Northern Ireland Assembly, 16 June 2026

611 contributions from 61 members. The official report.

Members' Statements

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Today in the Dáil, Sinn Féin will introduce a private Member's Bill that will require an Taoiseach to get planning and preparation for constitutional change and Irish unity under way. There is already an exciting and energetic debate under way across all four corners of the island about what a new Ireland would look like. I welcome Fine Gael's announcement that it will put forward a blueprint on Irish unity in November. Like never before, people are engaging and are genuinely interested in what constitutional change would look like for them. We have been clear: the Irish Government should step up and begin proper planning and preparation. The election of a first-ever nationalist and republican First Minister in the North and the recent election of pro-independence First Ministers in the North, Scotland and Wales have shown that people are fed up with savage Westminster policies. People want to look to a future in which decisions are made at home and in the best interests of the people who live here.

The legislation that will be introduced by uachtaráin Sinn Féin

[Translation: Sinn Féin president]

Mary Lou McDonald today provides for the Taoiseach to publish a government Green Paper to set out their ideas and vision for a united Ireland. It will also provide for the establishment of a citizens' assembly to help to shape and inform the debate. Importantly, that will involve people from across the island and from all sections of our community, including those from unionist and Protestant traditions. Preparation and planning are vital. The Bill will provide the Irish Government with the opportunity to start planning and preparing for Irish unity.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Last week, the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) published its report following an unannounced inspection of emergency general surgery pathways at the South West Acute Hospital (SWAH). While the report outlines a number of positive developments, it is vital that the findings and the figures are fully scrutinised and not simply accepted at face value.

Of particular concern are the issues highlighted regarding patient transfers from SWAH to Altnagelvin. Those concerns are not new.

For some time, I have been raising serious questions about patient transport arrangements and the impact that lengthy journeys and delays can have on patients. Constituents and healthcare staff have consistently voiced their concerns about the challenges associated with transfers between the hospital sites, and those concerns cannot be overlooked when assessing the overall effectiveness of the current emergency general surgery model.

The people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone were promised an awful lot when the service and the pathways were changed. We were promised that new roads would be built and that ambulance transfers would be in place. It is clear from the RQIA report that those things have not happened in tandem with the change of that service. We still have a pause — a temporary cessation — of emergency general surgery in Fermanagh, and, when you look at the fact that ambulance transfers are having a serious knock-on impact on the service, you see that that is having a detrimental impact. One aspect of the report that stood out for me was the fact that the Department of Health has not provided or commissioned any additional resource to alleviate the pressures experienced by the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service in supporting the changes to emergency general surgery at the SWAH that are increasing the transfers in the system.

This has been going on for too long. For four years, we have been in this situation, yet the Health Minister has failed to take the necessary action; instead, the trust has been forced to rely on private ambulance provision that comes at a cost to the Department and, essentially, to us as ratepayers and taxpayers. Therefore, it is important that the Minister steps in and acts. I thank the health staff who have been doing their utmost to ensure patient safety. I will try to meet the Health Minister, the RQIA and the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service on this, but it is time for action and to stop treating the people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— as citizens who do not —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Kate Nicholl.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— need respect.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

A few days ago, the world's first trillionaire, Elon Musk — a man with no mandate; an immigrant with wealth twice the GDP of the country that he came from — commented on a photo of the first citizen of Belfast and described her as a "Betrayer of her people". As a former Lord Mayor, I was not only shocked that someone who bought that social media platform to spread his ideological views would comment on the first citizen of Belfast but surprised that there was not more commentary on it. I feel strongly that Elon Musk has no real idea of what people across the world are going through, let alone those in Belfast.

That comment spoke to something more sinister that is going on in our society. In the news, there have been comments about how proxies have attacked the Prime Minister. The other day, Suzanne Breen wrote a powerful article about the abuse that she has received as a journalist, and what struck me when she posted that on social media were the comments from other women and other people who said that they had been receiving the same sort of abuse. Looking around the Chamber, I am sure that everyone here has received similar. There has been a noticeable change in the comments that we get in response to what we put on social media. We all have thick skin, and we have all been around for long enough to deal with the cut and thrust of politics, as it is often described here, but there has been a shift and a change. I had never had to report the comments that I received to the police, but I had to do that last week. Awful things that brought in families were said. The comments were violent and at a different level from anything that I have seen before.

We are in a difficult place right now. This destabilises our democracy. It is easy to believe lies when you are angry, and I am not sure what we do about it. I know that there is discussion about how new laws on cybersecurity need to be brought in, and I know that we need to address more of that. I am concerned about the bad actors at play, the misinformation and the inflaming of situations that are coming and about the fact that that is happening across society. We have to inform ourselves and challenge it when we see it and, when we engage — this might not sound like a theoretical thing to do — to do so with kindness and empathy, because we live in a dark time, and it is important that we bring that into our politics. Solidarity to everyone who is going through this right now but especially to the first citizen of Belfast, who should not have been subjected to that.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Recently, I had the privilege of taking a walk down memory lane when Kilmaine Primary School in Bangor hosted an impressive exhibition to celebrate 50 years of delivering a top-class and caring primary education to thousands of children. My five children attended the school — it is just round the corner from my home — and 11 of my grandchildren have been educated at Kilmaine Primary School. The school motto is, "Everyone Counts". That is an ethos that the school lives up to. It is a happy school, and the joy of the staff and children is evident when you step in through the front door.

Kilmaine opened in September 1975 with 109 pupils and five members of teaching staff. The school grew rapidly alongside the surrounding housing developments, and, in the 1980s, it reached more than 700 pupils and, during the 1990s, over 1,000. The founding principal was Mr Raymond Boyd, who led the school until 2001. He was loved by the children and respected in equal measure by the parents. The school added a nursery unit in October 2000, providing preschool education for 52 part-time pupils.

The late Mr John Mann succeeded Mr Boyd as principal and oversaw one of the most significant developments in the school's history when the move was made into a purpose-built new building in 2005. Prior to that, education had been conducted in 46 temporary mobile classrooms. The new facilities marked a major milestone for pupils and staff, providing modern classrooms and resources to support learning. Since then, the school has continued to build a reputation for academic achievement, sporting success and a strong programme of music, drama and pastoral care. Two members of the Northern Ireland senior women and men's football teams — the much-capped Ashley Hutton and Josh Magennis — attended Kilmaine.

Mr William Campbell served as principal from 2014 to 2019. The current principal is Mrs Rachael Sinnamon, who is not only a former teacher in Kilmaine; she attended that wonderful school as a pupil.

I wish the school another 50 years of success and excellence in delivering first-class primary education to generations to come. I record my warmest gratitude for what the current and past staff have contributed to children's education and development over the past 50 years in Kilmaine Primary School.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Today, I recognise and celebrate the 90th anniversary of the Camlough Brass and Reed Band. Ninety years is a remarkable achievement for any organisation. It is a testament to the dedication, commitment and passion of the generations of members, volunteers, families and supporters who have kept the proud tradition alive since 1936.

Over the past nine decades, the Camlough Brass and Reed Band, which was originally named the Camlough Foresters' Band, has been far more than a musical group. It has been an integral part of community life across County Armagh and beyond, bringing people together, developing young talent and raising hundreds of thousands of pounds for charities. Over the years, the band has been conducted by the great Billy Carroll, Eamon McNulty, Paxy Haughey, Seamus Mulligan, Adrian Benson, Philip Hughes and Tom McCabe. As is the case with many other community bands, thousands of voluntary hours go unseen each year into making the music that we have grown up to enjoy and appreciate. For that, we are incredibly grateful.

What makes Camlough brass band even more special is its cross-community ethos. In a place where we continue to build understanding and respect across traditions, the band stands as a wonderful testament to how music is one of the internationally understood languages that unites people, creates friendships and strengthens communities.

As we celebrate that milestone, we recognise not only the band's proud history but its exciting future. Whether I am singing along with the famous Kathleen and Andrew Moore and our former SDLP councillor John Feehan or tapping my feet to lifelong band members Billy McKevitt and Brian Keenan, the continued enthusiasm and talent of the musical team gives me every confidence that Camlough Brass and Reed Band will flourish many more years to come: for the next 90 years and beyond.

Camlough Brass and Reed Band's members always play with joy in their heart, and the band brings joy to the heart of everybody who hears it play and sing. I offer a hearty comhghairdeas

[Translation: congratulations]

and thank-you to all current and past members for that wonderful achievement, and I wish the band all the very best for the future.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Is scannalach go deo an foréigean ciníoch a chonaic muid le seachtain anuas. Tá ionsaithe ar theaghlaigh, ar thithe agus ar ghnólachtaí doleithscéil, agus tá siad dochosanta. Níor cheart eagla a mbáis a bheith ar dhaoine neamhurchóideacha mar gheall ar a gcine, a gcúlra ná a gcreideamh.

Is ar an neamhord phoiblí a díríodh an chuid is mó den aird, agus is ceart gur díríodh, ach caithfimid a aithint fosta go ndeachaidh an t-achrann i gcion ar pháistí ó phobail mionlaigh eitneacha. D’amharc cuid mhór daoine óga ar a raibh ag tarlú ar líne agus ina bpobail féin agus a sáith imní orthu. Tá eagla ar chuid acu taisteal, tá eagla orthu gabháil ar scoil, agus tá eagla orthu go ndéanfar ionsaí orthu mar gheall ar a n-aicme. Agus iad ag ullmhú le haghaidh scrúduithe GCSE agus ard-leibhéil, féadann an imní agus an éiginnteacht sin drochthionchar a imirt ar a n-oideachas agus ar a bhfolláine. Níor cheart rogha a bheith le déanamh ag dalta ar bith idir bheith ar a shuaimhneas nó gabháil ar scoil, níor cheart eagla a bheith ar thuismitheoirí a bpáistí a chur ar scoil ar maidin. Tá ról tábhachtach le himirt ag scoileanna, ag múinteoirí agus ag foirne cúnta le cuidiú leis na páistí ar bhain na heachtraí deireanacha dóibh, ach ní mór na hacmhainní agus an chomhairle chuí a bheith acu le sin a dhéanamh.

Ná téimis ar chúl scéithe leis: níl aon áit ag an chiníochas inár sochaí. Tá sé de cheart ag gach páiste, beag beann ar a aicme, a mhothú féin go bhfuil sé sábháilte, go bhfuil sé faoi mheas agus go bhfuil fáilte roimhe ina scoil agus ina shochaí.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

The week before last, I was honoured to join hundreds of members of the lower north Belfast community as we came together to remember on its 50th anniversary the Times Bar bombing, which took place on 5 June 1976. The commemoration marked 50 years since a terrorist attack tore the heart out of the lower north Belfast community. The Times Bar, which is located at the junction of York Road and Mountcollyer Road, was, and still is, a part of everyday life in north Belfast. It was a familiar meeting place where local people gathered for companionship and conversation during our darkest days.

On that June evening, republican terrorism brought devastation to that ordinary setting. Edward McMurray, aged 41, and Robert Groves, aged 45, were murdered in cold blood. Their only crime was to be ordinary members of our community out enjoying an evening with friends. Others were injured, and many more continue to carry the scars of that night. For the McMurray and Groves families, the effects of that bombing did not end when the debris was cleared. The pain, grief and loss that they experienced continues to have an impact on them.

I place on record my sincere thanks to the York Road Historical Society for organising such a dignified event. In particular, I pay tribute to Jim Bolland and Brian Boyd, the current owner of the Times Bar, for the immense amount of work that they undertook. I also acknowledge the many organisations and individuals who supported the event. Most importantly, I thank the McMurray and Groves families, who were represented on the evening. Despite 50 years of pain and loss, they have continued to honour the memory of their loved ones with dignity and grace.

I am particularly grateful to them for allowing us to open a new memorial to Edward and Robert. As part of the commemoration, a new mural was unveiled, providing a lasting tribute from our community to those who were murdered in cold blood.

Fifty years on, we remember those men with honour and pride, their lives taken by republican terrorists just because they were Protestants. Edward McMurray and Robert Groves will continue to be remembered proudly by the North Belfast community. Today and every day, we remember their families and loved ones.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Yesterday was an important day. Supported by the United Nations, it was a day focused on promoting the dignity, rights, empowerment and independence of older people in all our communities. For World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, I will speak to the fact that, with our rapidly ageing population, we require a renewed focus across all Departments. Elder abuse remains under-recognised, under-diagnosed, under-reported and, therefore, overlooked.

Elder abuse can take several forms, including physical, psychological, emotional and financial abuse, as well as neglect. Devastatingly, it often occurs because older people lack visibility, protection, care and community-based supports alongside access to services. Only concerted and coordinated action can create a society for all ages.

The Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill will provide an opportunity to introduce targeted protections from offences motivated by a person's vulnerability. We will scrutinise the need for enhanced protections that recognise the variants of stereotyping, prejudice, intersectionality and discrimination. The Department of Health's Adult Protection Bill will also be important to the creation of a comprehensive legal framework for safeguarding adults at risk of harm that will enable those responsible for abuse or neglect to be held accountable. Through the Criminal Law (Adult Safeguarding) Bill 2026, our colleagues in the South of Ireland are progressing similar provisions to protect at-risk adults whose ability to guard themselves against violence, exploitation or abuse by another person is significantly impaired.

The Minister for Communities should respond to the recent research by Siobhan Casey, the Older People's Commissioner, who calls for legislation to prohibit no-fault evictions in order to protect a growing body of vulnerable, older private renters. I ask all Ministers in their respective Departments to continue to advocate, educate, raise awareness and enhance available protections for older people.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I recognise the outstanding success of the Royal Landing celebrations held in Carrickfergus on Saturday. Once again, thousands of people lined the streets of our historic town to witness what can only be described as a spectacular re-enactment of one of the most important moments in Ulster's history: the landing of King William III at Carrickfergus on 14 June 1690. For one weekend, history was truly brought to life. Families, visitors, local residents and tourists were immersed in the history of a defining chapter of our heritage and culture. The sights, sounds and atmosphere allowed us not only to celebrate our past but to provide a really important educational experience for a new generation. The Royal Landing has become much more than an event. It showcases everything that is best about Carrickfergus and beyond, from the magnificent historical re-enactment to the participation of over 40 marching bands, Orange lodges, children's entertainers, pipers, Highland dancers, Lambeg drummers, community groups, living history performers, volunteers and many more.

The weekend demonstrated the vibrancy and cultural richness of our communities, and I pay tribute to everybody who was involved in such a successful event. What makes it so special, however, is its uniqueness. There is nothing quite like it. It is an authentic cultural experience rooted in the history of Carrickfergus. I was privileged on the day to speak to so many people from Australia, Canada, Wexford, Liverpool and beyond. That is why, in recent months, so many people have been disappointed to hear such cultural events and programmes associated with our important heritage and culture being classed as "vanity projects" by Sinn Féin. Such remarks fail to recognise the immense value that the events bring to our communities.

They overlook the volunteer time, the hours that are taken to preserve our history, the young people who spend their evenings participating in bands and cultural organisations and the thousands who attend with pride and enthusiasm. The scenes witnessed in Carrickfergus at the weekend provide the strongest possible response to those comments. The crowds speak for themselves; the success speaks for itself; and the community pride speaks for itself. It is far from being a vanity project; it is a celebration of important history, cultural tourism, education and community spirit, and we cannot wait to see it grow further.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Two weeks ago, I attended a special memorial service in Castlederg to mark the 38th anniversary of the brutal murder of Lance Corporal Michael Darcy on 4 June 1988 by the IRA, the bedfellows of Sinn Féin. While the IRA, which was responsible for decades of murder, violence, intimidation and human rights violations, claimed responsibility for the murder, there is one thing that it could never claim: justification. There was no justification for the murder of Michael Darcy. Michael Darcy, who was only 28 years old, lived with and cared for his elderly mother. He was her main carer. The only reason that he, like so many others in Castlederg, was murdered was that he was a Protestant and a unionist and upheld law and order. His murder was an attack not only on him but on the rule of law, on the right to life and on every citizen in the unionist community in Castlederg.

Earlier on the evening of 4 June 1988, Michael, a founding member of Castlederg Young Loyalists Flute Band, had attended a band parade in my village of Drumquin and then went on to Beragh. On his return home that night, as he drove his car into his backyard, a gunman stepped out from behind the trees and pumped six bullets into his back. Michael died instantly. Michael's mother — an elderly woman who depended on her only son as her main carer — was waiting for him to come home. When she heard the gunfire, she knew that something was seriously wrong. She was an elderly woman left without her only son and left without her main carer. The gruesome reality is that, were she alive today and were she to meet the so-called First Minister for all and ask her why her son was murdered, we know what the answer would be: "Mrs Darcy, there was no alternative". Of course, there is always an alternative to murder. There always was and always is an alternative to murder.

Today, we honour the memory of Michael Darcy, one of Ulster's sons. We remember the entire community of Castlederg, who suffered the loss not only of Michael but of 28 other gallant men and women who stood to uphold law and order throughout our communities and lost their life as a result.

Ministerial Statements

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Very well timed, First Minister.

I have received notice from the First Minister and deputy First Minister that they wish to make a statement. Before I call the First Minister, I remind Members that questions must be about the statement and nothing else.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

In compliance with section 52C of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the fifteenth institutional meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) and the thirty-first plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, both of which were held at the NSMC joint secretariat office in Armagh on 8 May 2026. The deputy First Minister and I have agreed that I will provide the report and that we are making the statement on behalf of all Executive Ministers who attended.

I will begin with the institutional meeting. The deputy First Minister and I represented the Executive, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Helen McEntee TD, represented the Irish Government. Minister McEntee chaired the institutional meeting.

The NSMC discussed matters relating to the North/South implementation bodies and noted that the freedom of information code of practice is in the final stages of review and will be brought to a future NSMC meeting for approval. Ministers noted that a process is now under way to collectively review the grading of the CEO posts of the NSMC bodies.

The Council had a discussion on the developments in the wider policy environment. It noted the far-reaching global geopolitical developments that had taken place since the last meeting and discussed the current situation. The Council noted the economic impact in both jurisdictions of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East in particular. Ministers noted the pivotal role that Ireland will play in the EU from 1 July as president of the Council of the European Union. Ministers also noted the progress being made in key areas under the strategic partnership between the UK and the EU and the fact that cooperation between both jurisdictions will continue in the context of the evolving nature of those relations. The meeting closed with the NSMC agreeing to meet again in institutional format in late 2026.

Following the institutional meeting, the thirty-first plenary meeting of the NSMC took place. The deputy First Minister and I led the Executive delegation, and the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, led the Irish Government delegation. The deputy First Minister and I chaired the meeting.

In the opening remarks, the Council discussed the current global situation, including the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East and their impact on the island. The Council welcomed the ongoing work being undertaken to address the legacy of mother-and-baby institutions, including progress on benefit disregards that will ensure that related payments do not affect an individual’s entitlement to benefits, regardless of where on these islands they currently live. The NSMC also noted the continued commitment to improving access to records and the fact that officials will continue to engage on that important work.

The next item on the agenda related to business and trade matters. The Council had an exchange of views on international and domestic business and trade developments, including developments on US tariffs, recent steel safeguard announcements and current trade impacts arising from the conflict in the Middle East. Ministers agreed that, in what remains an evolving international trading environment, the two Administrations will remain engaged with each other on business and trade matters. The Council also recalled that, where appropriate, the NSMC sectors should continue to consider how agreed collaborative approaches can contribute to the promotion of economic growth. Ministers noted that the most recent combined figures for trade in goods and services between the two jurisdictions showed a total value of £14·5 billion or €17·2 billion in 2024.

We moved on to have a constructive discussion on ending violence against women and girls, acknowledging the unacceptably high levels of gender-based violence and violence against women and girls in both jurisdictions. The Council agreed that there is a need for a whole-of-society response to address that. Ministers also agreed that sport provides an appropriate avenue to explore joint working on prevention-focused interventions. Ministers also agreed to explore the potential for further collaboration on initiatives with a protection focus, including child protection in the context of gender-based violence. The Council recognised that human trafficking for sexual exploitation is a really significant issue in both jurisdictions that also has a cross-border dimension. It agreed that officials will continue to examine opportunities for co-operation in that area. Ministers welcomed a shared learning event that took place in Drogheda in March of this year that showcased the experience of rolling out Operation Encompass in the North.

The next topic of discussion was on infrastructure and investment cooperation. We noted the decision of the Department for Infrastructure to appeal the judgement against the A5 western transport corridor and the fact that the appeal is due to be held on 25 and 26 June. The Council noted the ongoing work by Waterways Ireland on the Ulster canal restoration project and welcomed the continued progress that has been made on the Narrow Water bridge main construction project. Ministers welcomed the continued collaboration to progress the recommendations of the all-island strategic rail review through the rail project prioritisation strategy developed by both Administrations and published in December. They also welcomed the signing on 7 May of the contract of almost €700 million for the Enterprise rail fleet, funded by the Government of Ireland, the Executive and the PEACE PLUS programme.

The Council noted the progress that has been made on the Ulster University Magee expansion project and that the outcome of the planning decision on the construction of a new teaching block is awaited. We welcomed the commencement of projects under the second call of the North/South research programme and the progress on delivery of collaborative research and innovation programmes under the Shared Island bioeconomy initiative; partnerships between the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) and DAERA; and the co-centre programme.

The Council welcomed the announcement by the Irish Government in November 2025 of a Shared Island greenway development fund of €2 million to support the further development of greenways in the border region. The Council also welcomed the November 2025 announcement by the Irish Government that the Minister for Transport will introduce a new public service obligation (PSO) air service between Dublin Airport and City of Derry Airport in 2026.

Ministers welcomed the progress on the implementation of the PEACE PLUS programme and noted that discussions on allocations to successor programmes are taking place and that the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) has commenced the development of a successor programme.

We then discussed emergency planning and preparedness. The NSMC welcomed the regular and ongoing collaboration between officials in both jurisdictions on civil contingencies, resilience and emergency preparedness.

The Council also welcomed the sustained engagement between the jurisdictions to enhance strategic cooperation in the area of resilience and preparedness.

Ministers welcomed the fourth all-island disaster risk reduction conference, which was held on 29 and 30 April in Dundalk, and supported further discussions between the two Administrations on optimising cooperation on emergency preparedness, management, recovery and resilience.

The NSMC welcomed the announcement in November 2025 of a €5·9 million allocation from the Shared Island Fund to strengthen cooperation between the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service and Ireland's National Directorate for Fire and Emergency Management. That coordinated investment will expand training facilities, invest in interoperable urban search and rescue training equipment and procure a flood containment module. The Council noted that the two services and their parent Departments are working to finalise the approach.

We also welcomed the announcement in November 2025 of more than €4 million in PEACE PLUS funding for two projects on cross-border collaboration on emergency management — Training Across Communities for Tactical Interoperability for Cross-Border Safety (TACTICS) and Resilient Neighbours — delivered by fire and emergency services and local authorities for both jurisdictions.

The NSMC noted that, despite the global disruption to the supply of oil and gas and consequent price increases, there are currently no issues around security of supply across either jurisdiction, and officials will continue to monitor the situation jointly and update Ministers as necessary.

The Council noted that, since the last NSMC meeting in October, Ministers have met in nine sectoral formats, and the joint secretariat continues to work with both Administrations to facilitate NSMC meetings across all sectors.

The Council noted that corporate governance matters have been considered in each of the North/South implementation body sectors, including business plans, budgets and annual reports and accounts. It was noted that the Council appointed a number of board members to the North/South bodies and that the joint secretariat hosted a board member conference in February 2026.

The NSMC was advised that Ministers at relevant sectoral meetings have discussed collaboration to address climate change and loss of biodiversity and how agreed collaborative approaches can contribute to the promotion of economic growth and disability issues.

Finally, Ministers agreed a future schedule of NSMC meetings to take place across the various sectors in plenary and institutional format.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

First Minister, you said that the NSMC discussed wider geopolitical developments. One geopolitical development particularly pertaining on a cross-border basis is the rise of the online right and racism. A week ago, we had race-based pogroms, or attempted pogroms, in this city. People are still homeless, and they are fearful of what the rest of the summer will bring. However, as yet, there has been no coherent response from the Executive Office, despite you and the deputy First Minister leading the Government jointly and having responsibility for community cohesion and race relations. Why has there been no coherent response? Why have you left it up to the community and voluntary sector to protect people? When will there be a coherent response on policing, community integration and keeping people safe for the rest of the summer?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, we are all deeply shocked and disturbed by what we saw on our streets last week, whether it was the horrific incident in north Belfast or, indeed, what happened afterwards. I agree that what we witnessed on our streets was reminiscent of the pogroms of previous decades. None of us wants to see that violence on our streets, and we all have a collective responsibility to be very strong in our political condemnation, standing firmly together as political parties and saying no to racism in our society.

Throughout last week, we had a response that was initially led by the PSNI. It dealt with the unrest on our streets and the incident on Monday night. The Executive met on two occasions last week. Equally, we had a number of cross-party statements to ensure that we all collectively condemned what had happened on our streets, and we have been actively working with all partner agencies. I have been to our hospitals with the deputy First Minister to meet our healthcare workers, and I have been on the ground in north Belfast to meet our community workers.

Just yesterday evening, we met our racial equality subgroup to discuss its concerns and what it is hearing directly from the communities, including identifying any gaps. We are absolutely determined to ensure that we plug those gaps. We have been looking for some time at the whole issue of community cohesion and what more we can do about it, because it will take all of us working together to ensure proper, good community cohesion across the board. We are looking at short-, medium- and longer-term interventions.

