Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I invite you to make a brief opening statement, which may be up to 10 minutes. I imagine that members will then have questions for you based on that. Gordon, are you leading off for us?

Mr Gordon Best (Mineral Products Association Northern Ireland): Yes, Chair, I will lead off with our opening statement. Thanks very much for inviting us back.

We will give you an update on what is, as we see it, a critical situation in the sector. The initial 2025-26 roads maintenance budget is now almost spent, and only a minimal amount of maintenance work remains for the companies that we represent. The other guys on the panel will give you more detail on that shortly.

The industry held hope that the Minister, whom we met twice in July, would have made some changes to the balance of the 2025-26 capital budget to ensure that there would be adequate funding for roads maintenance. It seems, however, that that hope was misplaced. Following the Minister's contributions to the debate on the road maintenance strategy in the House on Monday 15 September, we have no doubt that the Minister and Department are under significant pressure to balance their capital budget. During the debate, Members from all parties highlighted examples from their constituencies of the deteriorating road network and the impact of that on the safety of the travelling public, whether they travel by car, lorry or bus, or they cycle or walk on the footways. Members may be aware of an imminent unofficial October monitoring round. It is vital that DOF reallocates any money that other Departments hand back to the centre to DFI's structural maintenance fund in order to ensure that there is adequate funding for the rest of the financial year.

When we last met the Committee, in early July, we told you that the indicative budget of £68 million is nowhere near what is required to keep the road network safe and to protect the hundreds of skilled workers who provide quality services and products to the Department for Infrastructure. Recently, we surveyed our members who carry out highway maintenance and supply materials to the Department. The results did not make for pleasant reading. A number of our members are here before the Committee — I will ask them to introduce themselves shortly — to give you an up-to-date report on what is happening on the ground and what the lack of structural maintenance funding means for their businesses, their skilled workforce and the delivery of social clauses in their contracts, including the knock-on impact on support for apprenticeships, local communities and charities.

It is fair to say — we were talking about this before we came into the Committee room today — that this is not so much about us; it is, fundamentally, about the safety and sustainability of the road network for the travelling public. The reality that we face is that, if no further funding becomes available in the October monitoring round, the Executive and the Assembly will oversee the most severe deterioration in the £40 billion road asset of any previous Administration. Thank you.

The guys will introduce themselves.

Mr John McQuillan (Mineral Products Association Northern Ireland): I am from McQuillan Companies.

Mr Damien Keenan (Mineral Products Association Northern Ireland): I am from P Keenan Quarries.

Mr David Chambers (Mineral Products Association Northern Ireland): I am from Gibson Bros.

Mr Gareth Telford (Mineral Products Association Northern Ireland): I am from Northstone Materials Limited.

Mr Best: We are happy to take questions, as that is the most important thing.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thank you very much for your presentation. I will start. I am quite new to the Committee and to chairing a Committee. You mentioned meeting the Minister. You have had engagement. How would you characterise that engagement and the Department's willingness to do something around the issues that you have raised this morning?

Mr Best: The first meeting was a site visit to Northstone's Craigantlet quarry —

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I know it well.

Mr Best: — outside Newtownards. We took the opportunity to show the Minister the new asphalt plant, which is probably the most modern in Europe. It was built to facilitate the decarbonisation and manufacture of warm asphalt, increased recycling of asphalt and things like that. Our second meeting was at the end of July in James House at the Gasworks. I have been doing this job for a long time, and I have met many Ministers, but she is the first Minister who I have ever met who took her own notes, so I will praise her for that. I accept that she is in a very difficult position. The Department is under significant pressure with NI Water and Translink. It seems that asset management now comes a very poor third. However, I have made this point at the Committee and in statements before: although we are building new roads, we cannot maintain the ones that we have. That is a major issue.

We fully understand that the Minister took a lot of time to approve the initial £68 million in April. We accept that the reason for that was that the Department was trying to turn over every stone to find extra money. However, the reality is that, because of the move in the fiscal floor to 124% per head of population, that was the largest allocation that the Infrastructure Department has ever had. We made the point that it is the Department's decision to slice the cake, and, in our view, it has sliced it wrong. The social and economic impacts of not maintaining the asset properly has been highlighted in the Snaith report, in the Barton report and by the Northern Ireland Audit Office.

For the guys on the panel, their businesses are obviously their priority. However, we are here to talk about the safety of the network and the absolute necessity to get additional funding for the road network to be maintained for the rest of the financial year. If we get a hard winter with frost, I do not know what will happen.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): You rightly mentioned the positive change with the fiscal floor going to 124%, and Infrastructure did very well from that. You said that the Infrastructure budget is there, and it is up to the Minister to decide how to apportion that across the various areas that she has responsibility for. I have not read some of those reports, as I am still getting up to speed on a range of areas. If we do not maintain our roads, and we leave them for a while, when we do get around to fixing them, is it even more expensive than if we had maintained them in the first place? Is that the way your industry works? That is a very genuine question.

Mr Best: The gents on the panel can correct me if I am wrong, but the statistics, from GB and further afield, show that preventative maintenance is 20 times more efficient than reactive maintenance. That is the problem.

