Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

On-shore sand processing site and suction-dredging barges at Toome Chris Scott

Investigation opened into NI tax scheme described as 'rehearsal' for cash for ash scandal

The ‘cash for ash’ scandal led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2017.

A MULTI-MILLION POUND scheme in Northern Ireland that gave tax relief to quarrying and sand dredging firms – granting up to 80% relief on the Aggregates Levy tax – has never been properly investigated, environmental campaigners have alleged.

The Aggregates Levy Credit Scheme (ALCS), which only operated in Northern Ireland, ran between 2004 and 2010.

After investigative news website The Detail raised a number of questions around the ALCS’s alleged failings with a Stormont government department, a fresh investigation was launched.

Representatives for the quarrying industry had argued that the Aggregates Levy tax, which all UK quarry operators are required to pay, encouraged a ‘black market’ in border areas and threatened the commercial viability of firms in Northern Ireland. The ALCS was subsequently introduced in April 2004.

However, the scheme has been described by Friends of the Earth’s Northern Ireland director, James Orr, as “a dress rehearsal for RHI” – the ‘cash for ash’ scandal which led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2017.

He and other campaigners allege that:

  • the scheme was mismanaged by the then-Department of the Environment (DoE), which in 2016 was subsumed into the Department of the Environment, Agriculture and Rural Affairs (DAERA),
  • sand extraction firms at Lough Neagh – Ireland’s largest inland water body – were awarded between £9.6 and £16.3m in tax credits, despite there being question marks over some of the companies’ planning and environmental consents,
  • a series of environmental improvements, which firms had to sign up to as part of the scheme, were not adequately monitored or enforced,
  • and a previous departmental probe into the scheme and an unpublished review exercise carried out by the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) were inadequate.

It is estimated that ALCS claims amounted to between £150m and £175m, although the overall cost of the scheme may be higher.

At least six companies involved in the extraction and processing of Lough Neagh sand received tax credits through ALCS.

The industrial-scale activity at Lough Neagh – one of Europe’s largest freshwater bodies and most important habitats – was unregulated until planning controls were introduced in early 2021.

Not all of the firms in receipt of ALCS tax relief held all of the consents stipulated by the scheme – which included planning permission, water discharge consents and consents for industrial facility emissions.

ALCS documents show that, for applicant firms, such consents were a “prerequisite” for entry to the scheme.

Files obtained under FOI legislation reveal that senior Stormont officials who administered ALCS had serious questions about a lack of formal consents for some sand extraction firms.

Dean Blackwood, a former DoE official, complained to the NIAO in 2014 about alleged breaches of the scheme and of environmental law.

He alleged that DoE sought to get around some Lough Neagh firms’ lack of planning consents by granting tax credits for comparatively minor on-site activity – even if the overall operation did not have planning permission.

P1003357 Dean Blackwood, ex-senior DoE planning official turned whistleblower, at Toome, by the shore of the lough Chris Scott Chris Scott

Blackwood said: “Only when it [the DoE] could not legitimately issue certificates because no permissions existed for the extraction did it seek a way around compliance with EU and planning legislation by looking to use on-shore sites as the basis for issuing ALCS certificates.

“In doing so it circumvented its lawful obligations under European directives and requirements to protect the public purse.”

A departmental probe that concluded in 2015 found that DoE officials had complied with the scheme. However, documents contained in the obtained ALCS files contradict a number of the review’s findings.

The NIAO’s report into unregulated Lough Neagh sand extraction, which included consideration of the tax relief granted to sand dredging firms through ALCS, reached an advanced stage – but was shelved in 2016, after a third draft of its report was presented to the department.

The NIAO cited developing legal proceedings as its reason for suspending the review at the time.

All of the scheme’s files held by DAERA were destroyed between December 2021 and August 2022.

IMG_8352 The Department of the Environment, Agriculture and Rural Affairs (DAERA) Tommy Greene Tommy Greene

Orr argues a lack of accountability over ALCS helped pave the way for the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) scheme’s controversies a number of years later, with ALCS acting as a “dress rehearsal” for the subsequent ‘cash for ash’ scandal.

“Like RHI, this scheme cost the taxpayer many millions of pounds,” he said.

“But the key difference is that, while RHI has cast a shadow on renewables – which we should be moving towards – this is something of a completely different scale.

“The ALCS scandal has not only brought the planning system into ridicule but has exposed a profound weakness in the regulation of the state’s finances. A question now begging to be asked: who will regulate the regulators?”

A spokesperson for DAERA said: “The Department is investigating the allegations.”

“We are not in a position to comment until that due diligence is complete.”

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Michael Creagh
    Favourite Michael Creagh
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 1:04 PM

    Sorry seems to be the hardest word goes the song,not in this kip though.