As I said, we met the racial equality subgroup yesterday to identify the gaps in communication, which was an issue that was raised with us. Protecting people is a policing responsibility, in the main, but we all have a role to play. That is why our Executive were working consistently throughout last week to respond to what was happening on our streets.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I welcome the First Minister's statement and the continued emphasis on real and practical North/South delivery, which is important. Will the First Minister provide an update on progress with the Narrow Water bridge? How will the Shared Island investment help to unlock tourism and economic potential in South Down?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Narrow Water bridge is one of the most exciting examples of all-island cooperation. I was pleased to discuss the project at the NSMC and to receive an update. As the Member suggested, the bridge will deliver real and tangible benefits; it will be a new landmark and a game changer for tourism in South Down and the wider Newry and Mourne community. It will further transform and enhance connectivity, which can only support the local tourism and hospitality sectors in particular.

The Department for Infrastructure has worked closely with the Irish Government since early 2022, and it chaired the Narrow Water bridge subcommittee group that has led to the implementation of the bridge plan that has allowed it to progress to this stage. I am pleased to say that significant progress is being made. I commend the work of Minister Kimmins and her counterpart in the South, who have worked with Louth County Council and the local council to ensure that the project comes to fruition. It will be only a short time until we will gladly be there for the official opening of the project. It has been a long time in the making, but it is finally getting to the delivery point.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. The Minister will know that two major road capital projects are on pause in my constituency: the A5 and the A4 Enniskillen bypass. Those two road projects are vital for connectivity in my area, but they are being hampered by the net zero climate change targets. First Minister, was there a discussion about the Irish Government's legislation that exempts major infrastructure projects from climate change legislation? What is the First Minister's view on similar legislation for Northern Ireland?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We are all absolutely committed to making sure that the A5 and the A4 are built. Those roads are a necessity. When we speak about the A5 in the House, we are often talking about it in the aftermath of a tragedy on that road. It is long beyond time that we get that road built.

The Executive are having the same challenges with infrastructure projects as other Governments across the world. We have actively discussed how we can remove any barriers that impede capital projects. If a capital project takes 15 years to be built after it is announced, the cost will be substantially different. We have to deal with all the issues that get in the way of our projects. However, there is no doubt in my mind that the Executive and all the political parties in the House are committed to ensuring that the A5, the A4 and other major capital projects are built. I have previously said clearly in the House that we have to look at the barriers and find ways to go around them.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. First Minister, what discussions, if any, have you had with the Irish Government about compensation from the institutions for the victims and survivors of the mother-and-baby homes? From working on the Bill, the Committee understands that the Irish Government have found it difficult to achieve that. We have worked tirelessly in Northern Ireland to see whether we can ensure that the institutions are made to pay for the horrible things that they did to people during that time. It would be useful to have that as an ongoing discussion.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I assure the Member that it is an ongoing discussion, because I concur with him: the institutions must pay. Unfortunately, as Members are aware, there has been a varying degree of response from the different institutions. Given that the Irish Government were ahead of us with their programme, their experience and learning should be applied to what we do. We should not try to recreate the wheel. If something works, we should pick it up; if something does not work, we should find an alternative way. It remains an ongoing conversation, as does our engagement with the various institutions about what they need to come forward with. I thank the Committee for its particular interest in that.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

First Minister, thank you for your statement this morning. Under business and trade matters, the statement reports that the council:

"had an exchange of views on international and domestic business and trade developments since the last Plenary meeting, including developments on US tariffs".

Can you expand on the issue of US tariffs? Those tariffs could have some very serious implications for the economies of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Given the global volatility right now, that remains a discussion at a lot of the sectoral meanings. We certainly had a good discussion about our economy and its potential, including its potential for growth. We also discussed the challenges, one of which is the uncertainty resulting from tariffs. Tariffs are now being used more frequently, meaning that there is less predictability for our economy, which creates trouble when we are planning for the future. That uncertainty is acutely felt right across our island. There is no doubt that the US is an important trade and investment partner for us. We want to continue to support opportunities for our businesses in the US market, but recent developments with tariffs and counter-tariffs mean that we can get caught in the middle. We have to continue to make the case for our economy here, and we will remain focused on the issue with the Irish Government as we move through the volatile times in which we are living.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

First Minister, you have spoken previously about the opportunities created as a result of our unique economic and trading position and about the increased potential that comes with all-island cooperation. Will you outline how the work of InterTradeIreland and Tourism Ireland is supporting further development of the all-island economy and ensuring that workers, families and businesses benefit from economic growth?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I referred to some figures in the statement. The recent combined figures for trade in goods and services between the jurisdictions showed a total value of £14·5 billion in 2024. That demonstrates that the continued growth of the all-island economy presents a major opportunity for our communities here and for many businesses across the North. The Member is therefore right to highlight the work that is being done to promote the all-island economy, such as the work of InterTradeIreland to maximise growth. The work that it does on driving cross-border collaboration, on supporting small to medium-sized enterprises and innovation, on facilitating trade and market access, on helping companies to access new markets and on sharing knowledge and leverage opportunities really strengthens the economy and is a key driver of economic growth.

Similarly, Tourism Ireland, as the body responsible for promoting the island as a leading global tourism destination, plays a critical role in supporting economic growth, job creation and balanced regional development. It helps promote economic growth through its support of sustainable benefits for SMEs and communities, of business events, of strategy and competitiveness, of productivity and of market diversification. All of that points to the fact that dual market access strengthens our competitiveness and creates opportunities for exporters and investors alike.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Minister, last month, you attended the signing of a contract for a £500 million investment in new, faster and more modern Enterprise trains in Grand Central station. The hourly service has led to a significant increase in passenger numbers using that service, with up to 200,000 passengers a month boosting the thriving all-island economy and footfall in Belfast city centre and beyond. Given the huge success of the Enterprise service, will you work with the Dublin Government to ensure that more rail projects benefit from Shared Island Fund investment?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was a good-news story to be in Grand Central station to welcome that development, because it is so huge and will be so significant for all-island connectivity. Ministers from across the island came to celebrate what was such a positive occasion. It is therefore vital that we continue to work together. As the Member said, it is a significant investment in monetary terms: £500 million. We will see additional trains, and there are hourly connections. That investment is making a positive and meaningful difference, and we want to replicate it right across the island. The statistics on the increased numbers of people travelling speak for themselves. They show that the better that we are connected across the island, the more beneficial that that will be for jobs and tourism equally. Minister Kimmins will continue to work with her counterpart in the South to deliver on the strategy, because rail represents a real opportunity to bolster our thriving all-island economy and to connect communities, as well as to decarbonise our transport network.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Mr Speaker, I apologise that I was not here for the start of the statement.

First Minister, very recently, Members attended the North/South Inter-Parliamentary Association (NSIPA) plenary in Dublin. It was a wonderful opportunity for us to hear about some of the really good projects that are coming forward through the PEACE PLUS programme. What role will the North/South Ministerial Council have in shaping the next round of funding with a view to our consideration of PEACE PLUS through the prism of full cultural and ethnic diversity as opposed to the binary green/orange of the past?

Further to that, following on from the leader of the Opposition's contribution, while it is great that so many agencies slotted into place over the past few days, what will you do about long-term emergency planning for when that situation arises again, so that people know where to go for help?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The potential successor to PEACE PLUS was discussed because, obviously, at the summit that was held between Dublin and London back in March, they agreed in principle to a new phase of the PEACE PLUS programme from 2028 onwards. We discussed that because it is important that we shape it right for the society in which we live in 2026. That will involve widening the scope, ensuring that we incorporate all our communities and ensuring that, when the new programme comes forward, it will be in line with our needs in 2028. We all have a bit of work to do to shape that. Certainly, we have had initial conversations with the SEUPB on what that might look like.

In particular, there needs to be a focus on rural communities, as there was in the previous programme. More can be done there as well. We now need to continue the work around how to translate an agreement in principle into a tangible programme going forward. We will continue to discuss that issue. The Department of Finance is continuing to work with its counterpart in Dublin to develop the future programme.

When it comes to longer-term intervention and what we need to do here, as I have said previously, we are looking at what we can do in the short term to deal with the crisis immediately, because some of the interventions that we put in place to deal with the aftermath of the Ballymena riots in 2025 were impactful and made a difference. We are actively looking at what else we can do in the here and now, working with all our partner agencies. We are also looking towards longer-term cohesion. Over recent months, our officials have done a lot of work on what that could look like in the medium and longer term. We will say more about that when we have a finalised programme.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. Minister, can you comment on the recent growth of the all-Ireland economy and on the role of North/South cooperation in supporting economic development and prosperity across the island?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I have said, tourism is very much an all-Ireland sector. Tourism Ireland does an excellent job in marketing the island internationally. Due to recent global events, we have, unfortunately, seen a dip in international tourism after many, many years of substantial growth. That is disappointing to see. However, it has been more than offset by a 15% increase in visitors from the 26 Counties coming north. That is an interesting factor. Again, a lot of those things are interconnected, and whether they are due to more connectivity across the island making it easier to travel, they are all really positive developments. We can see how the all-island economy is thriving and helping to compensate for a very difficult international situation.

Again, when it comes to tourism, its benefits are spread right across the island. They are not centralised in one area. There has been tourism growth in the Member's own backyard of Fermanagh, in particular. We have a lot of really exciting opportunities ahead of us. Whether it is the Fleadh Cheoil in Belfast or the Derry Halloween festival, a number of really huge events are happening across our island. Events such as those that we saw last week are so disheartening and saddening not only because of their impact on those who were targeted but because of the reputation and the world image of this place that they give us. I am sure that everyone in the House would concur that what we saw on our television screens last week does not reflect who we are as a people. We want to send that message very clearly.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. First Minister, you may have seen yesterday's 'Irish News' article by Angela McGowan, in which she said that, for too long, the North:

"has treated infrastructure as a cost to be managed rather than an investment in [the] future".

First Minister, it is great to hear you giving so much praise to the Department of the Taoiseach's Shared Island unit. Its vital capital investment has been essential to the delivery of cross-border roads and rail projects. When will we see some ambition from the North in delivering on and advancing the all-island strategic rail review so that, ultimately, we see trains pull into Portadown station having departed from Armagh?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, we have an ambitious piece of work on the all-island strategic rail review, and the 25-year plan sets out clearly where we need to target our investment to make a real difference. We have already made huge, practical strides forward, not least the eight additional hourly train services that we announced recently and the fact that that service has been availed of in such significant numbers. The investment of £500 million is tangible and concrete and shows our commitment to rail. The next step in delivering the objectives of the rail review is to develop joined-up governance arrangements. Then, we, as a collective Executive, will need to target capital investment at the infrastructure projects that we want to see delivered. I certainly want to see the fulfilment of the all-island strategic rail review.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

First Minister, it was great to see you and the deputy First Minister meeting hotel and hospitality businesses in my home county of Fermanagh recently. As always, I acknowledge the vital role that those businesses play in driving tourism, attracting visitors and, of course, supporting our local economy. Do you agree that our hospitality sector deserves a level playing field and that the British Government should align the VAT rate for hospitality in the North with that in the South?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was great to be in Fermanagh, where the deputy First Minister and I took the opportunity to engage with a range of hospitality businesses, even out on the lough. It was really heartening to see the positivity of those businesses, albeit that there are also big challenges, not least the fact that there is not a level playing field when it comes to VAT. We told the businesses that we had made the case directly to the British Government about creating a level playing field or at least giving us a pilot on VAT so that we can see what difference that would make.

We want businesses in Fermanagh to thrive. We do not want them just to survive; we want them to thrive. Individual businesses have their big plans. It does not make any sense that the local hospitality sector is at a disadvantage compared with their neighbours. We continue to make that case. It is not credible that you have a one business sitting on a 9% VAT rate and a neighbouring business sitting on 20%. That is a competitive disadvantage. At a time when just the cost of doing business is really challenging, we need to create a better and more level playing field for businesses. We will continue to make that case. We assure you that we will not miss an opportunity. The Department of Finance and the Finance Minister continue to raise that issue with the Treasury as well.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have received notice from the Minister for Communities that he wishes to make a statement.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to update Members on the progress of the affordable rent programme. I am pleased to announce that I have made an award of £61·5 million of financial transactions capital (FTC) loan funding to Maple and May. I can also now provide information on the locations where we will see the first affordable homes of this type delivered in Northern Ireland.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Dr Aiken] in the Chair)

Members will recall my previous announcement on this important initiative, when Maple and May was selected to act as the first affordable rent operator. I can now confirm that, since then, terms have been agreed and £61·5 million of FTC loan funding has been formally awarded to support delivery. That is a significant milestone and the next step towards those homes becoming available for rent. It means that we are moving from policy ambition to real, tangible delivery, providing the homes that people across Northern Ireland desperately need. In the coming weeks, the first scheme will be open for applications under the Maple and May affordable rent brand.