A number of you were involved in last week's debate on the new road maintenance strategy. What is happening at the minute is just throwing good money after bad. I am sure that the guys on the panel will highlight that fact. We are going out and nearly patching on patches, because maintenance is so reactive. There is also the fact that, over the past number of years, we have seen a big increase in utility works on the road network. We, as the core industry, certainly question that. All our workers have to be sector-scheme accredited: there are UK and national standards for people to do patching work on the network. A lot of utilities work, where that is not required, is being done, and nobody is really policing it, which is a big problem.

Mr Chambers: You also have the additional costs of the claims that are coming through year after year. That has to be put into the overall costs as well. It is a false economy.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I cannot remember the exact figure, but those claims have amounted to something like £4 million over the past while. They are becoming significant. Although there is an economic imperative regarding the safety of our roads — I have flagged this up on several occasions —

Mr Best: The Snaith report and the Barton report highlight the impact of not spending what professional opinion says that you need to spend in order to keep the road network in a safe and quality condition. In the Barton report in 2019, that figure was £143 million. When departmental officials were here last — I think that it was Colin Woods who gave the figure — they said that, because of construction inflation, that figure had increased to £192 million. When Andrew Murray was director of network services in the Department, he said that, for every £1 that we spend below that figure, it actually costs £1·26. We are adding to the backlog, and the underspend is now over £1 billion.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Will you clarify for me what the budget is for this year? I wrote down £68 million.

Mr Best: It is £68 million.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): DFI is going to spend £68 million, but it should probably spend £192 million. Is that —

Mr Best: We have to be realistic. That is the figure if you add inflation to the figure in the professional statement by Barton. His opinion, in 2019, was that the level of spending needed to maintain the network in Northern Ireland was £143 million. The Department has given the figure of £192 million, by adding in construction inflation. We have seen price increases in bitumen, labour and everything else.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. What has to happen? You are before a Committee.

Mr Best: Ultimately, additional money has to be found, and perhaps money is available because of the hold-up with the A5. However, we have to get our priorities right: it is as simple as that. We are here to do the work, but the pot is running dry.

Mr McQuillan: Peter, you mentioned claims and gave figures of between £3 million and £4 million. In early September, we met DFI officials who made us aware that claims doubled in 2024 and now sit at £7 million to £8 million. That gives you an indication of the severe deterioration of the road network. As Gordon said, the safety of the public user of the road is at stake. DFI officials made us aware that that figure has doubled.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thank you for that, John. That is very useful.

Mr Stewart: Gordon and gents, thanks very much for coming along today and for taking the time again. This is the second or third time that you have been in, and it is always very useful. We appreciate everything that the sector does under very difficult circumstances.

As you said, in the most recent financial year, claims totalled £5·1 million plus legal costs, which is akin to 10% of the entire road maintenance budget. It is lamentable, and it is getting worse year-on-year. It is totally unsustainable. Our road network is running to stand still. I have never seen it so bad, and I have been involved in local representation in politics for over 15 years. I do not need to tell you how bad it is. The Minister says that road safety is the number-one priority for the Department. Does the state of our roads not fly in the face of that?

Mr Telford: It does, because you are not investing in the infrastructure to maintain it, so the roads are getting worse and worse. The knock-on effect is that, one, two, five or 10 years down the line, you will have to spend a huge amount of money to fix the roads and strengthen the sub-bases of the roads. Water will get in and damage them further and, over the winter months, they will blow up. You will then have to spend five, 10 or 20 times the amount of money that you would need to spend to maintain the network now.

Mr Stewart: Yes. Gordon, you mentioned hoping that we do not have a bad winter. In the grand scheme, we have been quite lucky with how mild it has been. If we get a particularly bad winter, combined with the existing financial pressures, the roads will be unrecognisable. One of our previous colleagues talked about them looking like craters on the moon. It is not an exaggeration to say that that is where we could be if we get a particularly bad winter, without the necessary budget being in place to do the repairs.

Mr Telford: There is no budget left, so how do you maintain the network?

Mr Stewart: Yes. I am thinking of the October monitoring round and even the next financial year.

Mr Best: One of the companies whose example I provided in our submission — I could not include everyone's — has a small-scale contract. Interestingly, while all the others talked about laying people off and letting subcontractors go, that guy actually foresees taking on half a dozen people, because he is doing all that reactive patching. He said:

That tells a tale.

Mr Stewart: That is the point. When you were here last, you talked about the vulnerability of the sector and the workforce. We know that things are worse now. What is the situation with contractors who, having had the commitment from the Department that the money will be there, have effectively been working in good faith and trying to keep their workforce ready and eager to go when the money and contracts are there?

Mr Chambers: From our side — I imagine that we are all the same — we will be out of work in two to three weeks. I know that we are focusing on road maintenance, but I cannot emphasise enough that, if we do not get any money until the new financial year, there is a good chance that you will not even have the resources to maintain the roads at that stage. That is how vital the October monitoring round is. There is a long-term issue here as well.