    80
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Oliver Walker
    Favourite Oliver Walker
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 1:57 PM

    I find it hard to believe that there are still people in Galway Council that were active in the 70s-late 90s. Anybody in an institution that was involved with the deaths and unlawful dumping of babies can apologise away. If they were not involved with this institution then the apologies are empty. Where are those guilty of these atrocities? Those that were there and turned a blind eye? Hiding away, letting others apologise…

    79
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Maurice O Neill
    Favourite Maurice O Neill
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 2:25 PM

    @Oliver Walker: I recently discovered that Politicians that are around since 1981 in Galway are still active today and include Mayors and Former TDS .

    54
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Oliver Walker
    Favourite Oliver Walker
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 7:18 PM

    @Aine Healy: What do you mean ‘do your research’?… Have you seen the report? Have you read the article? Babies remains were dumped in septic tanks…

    Big leap from that to abortion.

    14
    See 6 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Aine Healy
    Favourite Aine Healy
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 8:57 PM

    @Oliver Walker: please see my above reply in answer to your questions.
    So, did you vote yes to legalising abortion that is responsible for the deaths of 7000 “invisible and voiceless” pre born human beings it it’s first year alone? Yes?

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Helen Downey
    Favourite Helen Downey
    Report
    Jan 26th 2021, 9:51 AM

    @Aine Healy: hold up, if they weren’t ‘dumped’ in there how do you think they got there? Crawled in themselves and died?

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Aine Healy
    Favourite Aine Healy
    Report
    Jan 26th 2021, 11:14 AM

    @Helen Downey: you should also do your research Helen. No babies were “dumped” in a “septic tank” by “the nuns” or anyone else. Notwithstanding the official report ( which I suggest that you actually read), where in the article above, does it state that babies were “dumped” in a “septic tank”?
    It would appear that you are letting your ideological narrative get on the way of facts.
    How about you Helen? Did your vote yes to the legalization of abortion which is responsible for the deaths of over 7000 Irish babies in its first year alone, most of whom actually did end up in the sewage system unlike the “Tuam babies” who did not?

    2
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Helen Downey
    Favourite Helen Downey
    Report
    Jan 26th 2021, 12:54 PM

    @Aine Healy: I consider babies in a sewage system dumped. How else did they get there? You haven’t answered that I see.

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Aine Healy
    Favourite Aine Healy
    Report
    Jan 26th 2021, 2:31 PM

    @Helen Downey: you really should do your own homework rather than expecting others to do it for you. Why so lazy?
    Again, your “consideration” does not facts make, although I acknowledge your considered opinion that aborted babies (those who are not incinerated) who end up in the sewage system as being “dumped”.
    There is no written or oral documentation that evidences that babies or children who died in Tuam were “dumped” in a “septic tank” by “the nuns” or indeed that they were “killed” by “the nuns”.
    Overwhelming evidence, with detailed references, shows that coffins and shrouds were used for babies who died in the Tuam mother and baby home. The babies were placed in a crypt. Crypts are very common in Ireland. Catherine Corless herself, interviewed two carpenters families who spoke to her about how their relatives built coffins for the babies. Nor were there any pipes going to or out the structure making the claim that the remains were in a septic tank utterly ridiculous. Old maps show a cess poll ( which is different to a septic tank) within the area and Corless put two and two together, made five, of which pro abortion advocates and Catholic bigots were only to delighted to fly the flag for.
    All of the babies and children’s names, ages, places of birth and causes of death (tb, measles, flu, whooping cough amongst other illnesses) were recorded.
    It was in fact county council who reduced the size of the original graveyard in order to build an access road to houses that had been built on the site and also to provide a playground. They reinterred the remains of babies and children that they had dug up in the structure (known as an ossuary). “The nuns” were well gone according to the evidence that shows the structure and re interment to have occurred after 1960’s.
    Again, research on your part would have led you to the facts, but again it appears that you have little interest in the truth of the matter. How tragic is that?

    2
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Helen Downey
    Favourite Helen Downey
    Report
    Jan 27th 2021, 10:49 PM

    @Aine Healy: the remains were found in a septic tank. Disused or not it is a septic tank. Not a grave.

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joecantdance
    Favourite Joecantdance
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 1:28 PM

    Ah well, that’s ok then. No worries!

    59
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jim Buckley Barrett
    Favourite Jim Buckley Barrett
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 3:13 PM

    @Joecantdance: considering that the majority of the members of the council weren’t even born during the majority of the time this abuse was going on, what do you really expect them to do?

    40
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Willie Bill Bryan
    Favourite Willie Bill Bryan
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 2:29 PM

    Not good enough, want to hear from the county manager at the time and to hear what his reasoning behind his lack of knowledge empathy of the women , not from the present council offering a hollow apology

    47
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Gene Johnston
    Favourite Gene Johnston
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 3:27 PM

    They will be even more sorry when sued

    22
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jim Lingk
    Favourite Jim Lingk
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 3:44 PM

    No good. Not accepted. No point in this. Most of not all of this on the county council has nothing to do with it.

    13
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Trevor Matthews
    Favourite Trevor Matthews
    Report
    Jan 25th 2021, 7:10 PM

    Are their politicians and senior civil servants getting a state funded pension for the work they did years ago. Health Boards, social workers among others.

    8
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a commentcancel

 
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds