well. The current greenways are mainly in the south-east and the north-west. Derry City Council did a lot of work to develop greenways along the Foyle. You can see from that map how broken up the "network" of greenways is. The strategic plan is, first and foremost, about joining those bits together into a primary network of around 450 kilometres, mainly using, where we can, bits of the old disused infrastructure such as old canals, dismantled railways etc. Not all of that still exists, of course. The plan will also propose a secondary network of about 600 kilometres, and that will bring greenways close to all areas of Northern Ireland so that there is truly a network that stretches right across the region. It will also link into cross-border routes, including those identified in the fairly recent 'North West Greenway Plan', which was published by Donegal County Council and Derry City and Strabane District Council.

As we move forward, the work will begin with the forthcoming publication of the strategic plan by the Minister. From that, individual schemes will be developed, and we expect councils to be very much at the forefront of that. The greenway projects recently put forward for INTERREG V funding were all sponsored by local authorities. Alongside that, we have been working on a small grants programme for greenways. The idea of that scheme is to provide a little funding for local authorities to develop feasibility studies and detailed plans that will put them into a position to deliver some of the network. This year, in the cycling unit, we are developing proposals for a capital grant scheme that would provide part capital funding to local authorities to build greenways, and, in that way, we hope to move the work forward.

The final slide — I hope that you have it in colour — gives you an idea of what we really have in mind for developing greenways, which is public space for people to become more active in.

That is my presentation, Chairman. Thank you very much.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Thank you. Claire, is there anything that you want to add before I bring members in?

Ms Claire Mulvenna (Department for Infrastructure): No.

2

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Thank you very much indeed for your presentation. You talked about a small grants scheme for councils to enable them to put plans together and do some work on that: what tangible outcomes have there been from that to put some infrastructure on the ground for cyclists?

Dr Grieve: The small grants programme is not in itself about constructing greenways; it is about helping councils to develop their plans so that they will then be in a position to take forward a scheme. The capital grant scheme that I referred to at the tail end is about providing resource to enable councils to construct greenways. The small grants programme is a three-stage competition. Earlier this year, we advertised to all councils and received 27 expressions of interest. We hope — this is running behind schedule for a number of reasons — to announce shortly the successful councils, which will all be provided with £8,000 to develop a feasibility study for the schemes that they have put forward. The schemes that come forward in stage 2 will then be assessed, and we are planning that up to four of them will be provided with £25,000 to develop a detailed design and project plan, which will put them in the position that they will be ready to take forward an actual scheme and construct it on the ground.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): We do not yet have a situation whereby money is being given to a council. I guess what I am asking is this: has any council received money?

Dr Grieve: Under the small grants programme — not yet.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): They go through the stage, they get £8,000, and then four of them are selected to get £25,000. Are you making sure that councils are committed and have the funding to do it? You would not want to go through the process of that money going in and a council not following through by putting it in place when perhaps another council might.

Dr Grieve: One of the criteria for assessment at stage 2 is the commitment of a council to take forward the project. That is built into the selection process.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): The financial commitment.

Dr Grieve: It includes that. In fairness, we have told councils that we hope to develop a capital grants scheme, so we hope to be in a position to provide some capital grant funding, but it will just be part funding. It will not be full funding because we want to ensure that councils have an ownership of the project.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Having the financial resource to do it is absolutely essential, otherwise there is no point in having it.

Ms Palmer: Thank you for the presentation, Andrew. I will pick up on what the Chair said about the small grants scheme and the process that we are going through now. Is there a risk that, when councils give a commitment through the small grants scheme to do the assessments and the planning to buy into this, the possible capital grants scheme will be hindered by the lack of budget from the Department and councils will probably have to find all the moneys to deliver what they were trying to do through the process? I am worried that possible capital grants schemes are like a carrot on a stick that encourages councils to say, "This is good. We can submit to the small grants scheme to do all the assessments", they buy into it and then, all of a sudden, there is a reduction in the budget for the projects. Do you think that that is a big risk?