The programme represents a strong and innovative public-private partnership. An initial investment from my Department will act as a catalyst, leveraging substantial private capital alongside additional private revenue investment from Maple and May. Together, those bring the total value of the funding programme to more than £122 million over the 25-year loan term. Importantly, because it is loan funding, it allows me to continue to prioritise my capital budget towards grant funding for social housing, therefore maximising every available resource towards the delivery of new homes.

The homes delivered under the programme will be high-quality, new-build properties located across Northern Ireland. They will form part of mixed-tenure developments, as well as stand-alone schemes, helping to create balanced, sustainable communities where people can put down roots. Critically, the homes will be offered for rents at least 20% below local market levels. That is a meaningful saving for working households. Rents can be uplifted only once annually, in line with legislation on the private rented sector, with an effective cap in place. Homes will be targeted at lower-income households, and, alongside that affordability, tenants will benefit from greater security through longer tenancies in high-quality, well-maintained homes and access to support services when they need them.

I turn to delivery. The first scheme will be in Dungannon, where 15 two- and three-bedroom homes are being built alongside social housing. That will be the first mixed-tenure development of its kind in Northern Ireland. My goodness, even the Chairman of the Communities Committee is smiling; there is another moment for the history books. As this and other schemes near completion, they will be advertised by Maple and May for rent, and eligible households can apply for a tenancy. Those tenancies are deliberately targeted towards lower-income households to maximise impact. Further schemes will follow in this financial year in Newry, Craigavon and Lisburn, and additional locations are planned, including Belfast and Londonderry, as part of an expanded roll-out next year. The first homes, which will be on the Old Eglish Road in Dungannon, are expected to be available to rent from later this summer, and I can confirm that advertising for those properties will begin shortly via the Maple and May website.

The programme is about providing real options for people. It will give people and families access to more affordable rents, greater stability and a genuine opportunity to plan ahead, whether that is about saving towards homeownership or simply securing a suitable, affordable home while waiting for access to social housing. Access to the homes will be fair, transparent and consistent. Eligibility criteria for a tenancy have been clearly set out in my Department’s policy. For example, households with a single adult must earn below £30,000, and those with two adults must earn below £40,000. That is intended to direct the tenancies to households that need them and can derive the most benefit from what is being offered.

There is no doubt that this type of housing is badly needed. Too many people are caught in the gap between being unable to access social housing and being unable to afford the cost of living in the private rental market. The programme is a direct response to that challenge. Let me be clear: this is only the beginning. Work is already under way to expand delivery beyond the initial 300 homes. My ambition is to see the model grow and play a meaningful role in addressing housing supply and housing need across Northern Ireland.

Alongside continued investment in social housing, the funding demonstrates a practical and innovative approach. It aligns with the objectives of the housing supply strategy to increase supply, broaden choice and ensure that people have access to the housing that they need. Over time, it will reduce pressure on our social housing waiting list, as households that meet the criteria can access affordable housing. It also reflects my personal commitment, as Minister, to increase housing stock, use the resources available as effectively as possible and adopt new approaches where they can make a difference.

My commitment goes far beyond the delivery of that new type of affordable housing for rent. The housing supply strategy seeks to accelerate the delivery of housing supply over the coming years. Shared ownership delivery through the Northern Ireland Co-ownership Housing Association is being expanded and plays a key role in enabling first-time buyers, in particular, to access affordable homeownership. Its over-55s scheme provides an important additional element of choice for people to move to homes that better suit their needs as they get older.

I continue to press at every opportunity for us to prioritise accessing the necessary capital funding to deliver the social homes that we need.

At the beginning of 2025-26, the outlook for the social housing development programme (SHDP) was poor, with a budget that would have achieved only 1,100 new social homes. I secured a further £42 million, resulting in the largest-ever investment in the social housing development programme, and achieved 1,765 new social home starts, representing a 17% increase in delivery year-on-year. There are now more than 6,000 new social homes under construction across Northern Ireland.

Looking forward, we need to do more. We need to secure more budget much earlier. In December 2025, £29 million was as much extra funding as the programme could absorb once in-year funding became available. I have, therefore, repeatedly pressed the Executive to earmark more funding for the SHDP. While there is some impact from that in the current Budget proposals, it is still not enough. That is why I have proposed to secure public-sector land instead of grant. The reviews of grant and design and the range of measures being explored or introduced will complement the SHDP in moving towards the housing supply targets. The measures include the New Foundations initiative, Housing Executive acquisitions and the housing supply action plan, which is now with the Executive.

I secured the major achievement of a commitment from the UK Government to consider Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) borrowing as part of the Northern Ireland fiscal framework discussions. In the meantime, urgent engagement continues between officials on the means to secure the financial viability of the Housing Executive and identify an interim solution to its investment need. I fully intend to make good on the commitments that I have made in this place and, in the supply strategy, to make sure that every household can have access to a quality, affordable and sustainable home that is appropriate for their needs and located in a thriving and inclusive community. That is what the new affordable rent homes will do. Ultimately, the programme is about more than bricks and mortar. It is about giving people security, providing stability and helping hard-pressed individuals and families to build a better future. I look forward to updating the House further as delivery progresses. I commend the statement to the House.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement. There are more than 50,000 households on the housing waiting list here. Over the past decade, with the DUP and Sinn Féin at the helm, homelessness has increased by 120% here, so we welcome any initiative to create more homes. We have to get that right, however, and this initiative might warrant further interrogation. Is housing need being considered in either the location or allocation of these homes?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I welcome the Member's comments on the scheme. The simple answer to his question is yes, we are absolutely looking at need. We want to make sure that the money that we invest, whether it is from our own capital budget or, in this instance, financial transactions capital, goes to where it can make most difference. He will be glad to hear that the answer to the question is a simple one: the scheme will help areas that are most in need.

The Member will be aware that his constituency of Foyle is one of the areas where we have greatest housing demand. That is why, in the first phase, an additional 60 homes will be made available in his constituency. There are huge waiting lists, and I want to do more to make sure that we tackle the overall need for housing. This scheme is one part of that, and it is small to start off with, but I want to make sure that it grows, as well as doing the other things that I have outlined today.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I can confirm that he could not have picked a better place to start than on the Old Eglish Road in Dungannon. I welcome the investment in housing, which is badly needed. I also welcome the other elements in the statement. There are important areas to be explored when it comes to issues around public land and Housing Executive borrowing.

The Committee for Communities has heard that, in the event of oversubscription, there could be a random element in the process of considering the eligibility criteria for allocation. I suspect that these homes will absolutely be oversubscribed in Dungannon and in other locations. In that case, could a system be put in place whereby you would align fully or closely with the Housing Executive points programme in order to ensure that, rather than allocation being random, housing need is fully addressed when allocations are made?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for his comments. I am pleased, as is a Member behind me, that the first tranche of homes will be in Dungannon. It is important to note that we have pushed the programme forward so that we are not just talking about policy development but about homes that have been built and are ready for allocation. I look forward to that proceeding.

We have had extensive conversations about how we ensure that the people who need the homes most will get them. We will have an application process through which an individual will have to demonstrate that they can afford to pay the rent; that, for example, social housing is not the best option; and that the programme is right for them. After that, there will be a random selection process, because demand will almost certainly outstrip supply. That is the fairest way to do it, because everybody will be eligible in the same way. It is not the same as social housing; it will not be done on a points basis. However, the process can absolutely be kept under review. That is why we have 300 homes in the first place: lots of things are being done differently. It is important to note that this is the first time that such a programme has been offered in Northern Ireland. I want to make sure that it is done in the fairest way possible. The information that we have right now is that random selection is the best way to do it, but, of course, I want to keep it all under review, because I want to see the programme massively scaled up so that it can help many more people. We will keep it under review.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Communities Minister. It is really good news for my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone that the first homes will be built on the Old Eglish Road in Dungannon. Often, people in my constituency feel that such housing is centred in urban, Belfast-centric areas. Minister, how will you ensure a continued regional balance to this approach to providing housing across Northern Ireland?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member for her kind comments. I am pleased that we are seeing the scheme rolled out not just in a small number of locations but across Northern Ireland. In fact, in the initial tranche, eight of the 11 council areas in Northern Ireland will have access to some of the affordable rent accommodation that we have announced today.

We have need throughout Northern Ireland. Yes, absolutely, there are higher numbers in some places, but, across Northern Ireland, the need is now consistently high in places where people are struggling. I am committed to making sure that we get a balance and spread and that the programme is not restricted to certain areas. I want to see it ramped up across Northern Ireland so that we deliver more and more. It is new, innovative and does not affect the social housing development programme. It will take no resource away from that. I want to keep putting investment into that programme, absolutely, but here is something new that will work and will deliver for people in the Member's constituency within a matter of weeks because of the decisions that I have taken on coming into this office. Let us ramp it up and ensure that we continue to have a spread across Northern Ireland.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you, Minister. The announcement of any new homes across Northern Ireland is welcome. You said that the programme will reduce pressure on the social housing waiting list. What modelling has your Department undertaken to demonstrate that claim? How many households do you hope or expect to move from the waiting list into affordable rented accommodation over the next five years? Will you publish that analysis?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am happy to publish any of the analysis that has been done. However, when we put 300 new homes on the market for people who have not otherwise been able to avail themselves of homes in the private rented market because of the cost, it is inevitable that a large number of them will be on the social housing waiting list, and probably very far down it, because the housing problems that we face in Northern Ireland can be summed up in one issue: supply. By creating the affordable rent programme, taking no money out of the social housing development programme but using financial transactions capital and private investment, we are increasing supply. Three hundred homes represents a great start, but there is so much more to do. If we want to reduce the social housing waiting list in Northern Ireland, we need to increase supply across all 10 years. That is what today's announcement is about. It is what we are achieving.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome, as colleagues from Fermanagh and South Tyrone have done, the imminent release of 15 new two- and three-bedroom houses on the Old Eglish Road. The size of those homes is important.

Although rents are set at 20% below market rates, many households on low incomes still struggle with affordability. What safeguards are therefore in place to ensure that those houses will remain genuinely affordable in practice over time? How will the Minister prioritise access for those most in need, rather than those who are simply able to meet the income thresholds?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Compared with the local open market rent in that area, rates will initially be set at a discount of 20% . The Member is right to ask how we can ensure that those homes are protected. That is why, for the programme, the increase is subject to a cap of CPI plus 1%, up to a maximum of 5%. The intention is to ensure that tenants are not exposed to the financial shock of a larger rent increase and also to ensure that their landlords secure the revenue necessary to maintain the homes to the very high standards to which they will be constructed. I hope that that provides the Member with some reassurance.

We want to make sure that the programme is used by those who need it most. It is not a scheme for everybody. There will be some for whom social housing is the best option, while there will be others for whom the private market is still best. We are trying to target those in the middle who are struggling to access either. I think that that will come to fruition as the programme is rolled out.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I remind Members of a convention in the Assembly that is quite well followed. It is that Members should not walk across the line of sight between the Speaker and the Member who is speaking. I know that Mr Dunne may not be fully aware of that, but I do know somebody who is. Let us have common courtesy in the Chamber, please.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Minister, unfortunately, the announcement is not such great news for South Down and its constituents. You talked about making some progress on achieving borrowing powers for the Housing Executive. Will you expand on that? Will the Housing Executive be able to use those powers to start building houses again?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I hope that I can give the Member some comfort today. Although we do not have any announcements for her constituency today — I share her frustration in that regard for my constituency — we are looking to develop and ramp up the scheme. I have given very clear instructions about my wanting to see that happen. By next March, we will have a plan for how we can significantly ramp up the scheme. It is part of the housing supply strategy action plan, which is now with the Executive. I hope that Executive colleagues will support me with that.

We have made more progress on Housing Executive borrowing than we ever have done before, and I believe that we can make a breakthrough. While we are waiting for that, however, I have asked for work to continue so that, when we access those borrowing powers, we are in a position to start. I tasked the former chief executive of the Housing Executive, who has now left her post and is in another role, with making sure that, if and when those powers are made available, the Housing Executive is ready. There is a significant investment need in current Housing Executive properties. That is to where some of the borrowing powers will go.

I also want to make sure that we build more homes. Yes, we need to make sure that we improve the standard of our existing stock, but we need to start building more homes as well. Overall, we have been trying to increase the number of houses in Northern Ireland. We are looking at the grant rate and the design guide so that we can make our current housing grant go further. It is also why we are looking at land, instead of just grant, and at intermediate rent. We are doing everything that we can to make progress. I hope that more homes in the Member's constituency and my constituency will be announced in further rounds.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. This is, of course, great news for Northern Ireland. You will know, as I do, that our constituents in East Antrim are crying out for affordable homes. Therefore, have there been any identifiable sites or have discussions been under way on the East Antrim area, and do you commit to, of course, extending the scheme throughout Northern Ireland?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes, absolutely. I want to make sure that this is expanded and that we have substantial numbers. I believe that this is innovative and can make a real difference. Although the 300 homes will be very welcome to those who are going to get them, we need to see many, many more. I want this to become a sizable proportion of our housing offering in Northern Ireland, so my team will be doing everything that it can to ramp this up. I look forward to many, many of these homes being made available in East Antrim as well.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas.

