Mid and East Antrim Council backs Prince Andrew Way renaming despite legal advice

Mid and East Antrim Borough Council has agreed to press ahead with the renaming of Prince Andrew Way in Carrickfergus, despite legal advice.

A report to councillors indicated that the local authority does not currently have a street naming or renaming policy, and that the council’s legal team has advised a policy should be developed and approved before the renaming of Prince Andrew Way proceeds.

In November, the borough council agreed to drop the street name following an Alliance Party motion, after the former prince was stripped of his titles by His Majesty King Charles III amid controversy over Prince Andrew’s alleged links with convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — allegations which he has consistently denied.

Although the council does not have a formal street naming policy, the naming and numbering of new housing developments is described in the report as “common practice”.

The report explained that applicants are asked to provide three proposed names which should not “duplicate or give rise to confusion” with other names in the vicinity, before being presented to the council’s Environment and Economy Committee for consideration.

However, there is currently no process in place for renaming existing streets or developments.

It was recommended that council officers develop a policy to include the street naming process for new developments, as well as the renaming of existing streets, roads or developments, to allow the renaming of Prince Andrew Way to progress.

Knockagh DUP Councillor Peter Johnston said he had “a couple of issues” with the report from both a governance and legislative perspective.

“The report in its current form is proposing that this council develops a new policy and I think from a governance point of view — and I may be slightly pedantic — it would be for the council to decide to develop a policy rather than for the council to note that a policy is being drafted,” he said.

He also highlighted what he described as a contradiction in the report, noting that councils already have the legislative ability to name or rename streets.

“The report says that the ability for council to name or rename streets is one which is allowed in legislation,” he added.

“I would simply propose that this council proceeds with what was decided by the notice of motion to rename Prince Andrew Way, and that it is not required to proceed with the development of a policy for street renaming.”

Bannside Sinn Féin Councillor Ian Friary asked whether a new street naming policy would include the Irish language. He was advised by an officer that the policy was for “naming and renaming only”.

Cllr Friary said the policy should include the Irish language but was told that, as the council does not currently have an Irish language policy, it had not been included in the proposed naming and renaming policy.

Knockagh Alliance Councillor Aaron Skinner said:

“In the motion that we passed, we specifically suggested that we would cover residents’ costs, as this was a council-led renaming. I would be uneasy about us then bringing in a policy that contradicts what we had agreed to do in the motion.

“It is one street with a very particular set of circumstances where council decided to make a decision to do this. Now we are spending a lot of time developing a policy on how, when or if we might decide to rename roads or streets. That part has been done here.

“We have made a decision as a council to do this. I would not want to see that process unnecessarily slowed down.”

Cllr Skinner seconded Cllr Johnston’s proposal to proceed with the renaming.

An officer said that, in terms of timescale, the draft policy would not be “an overly lengthy process” and could be ready within two or three months.

Braid TUV Councillor Matthew Warwick said he believed the issue could “develop into something that is not as straightforward as the notice of motion before the council”.

He said he doubted the matter would be resolved within a couple of months, as other issues could become involved, and indicated the TUV’s support for the notice of motion.

“I think sorting out the policy first is over-egging the pudding. This could be done and then look at a policy,” he said.

Larne Lough Ulster Unionist Councillor Roy Beggs said: “It is right that there are policies in place, but as others have said, Prince Andrew Way has a particular and exceptional circumstance around it.

“I have never come across any other road with this particular issue before and therefore the risk associated with proceeding without a policy is very low.

“Why can we not proceed to rename Prince Andrew Way and, at the same time, have officers develop a policy should any other street require renaming in the future? Why can we not take a tandem approach?”

Interim chief executive Valerie Watts said councillors’ views were clear.

“I am getting the message loud and clear — which I did the evening this was put forward — that councillors wish us to proceed with the renaming of Prince Andrew Way as soon as possible, prior to the development of policy,” she said.

“Officers were simply trying to do things the right way. However, if councillors’ decision is to move forward with this ahead of policy agreement, we will take that away and carry out that instruction.”

Braid Sinn Féin Councillor Archie Rae asked about public consultation, and an officer confirmed that consultation would be one of the first steps undertaken to gauge views on a potential new name.

Cllr Johnston said his understanding was that consultation would take place with the intention of maintaining a royal theme for the street name, which he said was “the spirit of the notice of motion”.

Ms Watts reiterated that best practice would normally be to have a policy in place but said she would be guided by elected members.

Cllr Skinner suggested that initial engagement should take place with the Royal Household to seek its views on prospective names.

Ms Watts clarified that officers intended to contact the Royal Household first “to see if they have an opinion”, while reiterating that a naming policy would normally be expected.

Cllr Beggs reminded members that permission may be required for the council to use a royal title for a street name.

Cllr Rae said: “I think there should be some sort of policy for this. It may not come up that often, but you can’t name streets willy-nilly. If you have a policy in place, like everything else, you go by policy.”

Carrickfergus Castle Alliance Councillor Lauren Gray noted the town’s “strong royal links”, adding: “That would be our preferred option.”

She said there had already been some level of public engagement and that the “starting point should be to engage with the Royal Household to see what options are available”.

“That is what we had hoped would take place as the next step,” she added.

Ms Watts said the chamber appeared divided on the policy issue and suggested a vote might be required.

Cllr Friary again asked whether the policy would include the Irish language and was told: “Not at this stage. We don’t have a policy on the Irish language.”

He replied: “I think it should be included before Sinn Féin will vote on it.”

Cllr Johnston then confirmed that a proposal had been proposed and seconded.

He proposed that the council proceeds with the renaming of Prince Andrew Way, engages with the Royal Household, and does not proceed with drafting a street naming policy. The proposal was seconded by Cllr Skinner.

The proposal was put to the floor and agreed.