Dr Grieve: There is always a risk as to whether we will have funding in future times. We do not have our budgets for successive years, and we are in that position, but we have a basis on which we plan. It is not real money; it is just planning money. I have money in a budget that I will be able to devote to this scheme. I cannot say that that money will definitely be there. As I stand today, I have millions of pounds over a number of years in my planning figures to put towards this.

Ms Palmer: I look forward to it.

3 Dr Grieve: Ministers can change their priorities, and the Department of Finance can change its priorities. I should emphasise again that the thing that encourages me is that there has been political commitment from all parties for it, so there is support. How serious that support is is yet to be seen.

Mr E McCann: You mentioned that some councils had done very well with the scheme, particularly Derry and Strabane council and its old manifestation of Derry City Council, with the walkway/cycle path along the river. There is no question that it is a tremendous amenity. It is a lovely place to go for a walk in the evening, with the river on one side and the old Great Northern Railway line, which is still there, on the other. It is rather rusted, but, nevertheless, it is still in place. It is not unique in that, of course. You mentioned Donegal: if you drive down to Donegal through the Barnesmore Gap and you look up to your left, you will see the railway line, with the telegraph poles still there, although it has been closed for many years. Many people who travel that road must sigh and say, "That must have been a wonderful journey halfway up the hill in Donegal". The line is still there.Sorry for the long preamble, but this may be an aspect that is not widely publicised or known. There is a concern among rail campaigners, North and South, who campaign to have lines reopened — I am among them — that that option will be seriously damaged or even removed by the introduction of greenways. It may come as a surprise to people that there are bitter disputes between rail advocates and greenways advocates — for example, in Mayo and Leitrim — and people get very angry. Is that a factor in your thinking? Is it even adjacent to the thinking about greenways?

Dr Grieve: The Department has an interest in all kinds of transport. We support bus, rail, walking and cycling. We have adopted the approach that, in the longer term, rail may be an option on some of the routes but, on most of them, it probably will not be. The development of greenways along more minor rail routes in areas where no one is talking about the opening of rail any time in the near future — Omagh/Fintona to Enniskillen, the east Derry line from Dungannon to Cookstown right up the River Bann — are still good candidates for going ahead and doing a greenway. Even in areas where there has been talk about opening rail lines — for example, Portadown to Dungannon or Cookstown junction through to Castledawson — it is a longer-term project. We believe that, in the interim, a greenway preserves the line — the Ulster canal is another example — and brings the route together, and the debate about whether the greenway should be retained or transferred to a rail can be a debate for another day.

I do not think that we can wait until we sort out all those debates. There is a need for people to become more active. Obesity is a big problem that we are trying to address. Making Life Better is a great policy, and greenways have a role in enabling people to get out and about and to travel actively for recreation etc. Greenways provide a short-term solution for getting people out and about, to travel more actively and to have more active lifestyles. In effect, I am pushing that debate further down the line.

Mr E McCann: The concern among rail campaigners — I include myself in this — is, as you say, that a greenway can be an interim arrangement, and our great fear is that things that are installed as interim arrangements frequently become permanent arrangements, not least because it is disruptive to remove or shift them. What I am really trying to get at is whether it is a factor in your mind and the minds of planners of this sort of thing — my impression is that it is not — if there are disused lines. You mentioned a couple of them. Bits and pieces of the Strabane-Omagh line are still there: if a greenway were to be built through them — I have no doubt that we will get the Strabane-Omagh line back — that would make it more difficult. That is the point that I am getting at.

Dr Grieve: In a sense, the strategic plan is a blueprint. We hope that, thereafter, councils will develop plans for different sections and individual schemes. When individual schemes are taken forward later on, those factors will be considered. It has not been a central consideration for the strategic plan, but it will be a consideration when individual schemes are brought forward.

Mr E McCann: Do cycle lanes come within your remit?