[Translation: I thank the Minister for his statement.]

In his statement, he said that the scheme would eventually be rolled out to Newry, Craigavon, Lisburn, Belfast and Derry. The locations are all cities, with the exception of Dungannon. I hope that, in future, rural areas will be considered as well. However, my immediate question is this, Minister: when can we expect the 300 new homes to be built and have tenants living in them?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am grateful for the Member's question, and we will certainly do everything that we can to get as many homes as possible in new areas that have not been mentioned yet, as I said in response to Cheryl Brownlee.

On the question of when the homes will be available, as I said, homes in Dungannon are going to be ready within the next few weeks. In the other phases, homes in Craigavon will be ready in autumn 2026, then Newry and Lisburn in the spring of next year. There will be further allocations in 2027 in Londonderry, Craigavon and Antrim. We are seeing houses being built already, and they will soon be allocated. These are not homes that are in the pipeline and will be available somewhere down the line. Some of them will be available very shortly, and others are in construction. At the same time, we are going to be looking at the policy to make sure that this can be ramped up and we can have even more in the construction pipeline after that.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Can the Minister advise the House of the standards for these homes? Will they follow the current design guide? Minister, maybe you can give the House an update on the design guide review.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Absolutely. These homes will be constructed to the design guide plus, if you like. They will be the same as social homes, however, they will have a turnkey finish. I know that that will be very welcome so that people can move straight in. They are being finished to a very high standard because I understand that we want to target the homes towards people who will be struggling a little. Perhaps they will be struggling to pay full market rent, and we want to make sure that the houses are ready for them to move into. That will be the condition of the stock, and the standard to which they will be built will align with the design guide.

I think that there are changes that can be made to the design guide. Housing associations are very keen that we look at that. That is progressing, and I hope to have an update towards September so that we can make sure that we progress with that and make it easier and more straightforward to build social homes.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, I am pleased to see that there is a good geographical mix of the new homes, and, of course, I welcome the homes on the Old Eglish Road in Dungannon. However, I notice that Fermanagh is missing. Can the Minister commit today to ensuring that Fermanagh gets its fair share of these 300 homes?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Unfortunately, not as part of the 300 homes. I do not think that we are going to be in a position to do that. Apologies, again, to Deborah on that one. I do not think that I have ever had questions on a statement where nearly every Member from Fermanagh and South Tyrone has asked me a question. It is unlikely, at this stage, that Fermanagh will be included in the current 300. However, as I have made very clear — I hope that the message has gone out very simply today — I want to see this programme ramped up. This is new and innovative. We are doing something different. It does not come at any cost to the social housing development programme or the Northern Ireland Executive Budget. We underutilise financial transactions capital, and this is an example of how we can use tens of millions of pounds more. I want to see it ramped up, and, yes, I want to see more homes in Fermanagh as well.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. As others have said, any news of new homes being built is positive. Please take my question in the spirit in which it is meant: why was the £61·5 million of public loan support for this project not used for social houses? How do we know that this will be the best use of public money? Were these houses already being built? Will this programme have a genuine impact on our waiting lists, more so than social housing would?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes, absolutely. Housing associations are unable to be involved in this sort of work, because current private tenancy legislation excludes housing associations from owning properties that are let as any form of private rental. Therefore, we are limited in how we can use financial transactions capital. This is a new and different way to use it, and one that will be able to deliver results. I have significantly ramped up the amount of FTC that the Department is using, particularly across housing. Changes to how FTC can be used are coming, and I want to explore the use of FTC across all areas of the Department. I want to get as much grant money as I can. I want to make sure that it goes as far as it can. I want to look at where else we can use FTC. This is one way in which we can use it, and that is why we are using it in this way. It is a start, and I want to do more.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his statement. How can he ensure that this programme is scaled up? Is Causeway Coast and Glens one of the eight council areas that he referenced, given the pressures that there are with holiday homes and second homes in the north coast area?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I know that this is becoming a common theme: there are areas that have been successful in this round and others that have not. However, I want to make it clear that I am determined that this will be available everywhere in Northern Ireland. I wanted to get it out as quickly as we could, and we found the available sites. I commit to him that we will do everything that we can to make sure that the Causeway Coast and Glens area is included in the next tranches, as we expand the programme. I am well aware of, and have been working on, the issues that are specific to his constituency. We are aware of the impact that holiday homes are having, and work on that is ongoing through the housing supply strategy. I know about the housing need in his constituency. That is why we will continue to build more social homes. I want to make sure that this programme will also be available to low-income households that need support.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

It is worth saying, again, that there are 50,000 people on the housing waiting lists and that, over the past 10 years, with Sinn Féin and the DUP — the long-standing establishment parties and partners in government — at the helm, homelessness has increased by 120%. I welcome your statement, Minister. Any initiative to alleviate homelessness and help with the cost of housing is very important. However, in the absence of a Budget, can that positive initiative proceed? How will having no Budget impact on your ability to deliver social housing this year?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I would have thought that he might have liked to welcome the fact that, in the first phase, we will be delivering an additional 18 homes in his Newry and Armagh constituency. That will help 18 families or individuals who are hard pressed, cannot get to the right position on the social housing waiting list or cannot afford homes in the private rental market. This helps; it makes a difference. They are small numbers — yes — but we want to ramp it up. It is important that we acknowledge that this has never been tried before. I came into office and said, "I want to push this forward". We now have homes being built, and, within a few weeks, applications will be made for homes that have already been constructed. Let us celebrate that and say, "We've tried something new. It's working. It's making a difference". We are going to ramp it up and achieve things that will be of benefit to the people in Northern Ireland.

We also need to do what I outlined in my statement: make sure that we have more social homes. That is why I want to see a Budget in place that allows us to proceed and meet the targets that have been set in the Programme for Government.

I am still making that case to Executive colleagues. I hope that that can be achieved, because housing is one of the most foundational and fundamental things, and that is why I put in that bid.

I am not just sitting here asking for more money. Yes, I would love that, but I have also taken the initiative to think how we can make the money that we have go further. That is why we are looking at the housing association grant. That has been changed so that housing associations can stretch that and do a little more, and, by doing so, we can build more homes. That is why we are also looking at the design guides. How can we make it more effective for us to build homes? How can we make it cheaper for us to build homes, while still at a high standard, by taking out anything that is unnecessary. This is one part of the overall puzzle as we seek to improve housing supply. I hope that the Member recognises the steps that have been taken and welcomes the fact that we have got more homes for Newry.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Just before I call the final speaker, Matthew, were you indicating that you wanted in on this?

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Yes.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

OK. Thank you very much indeed. My subliminal valve is not working well today.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I apologise for missing the beginning of the Minister's statement, which is very welcome. I appreciate the mention of Antrim, in my constituency of South Antrim; any clarity around future plans regarding the provision would be welcome.

Minister, deposits are often a huge challenge for many first-time renters. What provision can you make for those who find it hard to pull together a deposit?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member. I can confirm to her that there will be 20 new homes in her constituency on the Niblock Road in Antrim. They will be five-person, three-bedroom homes, which will help families there that are struggling.

The Member raises an important point about deposits. They can be out of reach for many people who cannot access the private rental sector for that reason, especially with average rents now being over £1,000 per month in Northern Ireland. If someone is asked for a deposit of one, two or three months, that could be a substantial amount. That is why, under the scheme, there will be a deposit builder in place so that, over a period of months, families can contribute to the required deposit. That is something new that is being tried for the scheme and will be welcome, as it will not serve as a barrier to those who would like to access the scheme but for whom a deposit might be a concern. It gives them a few months to build up a deposit, and that should be welcomed.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Mr Deputy Speaker, I hope that everything is OK with you. I believe that you said "subliminal valves". I am not sure what those are, but I am sure that everybody in the Chamber would be keen that you get those addressed before too long.

[Laughter.]

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

It is my birthday, Matthew.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Happy birthday, Mr Deputy Speaker. The warmest of happy birthdays. I am sure that we are all very pleased to be here with you on that date.

Minister, I acknowledge that my party and I encouraged you to make use of FTC. It is important to use FTC to build homes, but we want to ask about the detail regarding the 20% reduction on market rents. How will market rent be calculated, what specific metrics and data will be used, and what are the safeguards against, for example, inflation of rents in a given geography? How can we be sure that there will be a genuine reduction of at least 20% on local market rates? What data will be used?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First of all, on behalf of the whole House, I am sure, I wish you a very happy birthday, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My present to you is 20 affordable homes on the Niblock Road in Antrim.

[Laughter.]

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Put them in Ballyclare, Minister.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I hope that that is welcome.

I understand the Member's concerns about a genuine 20% reduction. We will use a number of measures to ensure that we have an accurate forecast of the market rent in those areas. Further details on that can be found as part of the policy development process on the Department's website. I am sure that that can be sent directly to the Member so that he can see.

I want to make sure that the scheme is fair and that there is a genuine 20% discount for those who need it. Additionally, that is why there will be a limit on increases to a cap of the consumer prices index (CPI) plus 1% up to a maximum of 5%. That should be welcomed. I recognise that the Member recognises that this is a good news story, that it is a start and that is part of the overall package that I am bringing in to make sure that we do what we can with what we have to deal with the housing crisis that we face in Northern Ireland.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

That concludes questions on the statement. We will take our ease for a few moments while we get ready for the next item.

Executive Committee Business

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I call the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Mr Andrew Muir, to move the Consideration Stage of the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There is a single group that contains 36 amendments dealing with reviews and procedural and technical matters.

I remind Members who intend to speak that, during the debate on the single group of amendments, they should address all the amendments on which they wish to comment. Once the debate has been completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each will be put without further debate. The Questions on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points in the Bill. If that is clear, we shall proceed.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 (Appeal against maintenance notice)

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

We now come to the single group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 2 to 36. I remind Members that a number of the amendments are consequential to one another or are paving amendments. Specifically, Amendment No 17 is consequential to amendment No 4. Amendment Nos 8, 10, 11, 13 and 18 are consequential to amendment No 5. Amendment Nos 9, 12, 14 to 16 and 20, 21 and 30 are consequential to amendment No 7. Amendment No 27 is a paving amendment to amendment No 28. Amendment No 31 is a paving amendment to amendment No 34. Amendment No 35 is consequential to amendment No 33. Amendment No 36 is consequential to amendment No 28.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I beg to move amendment No 1:

In page 2, line 2, leave out "adversely affecting" and insert "being detrimental to".

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 2: In clause 4, page 2, line 41, at end insert "or relating to it being a heritage site". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 3: In clause 7, page 4, line 28, at end insert "or relating to it being a heritage site". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 4: In clause 11, page 7, line 4, leave out "in a defective state," and insert "in such a state as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance,". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 5: In clause 11, page 7, line 5, leave out "the defective state" and insert "the state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 6: In clause 11, page 7, line 10, leave out from "and" to end of line 11. — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 7: In clause 11, page 7, line 12, leave out "(a "defective premises notice")’ and insert "an ("urgent abatement notice")". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 8: In clause 11, page 7, line 13, leave out "defective state" and insert "state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 9: In clause 11, page 7, line 15, leave out "A defective premises notice" and insert "An urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 10: In clause 11, page 7, line 16, leave out "defective state" and insert "state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 11: In clause 11, page 7, line 18, leave out "a defective state" and insert "such a state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 12: In clause 11, page 7, line 21, leave out "a defective premises notice" and insert "an urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 13: In clause 11, page 7, line 22, leave out "defective state" and insert "state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 14: In clause 11, page 7, line 24, leave out "a defective premises notice" and insert "an urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 15: In clause 11, page 7, line 26, leave out "defective premises notice" and insert "urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 16: In clause 11, page 7, line 34, leave out "defective premises notice" and insert "urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 17: In clause 11, page 7, line 38, leave out "in a defective state" and insert "in such a state as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 18: In clause 11, page 7, line 40, leave out "defective state" and insert "state". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 19: In clause 12, page 8, line 18, leave out subsection (4) and insert—

"(4) Where the steps taken by a council under section 10(2) consist of or include—

(a) fencing off the building, or

(b) arranging for it to be watched,

the costs that may be recovered under subsection (1) include the costs that the council incurs in the fencing or in the making of the arrangements.

(4A) But subsection (4) does not permit the recovery of costs relating to any period—

(a) after the danger has been removed by the steps taken by the council (unless it is the fencing or the arrangements that remove the danger), or

(b) if an order has been made under section 7 for the purpose of removing the danger, after the order has been complied with or has been executed under section 9(2).". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 20: In clause 12, page 8, line 30, leave out "(defective premises notice)" and insert "(urgent abatement notice)". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 21: In clause 12, page 8, line 35, leave out "defective premises notice" and insert "urgent abatement notice". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 22: In clause 16, page 10, line 19, leave out subsections (1) and (2) and insert—

"(1) Subject to subsection (2), a district council may serve on any person a notice requiring the person to give to the council, within a period or at times specified in the notice and in a form so specified, any information so specified which the council reasonably considers that it needs for the purposes of any function conferred on the council by this Act.

