Agenda item

(Mr. D. Robinson, Good Relations Officer, attended in connection with the agenda item).

            The Chairperson welcomed Mr. P. Osborne (Researcher) and the Good Relations Officer to the meeting.

            The Good Relations Officer began by highlighting that, according to the Council’s 2020 Resilience Strategy, “Belfast’s resilience was weakened because, unlike other cities, it was not socially cohesive”.  He advised that the research was commissioned to seek to understand this further and seek ways to overcome what was termed in the research as the city’s “segregation handicap” which would help to play a key role in helping Belfast to meet its ambitious targets to tackle climate change.

            At this stage in proceedings Mr. P. Osborne thanked the Members for the opportunity to present the findings of the Segregation and the Environment; Breaking Down Barriers report which had identified strong links between a legacy of segregation and division in some parts of Belfast and the city’s future ability to respond to the challenges posed by climate change.  He commenced by providing an overview of the history of segregation in the city, which included information in respect of the following:

·        Development in the city;

·        Housing;

·        Education;

·        Impact of the Troubles;

·        Peace Barriers; and

·        The Design of the city.

            He advised that the Belfast Climate Commission had set a target for net zero city by 2050, 42% by 2020, 66% by 2025 and 80% by 2030, and referenced where emissions arose from and noted that, whilst the conflict was no longer an over-riding risk factor, the legacy of division continued to undermine urban resilience and social cohesion.

            He then referred to the various aspects of segregation within the city and provided a brief overview, citing the following examples:

·        The Westlink, which was a barrier to access for many to the Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH). The RVH car park accounted for 0.02% of the emission’s target;

·        The continued presence of peace barriers/peace walls in many communities across the city, reducing connectivity, mobility and increasing reliance on the car;

·        94% Belfast social housing still segregated;

·        65% (primary) and 38% (post-primary) pupils go to school by car;

·        130m miles was expended bussing children to schools; and

·        Duplication of emissions from public buildings, due to a legacy of duplicating services. 

            He also drew reference to the socio-economic linkages, including the location of the interfaces, hidden barriers, quality of life issues and the engagement of traditionally excluded groups and highlighted the four strategic priority areas that had been identified within the research, as follows:

·        Segregation Handicap;

·        Environmental Justice;

·        Security Architecture; and

·        Good Relations.

            The Good Relations Officer referred to the findings of the UK Climate Change Predictions (UKCP18), including flood maps and the details of multi-level impacts.  He stated that the poorest communities were those that continued to be most impacted by the segregation and division, those located in the closest proximity to peace barriers and in addition, according to the prediction maps, these areas would be those communities most impacted by climate change unless a concerted effort was made to dismantle segregation and division.  He outlined that the report emphasised that, if more was done to reduce the “segregation handicap”, it would have the added benefit of helping Belfast achieve its vision of creating a more sustainable and resilient city by 2050.  

            In conclusion Mr. Osborne referred to the following four strategic themes of the recommendations arising from the report:

·        Recognise and reduce the Segregation Handicap caused by duplication by reducing the carbon footprint of the city, adapting the effects of climate change and increasing biodiversity;

·        Identify where the Security Architecture still reflects the grimmest days of the conflict and work to remove or re-wild those locations;

·        Identify issues of injustice in communities where the most disadvantaged across all faith backgrounds have less access to or engagement with the environment, identify where communities are more vulnerable to the effects of climate change and seek Environmental Justice remedies; and

·        Acknowledge the role good relations plays in reducing division, encouraging an end to segregation and an increase in cohesion and resilience in the city, with impactful Good Relations projects on a theme of the environment, climate change, and biodiversity.

            It was noted that, whilst the Council did not have the powers of ownership over interfaces, it could provide leadership and support further gradual improvement through its good relations strategy and action plan, Peaceplus, and its other functions, particularly Community Planning.  This would require further engagement with other public agencies and the community and voluntary sectors. 

The Good Relations Officer highlighted that there were 19 recommendations within the research report. These were designed to be progressed as part of the current business and he noted that officers were seeking to embed the recommendations into existing strategies and plans.  

            Detailed discussion ensued regarding the barriers and walls that remained throughout the city.  It was noted that some progress had been made in removing, reducing, or re-imaging peace or interface barriers, however, all present agreed that the removal of the barriers remained a complex challenge.

            The Members discussed the flood risks, segregation in education, duplication in services, access to green space in which the success of the Forth Meadow Community Greenway and Access to the Hills Projects were noted.

            Several of the Members expressed a desire to be further involved in the implementation of the recommendations arising from the report.

            The Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, thanked the Good Relations Officer and Mr. Osborne for the informative presentation and they retired from the meeting. 

            The Committee noted the research and the presentation and that officers would report on the implementation of the recommendations through the Corporate Management Team for its initial consideration as to how it could be progressed and that an update report would be submitted to the relevant Committee in due course.