Dr Grieve: They do to some extent. It depends on whether it is policy or the actual building of cycle lanes.

Mr E McCann: The policy — it is both, really.

Dr Grieve: Talk to me about it, Mr McCann.

4 Mr E McCann: One of the negative aspects —

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): You can talk to him as long as it includes a question.

Mr E McCann: Yes, indeed. Of course.

Would you not agree that, whilst cycling is enormously healthy and, in good weather, extremely enjoyable — even in bad weather, it can be exhilarating — safety on the roads is a factor for cyclists? We have statistics from here and there, and anyone who cycles or drives round knows that cyclists are not treated very well by motorists. Are there plans to increase the number or to have a denser network, if I can put it like that, of cycle lanes that people can use safely?

Dr Grieve: The bicycle strategy that I referred to that was published last year is built on three pillars: build, support and promote. We can provide members with a link to that strategy. It is available online, but we can give you a hard copy as well.

The "build" pillar is about bringing a comprehensive network for the bicycle to Northern Ireland. That includes two main elements. In no particular order of priority, the first element is the strategic plan for greenways. That is a wide-scale, mainly rural network that connects towns with the country and the country with towns and enables tourism — recreational and leisure tourism etc — to be developed. The second element is urban network plans. Our idea is to develop good networks in the main urban areas. I can come back to the Committee to talk to you about it, but, in the autumn, we hope to issue a Belfast bicycle network plan for public consultation. When that has been seen through, we will move to Derry or other towns. The idea behind all that is to have an emphasis on providing a good, coherent, comfortable, continuous cycle infrastructure that is, by and large, segregated from traffic — that is the link to the question that you asked. We really feel that, if you are to encourage people to cycle more, you have to give them that freedom and confidence: freedom to get out on the bike and confidence to use the infrastructure. It is good infrastructure that we are really about, and that is seen in the plans that we are taking forward. It is not just about throwing bicycles onto the roads but providing good infrastructure that enables cyclists to cycle safely.

Mr McAleer: Andrew and Claire, it is good to see you at the Committee. I support the greenway strategy and think that it has great potential in this part of Ireland. A number of years ago, when we looked at greenways with the old Regional Development Committee, we went to Westport, and I have been back to Westport every year and cycled the Great Western greenway with my children — as recently as last month. When we did that inquiry, we got figures that 250,000 cyclists use that greenway a year and that it generates €7 million for the local economy. I spoke to some of the guys when I was down last month, and that figure is now €11 million. It is a 25-mile track on the old Great Western Railway line, and it has a huge impact on the local economy. From a family perspective, it is segregated and safe. My youngest child is eight, and I felt free to let them cycle on ahead and had that bit more confidence.

I very much welcome the strategy being rolled out to councils here. I am conscious that councils have competing priorities. How do you propose to join the dots? One council may have the £25,000 and be working proactively to develop the network in its area. Another council may also have that, but the council in between may not have the same proactive approach to developing the greenway network.

Dr Grieve: The consultation that we undertook in developing the report that AECOM and Sustrans produced for the Department indicated a lot of support from councils. While it is undoubtedly true that it varies from council to council, we received applications for the small grants programme from every council. We feel that there is a lot of support. Even if it were the case that certain councils were a bit cold on the whole thing, this will take at least 10 years to roll out. As in all these things, while we are keen to get everyone involved, we will work with the willing people. As we work with those who are enthusiastic and wish to really commit to it and we develop greenways, that becomes a flagship for other councils to say, "Well, hold on, I want a bit of that". I am not overly concerned that councils are not interested, and I see a way whereby, even if that were the case, we can get this moving forward.

The important thing is to go ahead and get some infrastructure in place to let people see what it is. People have the idea that they cannot afford to spend money on this kind of thing. Look at studies that have been done in other parts of northern Europe. You cited Westport. A Copenhagen study, for example, indicates that, for every kilometre that is driven, there is a cost to society of 9 cent, whereas, if you get people to cycle that kilometre, it has a benefit to society of 17 cent. Those are the things that are of value to communities and councils to be involved in. If we demonstrate it through some

5 flagship project and councils in the west Tyrone area are really keen to take it forward, that can be what really gets it going.

Mr McAleer: Westport drew on the Comber greenway example when it was developing its greenway. There are good examples in this part of the country as well.

Finally, I happened to be speaking to a guy from Sustrans in recent times. He made the point that — you can verify the figures, Andrew — it could cost in the region of £130 million to do a comprehensive greenway cycle network throughout the North. That sounds like a lot of money, but that would buy you about 10 miles of motorway. It costs about £13 million a mile to build a motorway. Whilst I am very much an advocate of a strategic road network, we need to put it in perspective. You would get great value for money if you developed that network, which would connect communities, tourism and all the health, economic and social benefits that flow from it.

Dr Grieve: I think that the figure is £150 million, but that is not a criticism. If you are talking about a 10-year strategy, even if it were £130 million and you divided that by 10, £13 million or £15 million a year could develop something that would benefit not just a particular route, as maybe a motorway does, but the whole of Northern Ireland.

Mr McAleer: There are massive health and social benefits.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Mr McAleer has been to the Great Western line in Westport in Mayo, as have I. It is hugely impressive, but it is much more extensive than Comber simply because so much of it has not been used or built on. It is widely used by tourists in particular. Mr McAleer talked about costs: when you are looking at the costs of a potential investment like that, do you build in the potential for investment coming into the economy from tourists that would offset that cost?

Dr Grieve: In putting together the strategic plan and the routes that will be in it — I am sorry that I do not have an awful lot of detail ready to provide to the Committee this morning — AECOM and Sustrans have developed a methodology for assessing the routes. It takes into account a number of factors, including their potential to improve the recreational and leisure option, their potential to improve the local economy and the contribution that they make to active travel. They take all those factors into account. That assessment enables us to select routes for the primary or secondary network.It is done at a fairly high level, but those are the factors that we will expect to be included in proposals if we go ahead with our capital grants scheme. Those will be the factors that we will expect to be in the application that will demonstrate that it is contributing to all the outcomes that we want. That will be for a bit further down the road.

Mr F McCann: I will be brief because a number of the questions that I wished to ask have been answered. You said that you received 27 expressions of interest from councils. Given that there are 18 councils, I take it that multiple applications have come in.

Dr Grieve: Yes, councils were allowed to put in more than one application.

Mr F McCann: Have any councils not responded to it?

Dr Grieve: None.

Mr F McCann: The map shows that the provision of greenways does not seem to be that extensive across the North, especially given that we live in a very rural place. I know that we can offer small grants, but councils have wish lists of a million different things. Where this fits into those wish lists will determine whether it will go ahead.

Dr Grieve: The applications we have received for small grants are from all councils and cover every county in Northern Ireland. As these things move to the next stage, we will be seeking councils to undertake to make a commitment to them. That is one of the factors that will be taken account of. I am not really sure that I am answering your question.

Mr F McCann: I am not really sure what I asked you. [Laughter.] The point I am trying to make is that councils can have wish lists that are the length of your arm, but, unless this is prioritised it will go nowhere. I know that a date has been set for 2025.

6

Dr Grieve: We are meeting with councils. We meet with the council officials who put forward these proposals, and we encourage them to share them across their various committees etc. We are looking for a commitment; we do not just want councils to put forward some officer's idea for a greenway. We want to ensure that the chief executive, the mayor, the chairman of the council or whoever are behind these projects. That is one of the criteria that are in the application process. Above and beyond that, I am not sure what we could do.

Mr F McCann: The difficulty that you have with councils — I sat on a council for over 20 years — is that, with the best will in the world, people may think that something is a good idea but unless the nettle is grasped by councillors and officials it goes nowhere. It is a good idea to argue for greenways but unless you get over and above a commitment, as regards resources, finances and setting officers aside to develop the whole thing, it is going nowhere.