(2) The Department may by regulations make provision for restricting the information that may be required under subsection (1) and for determining the form in which the information is to be so required.". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 23: In clause 17, page 11, line 12, at beginning insert "For the purposes of this Act,". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 24: In clause 17, page 11, line 23, at beginning insert "For the purposes of this Act,". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 25: In clause 18, page 12, line 3, leave out subsection (2) and insert—

"(2) The power under this section (except in an emergency) is exercisable only—

(a) with the consent of the occupier, or

(b) in accordance with subsection (3A).". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 26: In clause 18, page 12, line 11, at end insert—

"(3A) If it is shown to the satisfaction of a lay magistrate on complaint on oath—

(a) that there are reasonable grounds for entering any land for any of the purposes mentioned in subsection (1)(a) to (e), and

(b) that admission to the land has been refused, or a refusal is reasonably apprehended,

the lay magistrate may issue a warrant authorising an authorised officer of a district council to enter the land (if need be by force).

(3B) For the purposes of subsection (3A)(b), admission to land shall be regarded as having been refused if no reply is received to a request for admission within a reasonable period.

(3C) A warrant authorises entry on one occasion only and that entry must be—

(a) within one month from the date of the issue of the warrant, and

(b) at a reasonable time.". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 27: In clause 19, page 12, line 34, at beginning insert "Subject to subsection (2A),". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 28: In clause 19, page 12, line 36, at end insert—

"(2A) Payment of a fixed penalty in relation to an offence under section 3(2) discharges liability for conviction in respect of failure to comply with a maintenance notice up to the date of payment of the fixed penalty (but if the person continues to fail to comply with the maintenance notice after having paid the fixed penalty, does not affect any criminal liability for continuing failure to comply with the maintenance notice after that date).". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 29: In clause 21, page 13, line 29, after "under" insert "the same provision of this Act or under". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 30: In clause 25, page 15, line 25, leave out "(defective premises notice)" and insert "(urgent abatement notice)". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 31: In clause 25, page 15, line 31, at end insert—

"(6) "District electoral area" has the meaning given in the District Electoral Areas (Northern Ireland) Order 2014.". — [Mr McCrossan.]

No 32: After clause 28 insert—

"Review of Act

28A—(1) The Department must—

(a) not later than 3 years after the commencement of this section, and

(b) at least once in every 5 year period thereafter,

review, and publish a report on, the implementation of this Act,

(2) Regulations made by the Department under this section must set out the terms of the review.". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

No 33: After clause 28 insert—

"Periodic review of dilapidated buildings, dangerous structures and neglected sites

28A.—(1) The Department must appoint such person or body as it considers appropriate to conduct a review of the prevalence of—

(a) dilapidated buildings;

(b) dangerous structures; and

(c) neglected sites,

in Northern Ireland, broken down by district council.

(2) Regulations made by the Department under this section must set out the terms of the review.

(3) The Department must ensure that—

(a) the first review under this section is completed within 3 years and before the commencement of the first review of the Act under Section 28A, [inserted by Amendment 32]

(b) following the completion of the first review under this section, the Department must carry out subsequent reviews at intervals of no more than 10 years.

(4) As soon as reasonably practicable after completing a review under this section, the Department must—

(a) prepare a report setting out the findings of the review; and

(b) lay a copy of that report before the Assembly.". — [Mr McCrossan.]

No 34: After clause 28 insert—

"Accessible register of action taken under this Act

28A.—(1) A district council must establish, maintain and publish in a manner that is accessible to the public, a register of action taken under this Act.

(2) The register must include—

(a) details on any notices, orders, or enforcement action taken under this Act;

(b) the district electoral area of each entry on the register;

(c) a description of the condition giving rise to inclusion on the register;

(d) the date of inclusion on the register; and

(e) updates relating to remediation, compliance or removal from the register.

(3) Nothing in subsection (2) precludes a district council from including such other matters as it may deem necessary on the register.

(4) The Department may by regulations—

(a) prescribe additional information to be included on the register;

(b) specify reporting requirements for district councils; and

(c) make further provision for the publication, maintenance and review of the register.". — [Mr McCrossan.]

No 35: In clause 30, page 16, line 34, after "sections" insert "28A," [inserted by Amendment 33]. — [Mr McCrossan.]

No 36: In schedule 1, page 19, line 4, at beginning insert "Subject to section 19(2A),". — [Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs).]

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I advise Members that most of the amendments that I have tabled arise from deliberations during Committee Stage. I express my deep appreciation of the sterling work of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in its detailed consideration of the Bill.

Amendment No 1 proposes to align the wording of clause 2(2)(c), which refers to land "adversely affecting amenity", with that of clause 1(1), which refers to a building or other land being "detrimental to" the amenity.

Amendment No 2 is to clause 4. The amendment proposes to strengthen clause 4 and close any potential loopholes in section 85 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, which provides for the offence of carrying out unauthorised works on a listed building. Officials in the Department for Communities' historic environment division (HED) confirmed that listed building consent for alterations or demolitions does not strictly relate to condition; it relates to architectural or historic character. The word "condition" needs to be inserted because, if the reference was removed, an interested person would be obliged to comply with all statutory provisions in relation to the building, which is not the policy intention. For example, if a building is in a state of disrepair, it may not be possible to comply with all health and safety obligations. Therefore, while the intention appears to be clear, I agreed that there is an opportunity to strengthen the drafting of clause 4(5) by revisiting the reference to "condition" to include reference to the obligation to comply with the building being a heritage site, as defined in clause 17.

Amendment No 3 is to clause 7. The amendment is a carbon copy of amendment No 2 but applies to clause 7(6) by also clarifying the obligation to comply with the building being a heritage site.

Amendment Nos 4 to 18 are to clause 11. The suite of amendments to clause 11 arose following discussions between my officials and the Department for Communities, which had concerns that clause 11 had the potential to cause confusion and conflation with the Defective Premises (Northern Ireland) Order 1975, which, Members will recall, was amended in 2024 in light of the Victoria Square situation.

Clause 11 is a direct replication of article 65 of the Pollution Control and Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 1978, which councils will already be familiar with. With the ongoing DFC work on new building safety legislation and recent post-Grenfell reports criticising the fragmentation in that area, the proposed amendments will remove any reference to defective premises. The provisions in clause 11 are not meant to overlap with the DFC legislation, but it is proposed that the defective premises notice be renamed "urgent abatement notice". That aligns more closely with the standard abatement notice provisions in Part 7 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, which we, of course, reference in clause 11(1)(b). These are cosmetic changes that do not alter the intention behind the provision.

Amendment Nos 19 to 21 are to clause 12. Clause 12 enables councils to continue to recoup the cost of fencing a dangerous structure or site only until the danger has been removed. In cases where the owner has acted to remove the danger by repairing or demolishing a structure, councils should not be able to recover ongoing fencing costs, and they are content with that position. The amendment has been drafted in respect of ongoing maintenance and repair of fencing in cases where the property itself continues to be dangerous but the presence of the fence removes the danger. In that case, the fence presents an ongoing cost to the council, and the property owner has done nothing to address the danger presented by the building or site. There are also minor amendments to clause 12 that are consequential to the renaming of the defective premises notice in clause 11.

Amendment No 22 is to clause 16. Clause 16 allows councils to obtain information on buildings or land. The amendment was requested by district councils, and it would strengthen the powers and mirror those already available to councils under article 72 of the Pollution Control and Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 1978 so that they can serve a notice requesting information on anyone such as a solicitor or other person with a financial interest in the land.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I appreciate the Minister giving way. On that point, the Minister will know that I have been supportive of the general principles of the Bill, particularly given the impact of dereliction and dilapidation on my constituency of North Belfast.

There is one issue, Minister, in relation to ownership. You will be aware — I have written to you on a number of occasions about it — that Japanese knotweed is growing on some unregistered land in the lower part of North Belfast and that that is impacting on local residents. The Bill was seen as the vehicle and the opportunity for councils to take action on that, given its impact on privately owned properties.

Will the Minister commit to saying that his amendments will not dilute councils' ability to take action against such land, which, through no fault of their own, impacts on my constituents?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention and for outlining that issue. I have received a number of items of correspondence and questions for written answer about that invasive species and my responsibility to act. The key issue is identifying the landowner. I will write to the Member to set out the law. There is an obligation to address that issue, and I know how it can affect properties. Through the Bill, we are seeking to give councils increased powers to act, while recognising that those powers are discretionary. Councils will decide to exercise their powers in cases in which they have confidence in their ability to trace the owner of the building. As I said, I will write to the Member to set out the law, because it is an important issue, about which people are concerned.

Amendment Nos 23 and 24 will make minor amendments to clause 17 to clarify that a council's functions as they relate to heritage sites are:

"For the purposes of this Act".

Amendment Nos 25 and 26 are to clause 18. Clause 18 gives councils various powers of entry relating to their functions under the Bill. The amendments were requested by councils and will give them an additional power similar to that which is provided in section 177 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, whereby a warrant may be sought from a lay magistrate where entry has been refused. Councils must have the power to enter by force in cases of emergency.

Amendment Nos 27 and 28 are to clause 19. Clause 19 provides for a discretionary fixed penalty to be offered by councils to discharge liability for conviction for a breach of a maintenance notice and for a failure to provide information without reasonable excuse. The amendments are necessary in order to make it clear that the fixed penalty to discharge liability for conviction for a failure to comply with the maintenance notice is up to the date of payment of the fixed penalty. If, however, the person continues to fail to comply with the maintenance notice after they have paid the fixed penalty, it does not affect the criminal liability for continued failure to comply with the maintenance notice after that date. In other words, the amendments will make it clear that payment of a fixed penalty does not mean that a person does not have to comply with the terms of a maintenance notice.

Amendment No 29 will make a minor amendment to clause 21 as a result of the amendments to clause 19. Clause 21 currently provides that there is nothing to prevent a different notice being served in the case of land where an earlier notice applied, such as in cases in which dilapidation has become worse and a stronger notice would therefore be more appropriate. The amendment will allow the same notice to be served, meaning that, where a maintenance notice has been served but a fixed penalty notice was issued to discharge liability for conviction, and no remedial works were carried out, the council can issue a fresh maintenance notice.

Amendment No 30 is to clause 25. It is consequential to the renaming of the "defective premises notice" provided for in clause 11 and substitutes references to "defective premises notice" in clause 25. Amendment No 31 is also an amendment to clause 25 and has resulted from proposed new clause 28A in amendment No 35, which Daniel McCrossan tabled. I seek guidance from the top Table on whether I am permitted to address Daniel's amendments now or should do so in my winding-up speech.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

You may address them now, Minister.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I will address his amendments at the end of my opening remarks, if that is OK. I will speak to my amendments first, after which I will address Daniel McCrossan's amendments.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I am content with that.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Amendment No 32, which will insert new clause 28A, was proposed by the AERA Committee. I was pleased to accept it, as it will ensure that an initial review of how the Act has been working in practice will take place no later than three years after the Act comes into operation. Thereafter, there will be a review every five years, the terms of which will be set out in regulations, which are to be made at a future date. Similar provisions exist in the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011.

Amendment No 36 is to schedule 1 and is consequential to the changes to clause 19 that are proposed in amendment Nos 27 and 28. Paragraph 7 of schedule 1 requires a small amendment in order to make it subject to the amended clause 19.

Those are my amendments. I will now address Daniel McCrossan's amendments. I then have a few summing-up remarks to make before we continue the debate.

I do not propose to support the amendments that Daniel McCrossan has tabled, and I urge the Assembly to do likewise. Amendment No 33 proposes a new clause on the periodic review of dilapidated buildings etc. It seeks to impose a statutory requirement on my Department to appoint a person or body to conduct a periodic review of dilapidated buildings. The most appropriate bodies to conduct any review of the level of dilapidation in an area are councils. Their officers are on the ground every day, and they are aware of the problem buildings and neglected sites in their areas. My Department does not have operational responsibility in that area or the relevant technical expertise in key matters such as structural engineering and building safety.

Appointing an outside body — at a significant cost to the public purse, I might add — would not represent value for money. It would also risk duplication of work and poor use of public funding, with councils maintaining their own records. A centralised assessment of that nature would place practical limitations as it would be too restrictive to take account of the flexibility in the legislation to enable individual councils to determine what they consider to be dilapidated, dangerous and so on.

