Mid Ulster street works: why an official 58% unsatisfactory figure demands an explanation

A figure buried in a Department for Infrastructure council report raises an unusually sharp question about the condition of roads after utility works in Mid Ulster. For 2024/25, the department's published network-maintenance table lists 5,205 street-works notifications, 2,949 subject to inspection and 58% of those inspected as unsatisfactory. On its face, that is an extraordinarily high reported failure proportion. It is not, however, a sound basis for asserting that most utility companies in the district are leaving roads dangerous: the underlying inspection mix and the accuracy of the published entry first need to be established.

PureCar compared the Mid Ulster entry with the department's own previous-year report and corresponding published figures for other Northern Ireland council areas. The difference is substantial enough to merit a public explanation, particularly because utility companies are required to restore road openings to specified standards.

What the Mid Ulster report actually says

The 2024/25 council page puts three values on a single line: 5,205 notifications; 2,949 subject to inspection; 58% unsatisfactory. The wording does not say whether each notified job appears once, whether repeat inspections are included or how findings are distributed between safety at an active worksite and the condition of a completed reinstatement. It does not name the undertakers involved, list individual failed sites or show a breakdown by defect type.

That distinction is central. A notification is not necessarily a completed excavation, and an inspection outcome is not necessarily a unique stretch of permanently defective carriageway. Even if the 58% is correct, the published table alone cannot establish the number of dangerous defects remaining on the network, which firms were responsible or how quickly identified issues were remedied.

The comparison that makes this an investigation

The department's Mid Ulster report for 2023/24 listed 5,020 notifications, 2,958 subject to inspection and 31.25% unsatisfactory. The following year's stated rate is therefore 26.75 percentage points higher. It is not legitimate to multiply those two rates together or describe the change as a precise increase in defective road openings without ensuring that the underlying measures and inspection practices were unchanged. But the year-on-year difference is large, not a rounding curiosity.

The 2024/25 DfI report for Fermanagh and Omagh records 976 notifications, 651 subject to inspection and 13.2% unsatisfactory. Derry City and Strabane's equivalent entry records 4,776 notifications, 1,535 inspected and 2.31% unsatisfactory. The districts are not interchangeable: contractors, work types, sample selection, road conditions and inspection procedures could vary. Nevertheless, the numbers make it impossible to dismiss the Mid Ulster entry as an ordinary regional average.

Another official table appears difficult to reconcile

DfI also publishes Northern Ireland-wide inspection results by utility company and by statutory sample category. Its 2024/25 table reports, for example, 92.1% of Fibrus category-B inspections passed and 97.8% of NI Water category-B inspections passed. Category B concerns reinstated road openings within six months of completion. Category A concerns signing, lighting and guarding while work is in progress; category C looks near the end of the normal warranty period.

Those national pass percentages are not a direct check on the Mid Ulster figure. The denominator, the mix of inspection stages, geography and potentially the treatment of repeat visits differ. Yet they show why a simple reading of the council table as evidence of widespread failed reinstatements would be premature. The tables require reconciliation, not a sensational accusation against named firms.

Who is supposed to put the road back?

The Department for Infrastructure says the street-works undertaker — commonly a water, electricity, gas or communications company — is responsible for completing a reinstatement to the specified standard. The department coordinates and inspects works, and can take enforcement action under street-works legislation. A normal reinstatement warranty period is two years. An information board at a worksite should identify the undertaker and provide a contact number.

This matters to motorists because a trench across a carriageway can look acceptable on the day it is filled yet settle, crack or deteriorate later. Equally, a temporary worksite can fail a safety inspection even where the finished surface proves sound. The reported 'unsatisfactory' rate does not tell the public which of those situations, if either, dominated the Mid Ulster data.

Five questions the department should answer

First, is the published 58% entry accurate, or has a transcription or classification error occurred? Second, are the Mid Ulster and other district figures calculated using an identical inspection definition? Third, how many unique sites failed, rather than how many inspection events were judged unsatisfactory? Fourth, what proportion involved temporary traffic management, reinstatement quality or documentation? Fifth, what proportion were corrected within the relevant time limits?

Answers would determine whether the publication reveals a genuine local performance problem, a difference in monitoring methods or an error needing correction. At the time of preparing this report, PureCar has not independently obtained the underlying case-level inspection dataset or a departmental clarification, so none of those explanations can fairly be presented as established fact.

What drivers can do when a reinstated road is poor

If a road opening appears to have collapsed, developed a dangerous edge or left a hazardous surface, record the exact location and describe the issue to the responsible utility using the site's information board where possible. DfI advises motorists to contact the local Roads Section Office when a complaint is unresolved or no suitable contact information is displayed. Do not stop in a dangerous place to take photographs.

The public-interest question is not whether 58% makes a dramatic headline; it is why an official council table and the wider regulatory picture appear so far apart. Northern Ireland's road users deserve a figure they can understand, an explanation of what was inspected and clear evidence of whether defects were put right.

Sources and method

PureCar compared DfI's published Mid Ulster council maintenance reports for 2023/24 and 2024/25 with contemporary Fermanagh and Omagh and Derry City and Strabane council pages and DfI's statutory sample-inspection overview. These are published administrative reports, not a verified dataset of individual inspections. No site visits, interviews or departmental responses are claimed.