Dr Grieve: While we have had applications from all councils, there are particular ones from which we sense a real commitment to deliver something. Without naming specific councils, some have developed greenway plans for their council areas. They are the councils that are likely to be successful. Again, it is about working with the willing to deliver something that looks the part and provides the benefits you are after. Then, other councils that are maybe a bit behind in their enthusiasm will be able to see that this is something that they need to do.

Mr F McCann: On the point that Eamonn raised earlier; sometimes you have opposing opinions, whether on greenways, railways or cycle tracks. Has there been any attempt to bring all these groups together and get a meeting of minds? Unless this is done at an early stage, the thing ferments and nearly becomes impossible to achieve; it becomes a matter of principle rather than anything else.

Dr Grieve: We have consulted with Translink and organisations like that. We have not had a huge group of stakeholders together, but we have had individual consultations. We need to think about that.

Mr F McCann: The toing and froing between Eamonn and Andrew was about the old rail networks. Could we get a map with an imprint of all the railway tracks across the North?

Dr Grieve: We can send you one.

Mr F McCann: It would give us an idea about it.

Dr Grieve: We have one. It is an old map. In fact, you can get it on Google, but we will send it to you.

Ms Armstrong: Thank you very much for your presentation, Andrew. As always, it is a pleasure to see that the Department is still keeping greenways — the lungs of the Department, as I like to call them — a priority. One thing that could be an issue for stage 2 of the development proposals is land ownership for councils. Where there have been proposals, for instance to extend existing greenways, there has been an assumption that land ownership would be within the remit of a council. In stage 2, did you ask those councils to confirm whether they actually had access to the land or is that for a later stage?

Dr Grieve: That is for a later stage. It is a key issue and it is the booby trap in all these discussions. Our view is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. There are a couple of considerations for councils; for example, do they need to own the land, or, how do they go about securing the agreement of landowners, which is a slightly different thing? Let me give you an example of what was done in Scotland. With the Caledonia Way, which is over 200 kilometres from Campbeltown on the Mull to Inverness and along the side of Loch Ness, they applied different procedures to different parts. Where landowners were willing to give permissive access, they took it. Where they were willing to rent a bit of land, they did so. Where there were other public bodies involved, they secured their agreement and the public bodies retained ownership. In a small number of cases, they bought the land. We want a low-cost option here; so, whatever is best and can be done should be followed up.

In Scotland, they also found that how you go about dealing with communities is important. They employed the charity Sustrans to negotiate with landowners. So, instead of the Department for Transport weighing in and the landowner immediately saying, "You did something to my dad 56 years ago and there is no way you are getting it", Sustrans came along and the landowner asked, "Who are

7 you? What are you about?", and they said, "We are a community organisation and we are keen to get people to move to active travel". There are different ways of working with people.

At this stage, we are not being prescriptive and saying, "Do this or do that". Local solutions for local problems is often the best way to deal with things, and local authorities can be very good at that. This is something for later on. This is a framework and a blueprint. This is about getting agreement on where we want to go. Once we have an idea of where we want to go, individual schemes will come forward and will need to be picked up.

Ms Armstrong: Thank you for that. I know that a few landowners are a bit perturbed that it was assumed that their land would be used or that it actually belonged to another statutory body, which was not the case. It would be good to see this resolved. It is a worry when a council has been allocated £25,000 and cannot deliver because of land ownership. As you say, it is a key issue.

I have a second quick question. You mentioned the capital grants scheme. We want as many people as possible to be able to avail themselves of greenways. Is there any potential in the capital grants scheme for a different way of looking at this, such as, for instance, where capital grants could be used by a social enterprise to establish bicycle refurbishment schemes? That would make bikes more affordable to those who currently cannot afford them, such as, for example, enabling a father of five to buy bikes for everyone. Is there potential to move the capital grants scheme to that type of development scheme?