Mr Telford: At this time of the year, we look at our budgets for next year and at how we will plan ahead. We do not have any assurance of what the budget will be. We were told the budget for this year only recently. We do not know what we will have for next year. How do we, as companies, try to plan ahead? How can we think about investment in our plant and equipment? The new asphalt plant in Craigantlet cost tens of millions of pounds. That sort of money does not grow on trees. We have to have a budget somewhere along the line in order for us to plan ahead.

If you look at our industry, you see that it is like a tap. It gets switched on, and we are meant to be there to do the work. You switch it off, and we have to go somewhere else to find work. Then, all of a sudden, you want to switch it on again. We do not have the resources for you to keep doing that. We have to come up with a sensible budget at the start of the year that will maintain the road network in the state that it is in in order to keep it safe. That is what we are here to lobby for. We need a budget that is realistic so that all of us, as businesspeople, can plan ahead and decide how many workers and apprentices we need. I have seven apprentices, and I do not know what they will be doing in November. Do I let them go? What do I do with them? It is part of my contract to have apprentices. We have social clauses in our contracts. We are trying to abide by those, but we cannot keep going the way that we are going if we do not have a budget. That is where we have to get to, guys: having a sensible budget for the whole industry in order to maintain your road network and allow people to drive on it safely.

Mr Stewart: I firmly agree with you, and I think that we would all say the same thing. As a scrutiny Committee for the Department, I want to see that budget. I want to see you having the security so that you are able to react when the work is there and are not made to operate in good faith. You have raised that with the Minister, and, ultimately, it is she and her officials who will decide on it. What was her response when you told her of the vulnerability of the sector and the fact that, as Gareth said, you cannot keep turning the tap on and off at their beck and call?

Mr Best: She fully accepted that, but —

Mr Stewart: But, "It is what it is".

Mr Best: — she has a constrained budget.

Mr Keenan: The Minister and the Department seem to understand that we need money, but the money just has not been forthcoming. Last year, we hosted a visit from the then Infrastructure Minister, John O'Dowd. We took him to an asphalt resurfacing scheme in Ballymena. The theme of the meeting was to demonstrate to the then Minister the level of investment that is required for the likes of a large asphalt scheme. On the day, he saw that up to 30 staff were employed on that one site. You could have up to £1 million of plant machinery on such a site. Behind all that, you have a quarry to manufacturer the aggregates and an asphalt plant. It takes a massive investment from us for us to be ready for when the Department needs the roads to be maintained. The Finance Minister, John O'Dowd, understands, because he went to an asphalt resurfacing site last year, the level of resources that are committed to it, and the current Infrastructure Minister understands that.

We have four asphalt resurfacing contracts. We do the work in mid-Ulster: Magherafelt, Cookstown, Dungannon and Omagh. We also have a contract in Moyle. Magherafelt and Cookstown have no resurfacing programme for the rest of the year. Dungannon has one for another couple of weeks, and then we will be finished. Moyle has no programme. We will have no resurfacing programmes after the middle of October. That is unprecedented. In my 20 years, I have never seen the resurfacing programme dry up to nothing.

We have three small-scale contracts, and we are inundated with patching. We get job cards in for fixing potholes. There is any God's number of potholes to fix. We try our best, but we will never get to the very last one, because they just keep coming in. We are inundated with job cards of potholes to repair. As Gordon said, we need to get out and fix the roads properly with the resurfacing contracts.

Mr Stewart: There is only half of the financial year to go. Half of it is gone.

Mr Chambers: To clarify what Damien said, the resources that you use to fix potholes are very different from the resources and machines that you need for full-scale resurfacing.

We will talk about the A5. There seem to be all these flashy new schemes and whatever. Regardless of who wins those contracts, the surfacing of the new roads will be done by somebody who is part of the Mineral Products Association (MPA). As important as those schemes are, maintenance of the roads is the core of our business. The Department needs to realise that whether the businesses have work and survive is important for the flashy new schemes, because we will all be involved in those as well.

Mr Stewart: I have one very quick question to ask, if I may, before I finish. There is so much to cover that we could probably spend a conference on it. We all accept that the budget is probably half as much as it should be, at the very least. We could probably spend infinitely more. How might you go about changing the way that the current budget is spent in assessing and triaging programmes and needs, and resurfacing by sector and by division? Would you do it any differently or feed into the Department's process?

Mr McQuillan: Gordon already highlighted the fact that the split between new capital programmes, including the opening of new roads, and maintenance of the existing asset needs to be seriously considered. In simple terms, why are the Government building new roads when they cannot maintain their existing asset? There needs to be more investment in structural maintenance. In order to procure those contracts, we, as companies, are asked to invest. Damien mentioned the investments that companies are making. We have to make those investments to be able to qualify to receive the contracts.

I will give you some figures on the level of that investment. At procurement stage, we are given mid-range values of what DFI expects the contracts to be worth. We are asked to gear up, invest and get the resource in order to be able to do them. Our company holds seven structural maintenance contracts, and actual spend on the contracts last year amounted to only 60% of the mid-range value that had been advised. Take a step forward and look at this year: our works orders that have been written are only 55% of the value of last year's works orders, and we have been told that there is no more money. We made that investment up front, and we are now sitting in the very difficult position where we will never get a return on the investment that we made. However, to qualify for and successfully procure the next DFI contract, we will be asked to make the same investments.

