My statement is in regard to an issue that most of us in the Chamber, as elected representatives, have had to deal with at some time, namely road maintenance projects that require road closures. Some road closures will be for a short period and will only be in place during working hours, whereas others can involve longer-term 24/7 closures. Either can have a devastating impact on local businesses and cause inconvenience to local residents. They can have implications for public transport services and also have the potential to cause delays in the movement of emergency vehicles.

On 12 February, the Minister for Infrastructure announced that he was releasing £1 million of funding to tackle the growing scourge of potholes on our roads. That was to be divided equally between the four regional section offices. When further broken down into two or three council areas within a region, the final amount available may not have represented a huge amount for repairs, but it was, nonetheless, welcome.

Four days later, on 16 February, the Minister announced a major project of kerb replacement and resurfacing at the Groomsport roundabout, which is situated at the eastern end of the Bangor ring road. That single project was costed at £460,000. When a question for written answer was submitted to enquire how many representations by elected representatives or members of the public had been made for that work to be prioritised, the Department responded that it does not retain records of such requests. My suspicion is that there were no such requests to record.

That project was scheduled to last for six weeks. It was said that lane closures would be needed and that road closures would be required when resurfacing was being carried out. There was an undertaking that notice of the road closures would be published nearer the time. The busy Groomsport Road into Bangor was closed for a full week during working hours, and the Bangor Road into Groomsport was also closed for a full week, all before any resurfacing work had commenced. Neither of those closures was advertised. Translink services through Groomsport had to be diverted, with residents left standing at bus stops waiting for public transport that was not going to appear.

Some of the signage was misleading and, at one location, presented a major road safety hazard. Any common-sense representations made to the contractors fell on deaf ears. I appreciate that the Department has a legal responsibility to ensure the safety of the site workers, but it also has a responsibility to convey to the public and local residents in a timely and professional manner its intention to close roads and to use bespoke signage that is more informative and relevant to the local situation. Ironically, another major road closure is in place at that location this morning. Again, that was unannounced. Regrettably, it seems that lessons are never learned.