Dr Grieve: In a sense, that is really outwith the strategic plan for greenways in particular. There are a number of schemes in Derry and Belfast in which there are little enterprises, and that is the kind of thing they do. To date, our Department has not been involved in funding them; statutory duties are a wee bit of a problem. In the past, however, the Department for Social Development and, presumably now the Department for Communities, has been involved in this kind of thing as part of its social enterprise or social inclusion programmes.

Again, this highlights the necessity to work across Departments to deliver these kinds of things. We are working with the Department for Communities and are contributing money to the development of a bicycle/public realm scheme in Belfast. We have not gone down that particular road to date. We would not set our minds against it but the key thing is to work with other Departments that have the relevant statutory duties and responsibilities in order to take it forward.

Ms Armstrong: It has been extremely successful in Liverpool, where poverty, maybe, would exclude people from thinking that they could use a greenway or take up cycling. The refurbishment scheme means that a lot of the things that were clogging up canals and so on were pulled out and fixed up by the community and reused. It opens up avenues for people to use the greenways.

Dr Grieve: City councils and councils in England, in general, have wider powers, which makes it more possible. I am just saying that as a statement of fact, not as a political statement.

Mr Girvan: I apologise for being late and missing the commencement of the presentation. I want to go back to an earlier point. We had a network of narrow gauge railways throughout Northern Ireland and all of them seem to have disappeared. In the area I represent, there was a very clearly defined line that ran from Ballyclare through to Larne, linking two fairly major businesses, including the paper mill. If you fly over the area, you can see where it is.

Dr Grieve: Yes, you can see it on Google maps.

Mr Girvan: The difficulty is that landowners and farmers who live along the line have, basically, claimed it.

Dr Grieve: They have taken it over.

Mr Girvan: As a consequence, the land now forms part of their farms. Has there ever been an investigation into that? There is a way of putting in a route that would be easy for pedestrians and cyclists to use as a healthy option for making a link between two or three villages. How would land transfers have been dealt with in such cases?

8

Dr Grieve: They were nicked.

Mr Girvan: Stolen?

Dr Grieve: I am sorry; that was very colloquial. It is permissive; it is called adverse possession. If you do not pay attention to your land for 20 years and someone decides to take it over, it is theirs. There was a case not long ago in which, as I understand it, the European Commission set its face against this and said that it should not be allowed. However, the UK Government appealed it. We are in the position where it is a problem. It is not just about the narrow gauge railways that you talked about, Mr Girvan, it happens all over Northern Ireland. That is the problem.

If you look at the satellite view in Google maps, you will see that there are areas where it is very clear that there is a cutting or an embankment and you can see the railway, and then it just seems to end in a field, because that is the area of level ground that has been taken over. There are issues, but this is where it is important to work with landowners so that we can say that we will buy the land from them or that we will ask them to give us permissive access. Those are all issues that need to be taken forward when we are developing a scheme. We are stuck on this, legally, I am afraid.

Mr Girvan: Sometimes, we look for reasons to not do things and that is the point. I am wondering whether, if we see some low-hanging fruit, we could reap it. We have the Newtownabbey Way, which has been very successful. It runs from Mossley down through the park and along the lough shore into Belfast. It links up with the towpath and goes right to Lisburn and you cross only a couple of roads. It is a fantastic path. We could not have delivered that unless the council purchased land to do it. We ended up having to buy quite a bit of land to allow it to happen. We have options to extend it, and I am sure you are aware of them. Some of the greatest opposition has come from statutory agencies, such as the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. It has land that it wants to hold on to, for one reason or another, but is not developing it. How can we ensure that we have buy-in from those agencies to see that there is greater benefit and come forward with a scheme that allows them to still design housing if they still desire to do so?