Mr Stewart: You have done your bit. It is only right and proper that both the Department and the Executive meet you halfway. That is all you are asking for. It is not a lot, to be fair.

Guys, I could ask plenty more, but I am conscious of time, so thank you. We will touch base again.

Mr Dunne: Thank you, gentlemen, for your presentation. I commend you for the survey that you have done. Taking time out to consult people is interesting and helpful for us as well. I have a couple of questions. Have you any figure as to what percentage of the road maintenance work, say in one financial year, is carried out by contractors like yourselves as opposed to being in-house DFI work? Is there any way of putting a rough figure on that?

Mr Keenan: The percentage that is in-house DFI work is very small, and it is getting smaller because the Department has issues with recruiting staff and all the rest.

Mr Dunne: What would you say it is?

Mr Best: I would say that well over 90%, maybe 95%, is done by contractors.

Mr McQuillan: We have a liaison group where industry meets DFI, and we have requested information on that split. In previous years, it was provided and we could see how much went directly to DFI or to Roads Service, as it used to be called.

Mr Dunne: You referred to the retention and recruitment problems that DFI has. How real a challenge are retention and recruitment? Is DFI losing workforce to other parts of the UK or the Republic, or will that happen in future?

Mr McQuillan: The industry in which we employ people is so unsustainable given the present budget. There are many more sustainable employment opportunities in the South, GB, Australia or wherever. We are sitting in front of you saying, genuinely, that the positions of over 500 people across our industry could be at risk. If those 500 people find work elsewhere that is more sustainable, and where budgets are more sustainable, they will not come back.

Mr Dunne: Yes. The £68 million has been used up with almost six months to go. There are five or six months left with no work. It is shocking and alarming. You are all well aware that, for over 10 years, there has been limited service from the Department. Obviously, that has had a severe impact on the road network in every constituency across Northern Ireland. The Minister has often talked about a new road maintenance strategy, and I proposed a motion last week to push her on that. We have still to see any action on that beyond words. Have you had any engagement on that road maintenance strategy, given the expertise at your table?

Mr Best: Yes. To be fair to the Department, it has engaged with us twice and asked our opinion. The jury is out: the glass is very much half-full. We are passionate that the road maintenance strategy needs to look at everything. That is the way in which DFI transport and roads asset management can deliver. A lot of you may be familiar with the consultancy/client split in the Department. That has to go, in our opinion, because it is not an efficient way to do business. There needs to be more collaboration, and the Department has highlighted that. An intelligence-led approach is sensible. The new technologies that are out there will enable a more collaborative approach with the industry to deliver better, more efficient road maintenance.

Mr McQuillan: Hand-in-hand with the procurement strategy, there has been talk of multi-year budgets. That is fine, but such budgets have to be sustainable for the safety of the road network. If Government decide that there will be a multi-year budget to spend £70 million per year for the next four years on structural maintenance, nothing will change. We were given high-level access on the procurement strategy, but we have not seen the final document yet.

Mr Dunne: You mention technology. What role does technology have today, or what role could it have? Is it a real game changer? There is talk that it can come into play in inspections, with videos, AI and so on. Is it used in other parts of the world? Are you using it?

Mr Best: To the best of my knowledge, it is used in GB and other areas. If it can help us in identifying where the main issues are, and to be preventative, that is a good thing. Damien mentioned the job cards. I am sure that this has happened to you. Family members have told me about driving up Mill Hill or out the Dunkirk Road in Waringstown, for example, and seeing markings for patching to be done, and the contractor comes out and does one but leaves the other one sitting beside it. What the heck is going on?

Mr Keenan: Sometimes, you go to a road and patch the areas that have been identified. You do a patch but know that another bit needs to be fixed. We are instructed to fix only the bit that they have identified for us. Within another couple or three weeks, we are back at the same road, fixing the other hole. We could be at the same road three or four times in the space of six months.

Mr Dunne: The Minister has mentioned Ards and North Down, which is my constituency. Some good work has been done there, with a bit more having been taken in, but I assure you that it still leaves a lot to be desired — a lot more is needed.

Finally, you mentioned building new roads but not maintaining the current ones. With Keith Buchanan not in attendance, it would be remiss of me not to mention his point about active travel. It is the same principle: we are building new footpaths, but, in some cases, our current footpaths are blocked or impassable. The Department needs to get a grip of that. I concur with everything that you have said today.

Mr McQuillan: Stephen, the Government committed to using 10% of the budget for active travel, but it seems that there is surplus money in active travel and that there is not enough active travel hitting the ground quickly enough. We are approaching the latter part of the financial year. Has the active travel budget been ring-fenced? Can that money be diverted to structural maintenance?

Mr Dunne: I know. That would allow it to be utilised for safe walking, cycling and so on.

Mr Best: As taxpayers, we appreciate that the Executive are under financial pressure, as the other devolved Administrations are. We welcome the closer collaboration in the road maintenance strategy, because we have to make the pound go further. We are up for that, but we need to get a sensible balance in the budget for the financial assets that we have, and look at ways of spending that more effectively.