I will highlight to Members that the Bill initially contained a clause that would have imposed a statutory duty on councils to carry out a survey of the levels of dilapidation in their areas within 18 months of the commencement of the Act. Following the survey, councils would then have had a duty to compile, maintain and publish a register of the buildings and land identified during the survey. The Department recognised that that would have placed a significant burden on councils, and the clause was removed as the Department was keen that no additional statutory duties were placed on councils, and, of course, the Bill does not do so. That is not to say that councils should not compile relevant information in their areas to enable them to carry out work to tackle dilapidation, but it should be at the discretion of each individual council as to whether it does so.

Amendment No 34 proposes a new clause on an accessible register of action taken. I do not support amendment No 34 and urge Members to join me in that. The amendment seeks to place a statutory burden on councils by requiring them to establish, maintain and publish a register of action taken under the legislation. As I just touched on, the same argument as to why the Department dropped a clause that would have placed a statutory duty on councils to conduct a survey and maintain registers is also appropriate in the case of amendment No 34.

When drafting the Bill, the Department was quite clear that no additional statutory duties would be placed on councils. The amendment, if carried, would have the potential to create significant additional burdens for councils. If members of the public or elected representatives, for that matter, wish to know what action councils have taken under the new legislation, they can go through the usual channels to request that information.

The two minor amendments are amendment Nos 31 and 35 to clauses 25 and 30. They are predicated on the proposed new clauses, and, in asking Members to reject amendment Nos 33 and 34, those would fall, but the Speaker will guide them with regard to the protocol associated with that.

We can have a discussion around this, but I will close with the responsibilities of councils arising from the legislation. It is important to take a perspective in relation to that. The Dilapidation Bill, which we are debating here today at Consideration Stage, will consolidate and modernise outdated Victorian legislation to help regenerate our cities, towns and villages by giving councils the power to better tackle the blight of dilapidation.

There has been significant and sustained engagement with local government on the Bill, helping to shape robust, fit-for-purpose legislation that grants councils discretionary powers equivalent to those now long established in Great Britain and Ireland. As Minister, I value the constructive relationship that has been fostered with councils, and I am grateful for the extensive engagement by local government throughout the earlier policy consultation process and, again, since work restarted on the Bill following restoration of devolved government in 2024 and the introduction of the Bill to the Assembly in June 2025.

I, along with my senior leadership team and officials who have been working directly on the Bill, have met council representatives on multiple occasions, and four local government-sponsored amendments have been tabled to strengthen the Bill, including new provisions on costs and warrants to access properties. Although proposed changes that could potentially make the Bill inoperable are not being taken forward by the Department, they will instead be addressed by statutory guidance as in other parts of the UK.

The Assembly's Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee undertook thorough scrutiny of the Bill as part of an extended Committee Stage. I thank the Committee for its work, which involved several briefings from the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA), and its report, which indicated that the Committee was content to proceed to the Consideration Stage.

Dilapidation policy in Northern Ireland has been in development since 2015, with work on the Bill being undertaken continuously over the past two years. That work has culminated in the current draft of the Bill, which includes new discretionary powers to issue maintenance notices to tackle low-level dilapidation. The powers are already available in England, Scotland and Wales, and councils in Northern Ireland supported the powers in their response to the public policy consultation. The Bill does not impose new statutory duties or financial burdens on councils. Rather, it gives councils the flexibility to use the new powers, as resources permit. There are extensive new cost recovery mechanisms and a requirement for DAERA to publish statutory guidance in order to give greater clarity than exists in the present set-up. The Department will continue to work with local government to develop the guidance, which will include terminology, definitions and thresholds. Hardwiring that into the Bill could inhibit use of the legislation, and that is why I have proposed amendments at Consideration Stage today.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I call the Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Mr Robbie Butler.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and happy birthday to you.

With your indulgence, before I address the amendments, I wish to say a few words about the Committee Stage of the Bill in my capacity as the Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. The Committee received 30 responses to its call for views from individuals, organisations, government bodies and businesses, along with a further 11 written submissions. The Committee held 14 oral evidence sessions with interested organisations and local government. The Committee explored a wide range of issues and concerns with departmental officials, who were always readily available to the Committee. I thank those officials. The Committee deliberated on the provisions of the Bill and proposed amendments at 10 further meetings, which concluded with its formal clause-by-clause considerations on 7 May 2026.

Throughout its consideration of the Bill, the Committee sought clarification on the intent, application and proportionality of the proposed powers, and explored how issues raised during the call for views might be addressed through proposed amendments or the supporting statutory guidance. Overall, there was broad support for the Bill's objective of equipping councils with modernised and consolidated powers to address dilapidated, dangerous and neglected buildings in the interests of amenity, public safety and community well-being. Stakeholders widely recognised the detrimental impact that poorly maintained and derelict buildings can have on local environments, particularly where such properties pose risks to public safety or undermine regeneration efforts. However, our evidence also highlighted concerns about the capacity of and financial constraints on councils; the need for clarity on the definitions and thresholds; and the importance of ensuring that councils apply their powers consistently.

Arising directly from the council's evidence and deliberations were a number of amendments that the Minister agreed to take forward, including amendments to existing clauses and the introduction of a new review clause as requested by the Committee. Those amendments demonstrate the effectiveness of the Committee's scrutiny and the value of the extended Committee Stage. I commend the Minister and the Department for engaging with the Committee on the amendments, because it is always better to do it in that manner. While NILGA and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers (SOLACE) initially declined to give oral evidence, the Committee always wished to place a particular emphasis on engagement with local government, in recognition of the central role that councils play in implementing such legislation. The Committee pursued the matter further, with NILGA subsequently attending in January. NILGA raised significant outstanding issues, which prompted the Committee to request direct departmental engagement with local government in order to resolve them.

The Committee's actions in going beyond routine evidence sessions reflected its determination to ensure that the concerns of those responsible for implementation were explored. The Committee facilitated further engagement with NILGA, including through a second oral evidence session, and requested that the Assembly's Bill Office officials met directly with councils' Building Control representatives to help them better understand the operational implications. The Committee sought proposals from local government on amendments and requested a formal departmental response to each of them. However, having considered the amendments in depth, the Committee accepted the Department's position that most proposals are already covered by existing legislation or will be better dealt with by the statutory guidance.

Notwithstanding that, the Committee recognises that local government remains dissatisfied that not all of its proposals were accepted and that its concerns persist regarding aspects of the Bill. The Committee highlighted the fact that effective implementation would rely on a number of factors, including clear guidance, consistent application and a robust post-implementation review, and we recommended that the Department continue to work with local government to strengthen the statutory guidance.

I take the opportunity to thank all those who submitted written evidence and gave oral evidence to the Committee. I also thank the departmental officials, the Bill Office and the Committee secretariat for their help throughout the Committee Stage, and I highlight the good working relationships between the Committee secretariat and the officials.

I now turn to amendment No 1, which is to clause 2. The Committee considered proposals, including those from NILGA and Building Control Northern Ireland (BCNI), to align the wording of clause 2(2)(c) with the wording of clause 1(1) and to introduce a material degree threshold. At a meeting on 30 April, the Department indicated that it intended to propose an amendment to align the wording of clause 2(2)(c) with that of clause 1(1) by substituting the words "being detrimental to" for "adversely affecting". The Committee was content with that approach and is pleased to support amendment No 1.

Amendment No 2 is to clause 4. The Committee considered evidence from the historic environment division, which is otherwise known as "HED", and Ulster Architectural Heritage that highlighted the need to strengthen the clause to better align it with the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. In particular, it was noted that the 2011 Act provides for the offence of carrying out unauthorised works on a listed building and that listed building consent for alterations or demolitions does not strictly relate solely to condition. The Committee raised those matters with officials at its meeting on 12 February, and, at the Committee's request, officials subsequently engaged further with HED. The Minister then agreed to table an amendment to clause 4(5) to include an explicit reference to statutory heritage controls. The Committee is satisfied that amendment No 2 strengthens the provision and is pleased to support it.

Amendment No 3 is to clause 7(4) and is consequential to amendment No 2. The Committee considered evidence from HED that highlighted the need to include an explicit reference to statutory heritage controls. The Committee is content with that approach and is pleased to support amendment No 3.

I turn to amendment Nos 4 to 18. On 17 September, the Committee was advised of the Minister's intention to amend the title of clause 11 to avoid confusion with the Defective Premises (Northern Ireland) Order 1975 as recently amended. That was in light of ongoing work by the Department for Communities on building safety legislation and wider concerns regarding fragmentation in that area. The Committee supported the Department's view that references to "defective premises" should be removed and replaced with more appropriate terminology. The Committee subsequently considered a suite of 16 proposed amendments to clause 11 and is content to support the revised approach under amendment Nos 4 to 18.

Amendment No 19 was tabled after Committee Stage. However, the issue of cost recovery was considered during our deliberations in February. Members explored what constitutes "reasonable costs" and, in particular, whether the costs associated with fencing off sites are recoverable by councils. At that time, officials clarified that "reasonable costs" is a term used in other legislation and that councils should apply a degree of common sense in determining what is reasonable in the circumstances. Officials also confirmed that, under clause 12(4), councils may recover the cost of fencing off sites but only up to the point at which the danger is secured.

I now turn to amendment Nos 20 and 21. The Committee recognised that those amendments are consequential to the change in the title of clause 11, and we support the amendments.

Amendment No 22 is to clause 16. The Committee considered evidence from councils that highlighted concerns that the provision could limit their ability to obtain ownership information and would represent a weakening of existing powers under article 72 of the Pollution Control and Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 1978. The Committee raised those concerns with officials, who took legal advice and subsequently advised us, on 31 March, that the Minister had agreed to table an amendment to broaden the scope of the clause and to align the provision more closely with article 72 to enable councils to require information from a person in relation to a property. The Committee is content with that approach and is pleased to support amendment No 22.

I turn to amendment Nos 23 and 24. Those minor amendments were noted by the Committee as introduced by the Minister during Committee Stage with regard to clause 17.

Amendment Nos 25 and 26 are to clause 18. The Committee considered evidence indicating that, under the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, where entry is refused, consent may be sought from a lay magistrate. The Committee queried whether it would be appropriate to reflect a similar provision in the Bill. Officials subsequently confirmed on 19 March that they would be content to propose said amendment. The amendment provides for the seeking of a warrant from a lay magistrate where entry has been confused, which is comparable with section 177 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. The Committee is content with that approach and is pleased to support amendment Nos 25 and 26.

Amendment Nos 27 and 28 relate to clause 19. The Committee considered whether the Bill made adequate provision for stronger penalties in respect of repeat offenders. Officials clarified that the payment of a fixed penalty notice discharges liability for conviction only and does not remove the requirement to carry out the work specified in the notice. The Committee also explored the handling of multiple maintenance notices. On 17 April, officials advised, following receipt of legal advice, that issuing further fixed penalty notices for the same circumstances would not be appropriate, as it could amount to penalising an individual twice for the same offence.

The Committee then sought further clarification on scenarios that involve repeat offenders with multiple properties. Officials advised that the Bill allows for multiple notices, including different types of notice, to be issued in respect of a property. The Committee was subsequently informed that the Department would propose an amendment to provide that payment of a fixed penalty would discharge liability for a conviction only up to the date of payment. That allows for further enforcement action, including court proceedings, in cases of continued non-compliance. The Committee is content with the approach and is pleased to support amendment Nos 27 and 28.

Amendment No 29 relates to clause 21(6). The Committee was content when it was proposed by the Minister during Committee Stage and following further clarification on multiple notices.

The Committee recognised the need for ministerial amendment No 30 to clause 25 to align with the new title of clause 11.

Amendment No 31 was tabled after Committee Stage, so I will turn to amendment No 32. Following deliberations, the Committee concluded that the inclusion of a review and reporting clause was essential to the Bill. Such a provision would enable the Assembly and future AERA Committees to assess the effectiveness of the legislation and ensure that councils contribute to that process through the provision of relevant information. At our meeting on 23 April, Department officials indicated that the Minister would consider drafting a standard clause in that regard. Subsequently, the Committee, at its meeting on 7 May, considered a draft amendment. Following clarification from officials that the proposed regulations would broadly reflect those set out in section 228 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, the Committee agreed to support the inclusion of new clause 28A as drafted. Therefore, the Committee is pleased to support amendment No 32.

Amendment Nos 33, 34 and 35 were tabled after Committee Stage completed, so I will turn now to amendment No 36. On schedule 1, the Department advised the Committee of that additional provision, subject to the new provision to fix penalty notices at clause 19, so the Committee is pleased to support amendment No 36.

That ends my comments as the Chair of the Committee.

If you do not mind, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will now reflect the thoughts of the Ulster Unionist Party as its spokesperson. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the amendments to the Dilapidation Bill. At the outset, I acknowledge the considerable work undertaken by the Committee and the engagement that has taken place between the Department, councils, heritage bodies and other stakeholders throughout the scrutiny process. The Ulster Unionist Party supports the principles behind the legislation. Across Northern Ireland, whether it is in our villages, towns or city centres, too many communities are blighted by derelict buildings, dangerous structures and neglected sites. They undermine regeneration, deter investment and create genuine safety concerns. The challenge has never been identifying the problem, however; it has always been providing councils with the practical tools to address it.