Dr Grieve: The key thing, not so much with the strategic plan for greenways but with urban network plans, is that cycle paths and walkways go right through housing estates so that people living there can gain access to the route and go to whichever destination they want. Maybe you would like to invite the Committee to have a go on the Newtownabbey Way.

Mr Girvan: It is fantastic. I have cycled it many times.

Dr Grieve: I think that the Committee is going to the Connswater Community Greenway. We have been dealing with councils in developing their local development and community plans. In our returns to them, we have emphasised that there is a strategic plan and urban area plans, and we advise them to leave space for connections to the cycling infrastructure when they are doing their plans. That is one way in which we ensure that this is all joined up. I would not like to say anything about other public bodies.

Mr Girvan: We have found that it is not necessarily private landowners who throw a spanner in the works; it has been some of the statutory agencies. They say, "We have not decided what we are doing in an area, and, until that happens, you can do nothing". It holds up that linked-up approach. We would like to make the link from Corr's Corner roundabout through the whole area. We are getting there with that one.

Dr Grieve: The council has been in touch with us about the scheme you have outlined to link up with Larne.

Mr Girvan: You will be hearing from Newtownabbey, because it is one of the schemes I want to bring forward from Ballyclare.

Dr Grieve: Yes, and in the other direction to Ballymena.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): I have a couple of quick questions. As somebody who uses the towpath along the Lagan quite a bit, I want to know how do you get the balance right between cyclists and pedestrians?

9

Mr Girvan: A big stick. [Laughter.]

Ms Armstrong: And a bell.

Dr Grieve: Maybe I can add to that answer. Conflict is a problem, but it is not a cyclist's problem, a pedestrian problem or a driver problem: it is a human problem. One of the ways in which we and the councils have been working with Sustrans is through what is called the One Path initiative. You work with the communities and the people who use a particular greenway or path and encourage them to share, respect, enjoy. It is a behavioural programme that tries to get people to understand other users' needs and work with them to share it properly so that everybody enjoys it.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): With respect, Dr Grieve, we have laws in this country — as there are laws in any country — and people do not necessarily adhere to them. With the best will in the world, we struggle. This may be a human problem, but is it also a spatial problem?

Dr Grieve: That is right: the width of paths and greenways is important. A paper was presented to the Cycle City conference in May that looked at the different users of greenways and paths and the various widths and analysed all of that. The conclusion was that, if you want to minimise conflict, you have to build paths of sufficient width — at least three metres and up to five. One of the problems we have is with, say, the towpath at Edenderry, where you have 1·5 metres: it is inevitable that you will have conflict. A lot of our paths are 2·5 metres wide; two people can walk side by side, so how do you get past? One of our recommendations is that paths are of adequate width for the traffic that will use them. You are exactly right: it is a spatial issue.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Can I make a plea for some investment in the towpath, especially around Edenderry, where it is difficult? I appreciate that the topography is difficult as well.

A number of members have talked about councils. I am no longer on a council, but when I was there used to be regional tourism partnerships (RTPs). They are useful because many of them straddle council areas. We may have bigger council areas now but RTPs would be a way to get joined-upness without having to deal with a council individually because the next-door council is lukewarm — or it might be the other way round. The RTPs are a good way of doing that. They are also a good way of marketing this.

It would be useful if the Department had a stakeholder meeting to take this forward, getting all the interested people around the table to work together to get a strategy to take this forward. It is clear that you are passionate about it and have some money to make a difference. Equally, if councils, the Tourist Board and everyone deemed to be players in this are brought around the table, that would be very useful to take the thing forward.

Dr Grieve: A number of councils were working together on some of the applications that came forward. It has begun, but it is a very important point.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): Thank you both very much for your time. You mentioned the visit to the greenway on 5 October: I understand that you are willing to attend in case we have questions.

Dr Grieve: We are happy to do that, yes. The Connswater Community Greenway is not a departmental project, but we are very supportive of it.

The Chairperson (Mr Humphrey): You got that in early. Thanks very much.

10