Mr Chambers: I will go back to what you said about technology. Technology is important, but there is such a vast difference between what the budget is and what we need, that it is not going to have much of an impact. The lack of budget is so severe.

Mr Dunne: I appreciate that. Thanks, gentlemen.

Mr McMurray: Thank you for the presentation. I get all the points. I want to widen it out a bit, because you have made the case for road maintenance very well. You mentioned accreditation for patching. Maybe I picked you up wrong, but is there no accreditation for patch jobs on the roads? Could that be brought in? Would that improve the situation? What are your thoughts on that?

Mr Best: As an industry, in working for the Department, all our companies have to have sector scheme 16 accreditation. That allows their workforce to work on the network for DFI. Furthermore, all our manufacturing plants have to be third-party accredited and sector scheme 14 accredited. We have to meet particular standards so that the product that DFI and the Northern Ireland public get does what it says on the tin. However, for the likes of private streets and utility patching, those requirements do not apply.

Most of the materials that utility subcontractors will buy will come from our plants, so there are no issues with the materials. The issue is with the quality of the workmanship in the patching, the compaction and that type of thing. All our workers have to be trained to reach sector scheme 16 accreditation, which is UK-wide. That is the point that I was making, Andrew.

Mr McMurray: I think — I do not have my glasses on, sorry— that you are Mr Telford: is that right?

Mr Telford: Yes.

Mr McMurray: You talked about your plant and decarbonisation. You want to be sustainable, not only in roads but in quarrying, aggregates and stuff like that. How much impact is this having on sustainability and decarbonisation?

Mr Telford: A number of years ago, we were planning ahead. We had three asphalt plants in the Belfast region, and we decided to do away with three plants and put in one super-plant so that we would not burn as much fuel and the carbon footprint would be reduced. The plant that we installed, at considerable cost, can put at least 70% RAP material into the bases and binders, but the specification at the minute allows only up to 50% to be used. In the South of Ireland, where trials have been done, the limit is 70%. We are future-proofing our investment in the plant so that we can ramp up to meet the Assembly's carbon sustainability commitments by 2030. We have invested considerably in that, and we are now asking you to come forward, move the goalposts a wee bit further and push the sustainability side of things in the Assembly. Those commitments are there. One of the reasons why the A5 project did not go ahead is that the judge ruled that the Assembly was not meeting the sustainability criteria that it had set for 2030. We have invested in it, however. We decided three or four years ago to do that, but it all takes planning. It does not happen overnight. When you go to buy an asphalt plant at £5 million or £6 million, it takes a bit of time to make sure that you are getting the right piece of equipment. You certainly do your homework. We are just looking for investment in the roads infrastructure. We and a lot of companies have the resources to put RAP into roads, but we need to take that a step further and think about what we are doing and how we go about maintaining the network in a more sustainable way.

Mr Best: Andrew, it is important that members realise that the industry is ready. It is about the specification from the Department. We have told the Department that we are ready for warm asphalt, but it is not being specified. I know for a fact that 50,000 or 60,000 tons of recycled asphalt could have been used on the A5, but the engineer did not want it.

I go back to this point: we are ready. A lot of investment has been made, not just by Northstone but by other companies here, in increasing the RAP capacity of the plants. At an MPA level, we are involved in the Industrial Decarbonisation for NI project. You talked about sustainable aggregates. Once the gas network and the grid is sorted out, as a wider industry, we could come off the grid eventually, because of the size of our sites and their use of solar, wind and small-scale hydrogen. I think that we mentioned that at the last Committee session that we attended. Do not be in any doubt that the industry is ready. The Department needs to make the decision to jump-start the specifications.

Mr McMurray: May I ask one more question?

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Sure.

Mr McMurray: Does RAP mean "recycled asphalt products"?

Mr Best: RAP means "recycled asphalt planings".

Mr McMurray: OK. I want to talk about wider societal things. What effect will this have on apprenticeships? There was something in the news the other day about apprenticeships, the difficulty of getting them and the wider economic knock-on effect of apprenticeships — the development production line, if you will — on the workforce.

Mr Best: As you are probably aware, as an industry, we have huge capacity to take on apprenticeships. It was a requirement of the social clauses. However, we cannot employ and sustain apprentices if we have no money. The move towards multi-year budgets will help but, as John said, only if the budget is correct.

I will give you an example from the Department for Infrastructure. I was approached by DFI a few weeks ago. A letter had gone from the Department of Justice to the Department for Infrastructure to ask what the capacity is for taking on rehabilitated offenders in our work. I met Naomi at an event and said to her, "We have received this letter. I want to tell you right now that it is not that we do not want to do it, but we can't because of the budget situation". The Government need to understand that you can only deliver social clauses if you have a budget through public-sector contracts. That is the reality.

Mr Telford: Apprenticeships were in the news last night, and one of the statements was that 10% of companies in Northern Ireland take on apprentices. I would say that of every one of the companies that you are looking at today — a lot of the people in our industry are taking on apprentices. We have somewhere in the region of 15 to 20 apprentices in our business. That is how we are getting young people in. They are the future, but you are turning the tap off again. We have a decision to make before the end of this year about whether we are going to take on apprentices next year, because you have to look at budgets and plan ahead. By the end of November, we have to tell Workplus what apprentices we need. They get ready in December and advertise in January. People apply in February, and we then interview in March and appoint in April. That is six months. That is planning ahead. We cannot plan ahead with the budget that you are giving us because we do not know what the budget is. That is the predicament that we are all in.

Mr Chambers: On that, without getting into the details, just so that you understand, when it comes to these contracts — I think that my figures are right, but you can correct me if I am wrong — we have to have 100 points per £1 million spend in the social clauses. That is contractual. When we have work, we have to meet those 100 points, but it comes back to what Gareth said: what do you do for those apprentices? This has an impact on mental wellness and charity work. It is all part of social clauses, but you are giving us work for only six months of the year, so what do we do for the other six months?

Mr McQuillan: Gareth mentioned eight apprentices working directly on structural maintenance contracts. We have seven. We are in the same scenario. I am not concerned about apprentices only. I am concerned about the people for whom we are providing employment, benefits and further professional development. It is not only apprentices that are at risk here.

Mr McMurray: Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I am conscious of time. It is catching us.

Mr Boylan: Gordon, this is not our first rodeo, eh? For me and you anyway. I understand. Thanks very much for the presentation. We all know about the budget. I sit in the Chamber every Monday and Tuesday and hear all the Ministers shouting at John O'Dowd, the Finance Minister, about giving them money, and, then, all of a sudden, I am sitting here in Committee and it is about the Minister for Infrastructure. We are strapped for budgets. We have had a number of meetings and have talked about this before, and I agree with you about the state of the roads. There is no doubt that every constituency office in this place hears about not only potholes but other issues. Road maintenance is an issue for us. I have no doubt that this Committee will support you.

You have teased out most of the issues. A lot of us are aware of them. Obviously, it is coming up to the October monitoring round, and your conversation with the Minister will continue after this conversation today. I am asking you this because that is the next process for us, and the discussions about the budget will continue. What are your general views on the October monitoring round? You may be looking for support from that monitoring round.

Mr Best: Yesterday, I sent a letter to John O'Dowd, because I think that money may be handed back to the centre. For example, when it comes to the A5 money, we are now aware that the hearing will not be held until December. I expect that there is money sitting there unspent that is likely to remain unspent. I know that, because the A5 is an Executive project, DFI would have to submit a bid to get permission to reallocate that money.

I say this to you all: the big stingy nettle in the room is revenue raising. We have made a detailed submission to the transport strategy, and we have been open about considering toll roads. If I drive to Galway, I use three or four toll roads. We should start to think outside the box about revenue raising. I even suggest congestion charging. It is a hot potato, but the Construction Employers Federation, the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Grant Thornton put forward a good proposal for a sewerage charge — you will note the change of language — of £120 a year. People in social housing or those in receipt of universal credit would not pay the charge. We have to get real about how we maintain and invest in our infrastructure. If we do not grasp the nettle and make some difficult decisions and show political leadership, our infrastructure will continue to degrade. We need a serious discussion about a public-private collaboration to invest in and maintain our infrastructure.

Mr McQuillan: In 2016, it was reported that 100,000 vehicles use the Westlink daily. A toll of £1 would create £35 million of additional funding per year, which could be used to maintain the road and make it safer. Gordon mentioned using toll roads. The closest toll road is the M1 to Drogheda, and there is no roundabout at Drogheda for people who do not want to choose that road and pay the toll. I do not think that it will be case for the Westlink either. The Government are encouraging people to use public transport, and implementing a congestion charge will encourage people. For years, the Mineral Products Association has lobbied for more funding for structural maintenance. We sympathise with the Minister because the pot is only so large, but, unless we think outside the box about internal fundraising, nothing will change. We will come back next year and the year after, and the roads will fall into a greater state of disrepair.

Mr Boylan: I have had that chat with Gordon on numerous occasions. I am supportive, but we are strapped for funding. I am sure that the Committee will support some of the suggestions that have been made today, and there are monitoring rounds coming up.

Mr Harvey: Thank you, gentlemen. You mentioned a big increase in the activity of the utility companies that is not policed properly, probably over the past five or 10 years. In most cases, when utility companies dig up the roads, the holes are deeper and wider. They do not seem to repair the roads with the same materials, and trucks are now heavier. Maybe the utility companies use some of your companies to repair the roads, and they are certainly using your materials. If those repairs were better policed and the companies were held to account, would it help with road safety?

Mr Best: I have always believed that any legislation, requirements or guidance are not worth the paper that they are written on if they are not policed. There are standards to police the repairs under the street works legislation. We are all aware of the Department's resource issues. The work of some utility companies is better than that of others. We have a health and safety group with the Department, and one of the standard agenda items is the utility companies. Over the past number of years, there has been a greater understanding between the core maintenance contractors and the utility companies. For example, in some cases, a utility company has gone into an existing roadworks site at the weekend with no communication at all. The contractor has come back and wondered what has happened, because there has been no communication. We are getting to grips with that issue.

The Northern Ireland Road Authority and Utility Committees has standards, and there are utilities standards across the UK, but it all comes back to policing — indeed, the policing of subcontractors' work for those utilities. We regularly find not so much electricity and gas cables but high-speed fibre broadband material buried at depths that are against the rules, basically. There is an issue of enforcement and scrutiny. Again, it all comes back to having the resource to be out there on the ground.

Mr McQuillan: I am aware that, within the past year and a half, Highways England actually introduced a fine structure for substandard works that have been completed by utility bodies. That would suggest that it is policing that in some fashion. I fully appreciate that DFI has a resource issue. However, as Gordon mentioned earlier, by requesting that any contractors who carry out repairs on DFI-owned roads have the right qualifications — the qualifications that the people at this table have through their sector scheme approval — that would be a step in the right direction.

Mr Harvey: All repairs should be up to sector scheme 14 or 16 accreditation or whatever standard. Around 50% of the problems with roads are due to previous repairs and then heavy vehicles. Good point. Thank you very much.

Mr McNulty: Thanks, folks. You said that it is the most serious deterioration of the road network that any Administration have ever seen. That is some statement.

Mr Best: That is the reality, Justin.

Mr McNulty: Is that not frightening?

Mr Best: It is extremely frightening. I know quite a number of cyclists. Indeed, recently, I was told by an official that a couple of the cycling organisations have actually met the Minister. When I came to the Committee in early July, I said in my opening statement that I had a strong feeling of déjà vu. We have been talking about the issue of road maintenance since the Assembly was established, and even prior to that. Many of the comments here have, basically, highlighted that, in people's experience, they have never seen the roads in as bad a condition. That is the reality. Sometimes, you need to shock people. Unless significant extra money is found in this financial year — it will probably take £120 million or £130 million overall in 2025-26 — we will see significant deterioration of the road network. That is not even allowing for a severe winter.

Mr McQuillan: Justin, as I mentioned earlier, the fact that we were made aware by a DFI official that public liability claims doubled in 2024 backs up that statement. It suggests that that is the way in which the network is headed.

Mr McNulty: It is crazy. It is the most serious deterioration of the road network that any Administration have ever seen, yet the Department's budget has gone up. The Department is being funded to a higher level than ever before, yet the budget for road maintenance has decreased. By what percentage has it decreased?

Mr McQuillan: Last year, the initial budget was £89 million. This year, it is £68 million. We have been told that there is no more money.

Mr McNulty: That is a significant drop. How has that impacted on morale in the industry? Obviously, you are at the precipice of having to let 500 people go. You are not taking on apprentices. In the Department, morale among DFI Roads staff is at rock bottom. They know the state of the roads and want to go out and fix them. They feel as though they want to jump ship because they see no future in the service. There is an ageing workforce, so there is also natural attrition, and the Department is not bringing new blood in. If all that is not checked, it will create a perfect storm for an even bigger crisis. There has been a doubling of claims. Have traffic levels decreased in sync with the deteriorating budget, or am I missing something here?

Mr Best: Well, I use the train to get to every meeting that I come to in Belfast because I cannot be bothered to sit in the car park that is the M1, so I would suggest that traffic volumes have gone up. You used the correct term: it is a perfect storm. From talking to the other guys on the panel about the conversations that they have locally, I can say that the morale of DFI staff at the coalface has never been lower.

Mr McNulty: I have experienced meeting them and speaking to them regularly about the state of the roads, which is a big bugbear for people.

Mr Chambers: On that point, I do not know the numbers of DFI staff, but there are so many people who are employed by DFI who will not have a whole lot to do for six months of the year. That is a total waste of money, paying salaries while nothing is being done.

Mr McNulty: That is crazy.

Mr Best: That emphasises the need for the new road maintenance strategy and the restructuring of DFI's delivery and how it collaborates better with the industry.

Mr McNulty: It is sad that you men, sitting here, are talking about diverting money from the A5, which is a flagship Executive project that has been delayed, and about potentially diverting money from active travel schemes. It does not say a lot about this Administration that that is being discussed.

What is your understanding of how budget is allocated? Is it allocated by division or by need? I speak as a south Armagh man. I feel strongly that the roads there are the worst in the North. Driving round Crossmaglen square is like driving on the far side of the moon, and that is in the Minister's constituency. How are budgets allocated? Are they allocated by need or by division?

Mr Chambers: By division.

Mr McNulty: While the roads in south Armagh crumble into an even worse state because budget is not available, that budget is being allocated not by need but by division. That is —.

Mr Best: Again, Justin, we have been told that that will change with the introduction of the road maintenance strategy. You may be aware, as I am, that the Department has instigated a road condition survey — if that has not happened yet, it will happen in the next few days. When we spoke to representatives from the Department a couple of weeks ago, they said that that would start to happen in the next couple of weeks as part of the road maintenance strategy; that a baseline will be formed and that there will be prioritisation of where the maintenance — proper maintenance; not patching — needs to be.

Mr McNulty: What has to happen for your industry in the October monitoring round?

Mr McQuillan: What has to happen?

Mr McNulty: Yes.

Mr McQuillan: To sustain our businesses and get the roads to a reasonable standard, our industry could take £8 million to £9 million a month for the next six months on asphalt resurfacing alone. That is what would have to happen. I know that the structural maintenance budget gets divvied up in different ways, but we could take £8 million to £9 million on asphalt resurfacing — the preventative maintenance of the roads. We have to be realistic, but we need to see a reasonable amount come from the October monitoring round.

Mr Telford: The problem is that we have been lobbying since June or July. That is when we needed the money. The October monitoring round was not meant to happen, but will now happen.

Mr Best: It is an unofficial one, I am led to believe.

Mr Telford: If we get money in October, there will still be a delay in getting work on the ground. Then we will be into December, when there is an —

Mr Best: Embargo.

Mr Telford: — embargo on the road network. We cannot work on the road network in December. If we were to get the money in October, the best-case scenario is that we could do a bit of work in November. It would be the end of January and into February and March before we would see the real works hitting the ground. We are still in flux, because we do not have a lot to do in October, November and December, so we are having to think about what to do with our people. We are in that situation because a proper budget was not set down from day 1. We lobbied in June and July, because we realised that the £68 million would never keep us going; not even through the last quarter of this year. It is important that we quickly get word to the people who deliver works on the ground for DFI in order to get the works that are required to maintain the network and to get those people ready for us in October and November. That will be the case, if the money is available.

Mr Best: I will say, again, what I said in my introduction: you have heard about the impact on our businesses, but the priority is the safety of the road network and the travelling public.

Mr McNulty: Do you feel that your voices are going unheard in the Department, including by the Minister?

Mr Best: I was flabbergasted when we did not get anything in June. Following our presentation to the Committee in early July, we met the Minister. The fact that it took so long for the Minister to decide on rebalancing the DFI budget led to our holding out some hope that there was going to be a rethink and that she would, appropriately, change the split and give a more appropriate level to structural maintenance. That hope was misplaced.

Mr Chambers: I always say that words mean nothing; it is about action. The lack of action answers your question.

Mr McNulty: This is my last question. Gordon, you said that 50,000 tons to 60,000 tons of recycled material was offered for use on the A5 scheme and was refused.

Mr Best: It is not so much about that. I know that we do not have time, but we could hold a meeting on the debacle that was the A5 and lower carbon materials. The use of lower carbon fuels in the vehicles was not even on the horizon.

Mr McNulty: In the tender.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I am conscious of time; I am going to give Justin his last question. Gordon, if you want to submit something to the Committee on that, we would be more than happy to hear it.

Mr Best: A lot of these guys tendered for work and supplies —.

Mr McNulty: You are opening up a can of worms there, Gordon.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Justin, just one second.

Mr McNulty: You are opening up a can of worms there. Recycled materials were not included in the tender documents or the procurement exercise. That is —.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Justin, calm yourself, man. I will let you —.

Mr McNulty: I am not calm at all, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I will let you get to your last question. I am just thinking about the management of this session and the time that we have. Gordon and colleagues, we are more than happy to hear and take some evidence around that. If you want to write in, please do so. Justin, go ahead.

Mr McNulty: Obviously, the A5 has hit a major roadblock. Lives are at stake. We are hearing from industry that recycled materials and the climate change initiatives that were available in the industry were not included in the procurement exercise. Is that correct?

Mr Best: The one thing that I will say is that other projects were halted after the Climate Change Act to relook at the documents. The A5 was not. We had the potential to build the first carbon-neutral dual carriageway/motorway on this island if the proper procedures had been followed.

Mr McNulty: That is major.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thank you, Gordon. I am sure that Justin is going to write that down.

Mr Stewart: I will follow up on John's point, but carrying into what Gordon said about road safety, was there any discussion with the Minister about more flexibility in the interpretation of the active travel budget? To date, it has been interpreted quite widely. For example, street lights qualify because people might run past them; they are considered part of active travel. I argue that the overwhelming amount of cycling is done on roads, so it is an active travel thing. The amount of road running is going through the roof. Equestrian activity is also done on roads. If we are using street lights in active travel, can we not use active travel to repair potholes on roads that cyclists are on?

Mr McQuillan: That is the intention.

Mr Stewart: It is the intention; it is just not happening yet, which is unfortunate.

Mr McQuillan: There are active travel schemes that include the building of new footpaths and cycle lanes, but —.

Mr Stewart: No repairs to existing infrastructure.

Mr McQuillan: I believe that the resurfacing of a road on an active travel route can be considered as active travel money, which would back up the requirement to move that money to get it out on the ground quicker, when it is needed now.

Mr Stewart: I have not to date seen, via any questions that I have submitted, any examples of repairs where cycling, running and equestrian activity has taken place on main roads to prevent injury and to encourage active travel on them. I know that we could have a discussion about that, but, given how tight the purse strings are being pulled at the minute, flexibility is key. That is my humble opinion.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Gentlemen, thank you so much for coming in. That was illuminating in a whole range of ways. The Committee will now consider what you have told us. I have been scribbling away about what I intend to do with some of that. If you look at the stream later, you will, no doubt, see what the Committee is going to do with the evidence that you provided. Thank you for your time today, and I wish you all the best.