Many of the Minister's amendments seek to improve the Bill and respond to concerns raised during scrutiny by the Committee. The Ulster Unionist Party is broadly content with them.

Looking at amendment No 1, the Ulster Unionist Party welcomed the decision to align the wording of clause 2 with that used elsewhere in the Bill, because consistency in drafting matters significantly, particularly where councils would be required to make judgements on whether a building or site falls within the scope of the legislation. However, clear guidance will still be required to ensure that the provisions are applied consistently across all council areas. I returned to that point many times throughout deliberations on the Bill: we really require all councils to respond in the same manner, whether that is in urban settings or, particularly, in rural settings.

The Ulster Unionist Party also welcomes amendment Nos 2 and 3 relating to heritage sites. Northern Ireland has a rich tapestry of heritage buildings and sites. Through the scrutiny process, concerns were raised that efforts to tackle dilapidation should not inadvertently undermine existing heritage protections. The amendments provide greater reassurance in that regard, and they recognise that regeneration and heritage preservation should not be viewed as competing objectives.

Turning to amendment Nos 4 to 18, we support the changes to clause 11. While largely technical in nature, the amendments provide greater clarity and avoid confusion with existing defective premises legislation. Clear and understandable legislation is always preferable, particularly where councils and property owners alike need certainty regarding their responsibilities.

Amendment No 19 is particularly important. Throughout the scrutiny, councils repeatedly highlighted concerns regarding cost recovery. Giving councils powers to intervene is one thing; ensuring that they are not left carrying disproportionate financial burdens is another. The amendment provides useful clarification regarding the recovery of costs associated with fencing and securing dangerous sites. However, we would welcome further assurance from the Minister regarding circumstances where ownership becomes disputed, where sites have effectively been abandoned or where the recovery of costs proves difficult for councils. Councils must have confidence that their use of the powers will not leave ratepayers having to carry the financial burden.

The Ulster Unionist Party supports amendment Nos 20 and 21. Amendment No 21 covers consequential changes arising from amendments to clause 11.

We also welcome amendment No 22. One of the recurring themes raised by councils was the difficulty in identifying ownership and obtaining the information necessary to pursue enforcement action. Strengthening the information-gathering powers is therefore a sensible and practical improvement to the Bill. Nevertheless, identifying responsible persons remains one of the greatest barriers to effective enforcement, and the Minister should continue to work closely with councils to ensure that the powers are effective in practice.

We are content to support amendment Nos 23 and 24.

Regarding amendment Nos 25 and 26, we welcome the introduction of a warrant process where access to land has been refused. That represents an appropriate balance between providing councils with effective enforcement powers and protecting individual property rights and ensuring due process.

Amendment Nos 27, 28 and 29 and the consequential amendment No 36 provide welcome clarity regarding the fixed penalty notice and ongoing liability for non-compliance. Throughout the passage of the Bill, Members have questioned whether the fixed penalty regime will provide a sufficient deterrent, particularly for repeat offenders. While the amendments strengthen the position, their effectiveness will, ultimately, be tested only in practice.

We are content to support amendment No 30, as it is a consequential amendment arising from changes to clause 11.

We welcome amendment No 32 and respect the fact that it may be one of the most important amendments before the House today. If we grant councils significant new powers, it is only right that the Assembly has an opportunity to assess whether those powers are being used effectively; whether they are delivering improvements on the ground; and whether further legislative change would be required. The review mechanism will provide an important opportunity to assess implementation, consistency of enforcement, council capacity and the overall effectiveness of the legislation. Those conversations with councils will be crucial to ensuring the efficacy and deliverability of the proposed legislation.

I wish to comment on the late amendments that were tabled by Mr McCrossan and Mr McGrath: amendment Nos 31, 33, 34 and 35. I will listen to the Member's comments on amendment Nos 31 and 34 and the consequential No 35, because, while I recognise that the establishment and maintenance of a public register will inevitably create an additional administrative burden for the councils, I believe that it is worth listening to the merits of the debate. At times, the Committee was at pains to ensure that the burden would not be put on councils because there was no new money coming with the provisions of the Bill. While there is merit in the amendment, we want to listen to the Member and give him the right to make his case. We also want to listen to the Minister in the winding-up speech on the implications of the amendment.

If the Bill is to achieve its objectives, we need to be able to measure its effectiveness. An accurate and publicly available register would provide not only greater accountability but a valuable evidence base from which councils, the Department and future Assembly Committees could assess progress, identify trends and determine whether further intervention may be required. Likewise, the inclusion of district electoral area (DEA) information could help Members, councils and local communities to better understand how the powers are being used across Northern Ireland. While some initial work may be required to establish such a system, the long-term benefits could provide an accurate baseline and an ongoing public record that may outweigh the other costs.

We are therefore interested in hearing further about a cost-benefit analysis of that.

We are, however, less convinced by amendment No 33. That is not to suggest that the proposal lacks any merit. There is undoubtedly value in understanding the prevalence of dilapidated buildings, dangerous structures and neglected sites across Northern Ireland. Rather, the Ulster Unionist Party's concern is one of principle. The proposal would have benefited significantly from being considered during Committee Stage, as that would have provided an opportunity for us to engage directly with councils, stakeholders and the Department to test its practicality, to explore how such a review would be conducted and, importantly, to quantify the costs and benefits associated with the introduction of such a requirement. Without that scrutiny having been undertaken, Members are being asked to take a view on a potentially significant new obligation in the absence of the level of evidence that normally informs good legislation. For that reason, although we will consider amendment Nos 31, 34 and 35, we are not persuaded by amendment No 33.

In conclusion, the amendments strengthen the Bill, but legislation alone will not solve the problem of dilapidation. The legislation's true test will not be whether it passes but whether councils will have the resources, guidance and confidence necessary to use the powers effectively. Our towns, villages and city centres deserve better than to have buildings that are left to deteriorate year after year. The Bill provides an opportunity to address that challenge. The Ulster Unionist Party supports the majority of the amendments before us, particularly those that the Minister tabled. We encourage him to continue to engage with councils on the Bill's implementation, on assistance with cost recovery, on guidance and on the future review of the legislation.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I call Daniel McCrossan.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and happy birthday. I am not sure whether it makes you the grandfather of the House or whether you are working towards that title, but, nonetheless, happy birthday.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Less of your ageism, Daniel.

[Laughter.]

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I jest.

The Bill is important, as we all know and as was widely discussed at Committee Stage. As the Chair of the Committee and the Minister reiterated in their contributions, dilapidation has a real impact on communities. It undermines regeneration, damages local pride and creates considerable public safety concerns, about which we, as constituency MLAs, hear all too often. For far too long, communities have been forced to live with derelict buildings and neglected sites, while local authorities have lacked the necessary powers to intervene effectively. I get that that is why the Bill is so essential, in that it provides the tools required to remedy that particular issue. Although we support its broad intent, the Bill alone will not solve the problem of dilapidation. There is a desperate need for the necessary funding and resources to back it up.

One of the strongest themes to emerge during the Committee's scrutiny was the concern about cost recovery and the financial burden that might be placed on local councils. Members have been clear about the genuine concern that the burden will ultimately fall to the ratepayer. We all know that, over recent years, councils have stated firmly on the record that they continue to be under serious financial pressure and that they face increasing expectations and demands on their services with less real-terms funding to meet their responsibilities. We hear daily from ratepayers who are fed up with seeing rising rates but not the investment that they expect to see in our towns, villages and cities.

The Bill gives councils significant new responsibilities. That is to be welcomed, but giving them responsibilities is not sufficient. They also need the necessary funding and resources to ensure effective delivery in order to remedy what is an outstanding and ongoing issue. As I said, questions remain as to whether councils will have the resources to use the powers effectively on the ground and whether all 11 councils will take the same approach consistently. When considering the Bill, we should be careful that we do not create a situation in which the public's expectations are raised but councils are left to carry the financial burden. As is often the case when we speak in the House, it may be that some ratepayers or members of the public will take it as a given that the Bill will be the silver bullet that will resolve the dilapidation issues in towns. Depending on which area you are in, the scale is very different. For example, I represent Omagh, which shares a council area with Fermanagh, and Strabane, which shares a council area with Derry. Whilst both councils have significant issues across the board with dilapidation, dereliction and dangerous buildings etc, the situation in some areas is worse than in others. I would argue, selfishly, for instance, that Strabane town has particular issues where there are buildings of a significant age, and there is just not the means to restore them, particularly in line with the heritage requirements that are in place.

Addressing dilapidation is not simply a matter for local government in isolation. The responsibility lies with the Executive as a whole. The Executive have had their eyes closed to this matter for too long, and many of our buildings have deteriorated significantly across council areas over a long period. It could be argued that, until now, the Executive have failed to get a handle on the matter, and significant deterioration has been the result. In fairness, however, within the cogs of the Bill, the Minister is pointing to a very clear and obvious problem. In my view, he has good intentions to resolve the issues for councils, but we cannot just fire out the legislation and, as I said, expect ratepayers to pick up the slack, particularly with all the other competing financial demands that exist.

If we are serious about tackling dereliction, vacant properties and neglected sites, then DAERA, the Department for Communities and the Department of Finance all have a role to play. We need to remove silo working, look at our local towns, villages and cities collectively as an Executive and work to find solutions that will breathe new life into those places. There is widespread criticism that our town centres are dying. Members have spoken about that on numerous occasions in the House. A number of constituency colleagues who sit on the AERA Committee and know Omagh and Strabane and their surrounding villages — I am speaking parochially because that is where I know best — often say that not enough has been done to deal with the issues at hand. Whilst the Executive and Departments have been quite good at pumping money into regeneration schemes for footpaths, roads and street landscaping, the buildings that sit amongst those wonderful new settings are often eyesores that take away from the significant investment that has been made in those areas.

Enforcement powers are absolutely important, and will serve as a reminder to those concerned that they have a responsibility to carry out works. That applies in particular to those who have been land-banking over a period of time — that happens everywhere, unfortunately — with the hope that the big cash cow will be coming and, ultimately, they will be relieved of their responsibility to maintain, look after and enhance the landscape in a town or village by spending the necessary funds to keep the building up to a good standard. I could list significant numbers of properties in many towns and villages that are owned by a few individuals. Those individuals constantly ask my office whether any grants are available for those buildings whilst, at the same time, buying another building down the street. I get that there is a fundamental issue that needs to be resolved.

We have to remember that there are a wide variety of circumstances that are unique to individuals. For instance, some people might have the great misfortune to inherit a complete wreck of a building, with no means to resolve the problem, and end up in a very difficult situation. That is a concern that I have. There may be those who have an aunt or uncle with no children — I do not — who might leave them an old mill in Strabane, for instance, which could very quickly become a problem under the legislation.

Enforcement powers in themselves cannot become a substitute for the necessary investment that is required. More is needed from the Departments that I have listed to complement the legislation and to interpret what the legislation intends to do. Hopefully, after further conversation with the Minister, that will be something that he and his Executive colleagues will be keen to consider.

A strong case remains for targeted regeneration schemes and funding programmes to bring problematic properties back into productive use. Indeed, that has happened: we have seen it in Belfast, Derry and elsewhere over the years. Realistically, however, the Executive cannot come on a white horse and restore all derelict buildings and properties across Northern Ireland; that is just not practical, nor should it be the case, as people need to live up to their own responsibilities. As I said, some areas are worse than others. A neglected building is often a symptom of wider issues, such as economic decline, underinvestment and failed regeneration. Some towns and cities in Northern Ireland are thriving: those with much better populated urban centres where there is a hive of activity. That encourages private investment, and there is natural enhancement from those investors. However, in areas that lag behind because of economic decline, underinvestment and general deprivation, many towns and cities can quickly become the poor cousin.

The Bill is not perfect; that fact has been well rehearsed and certainly was throughout the AERA Committee's many meetings. However, it is a significant improvement on the current fragmented and outdated framework, which has really not served our communities well. We have to be honest about the Bill's being a starting point. As the Chair of the Committee rightly said, the Committee undertook extensive scrutiny of the Bill and raised a number of legitimate concerns on councils' behalf. We heard those concerns through various evidence sessions. Heritage bodies were also clear, as were other stakeholders such as Building Control, about the Bill's unintended consequences without its having the necessary the teeth to deliver.

It is welcome that the Minister has listened to many of the Committee's concerns. That does not always happen. A number of amendments have been tabled that would strengthen the Bill, but we could go much further. I am sure that, as we continue the process, the Minister will be all ears to hear what else can be done to improve it. As the official Opposition, we will support the Minister's amendments today. We recognise the constructive engagement that has taken place throughout the scrutiny process, not just from the Minister and departmental officials but from all the witnesses who looked at the issue honestly and said, "Yes, there is a problem here". We just need to ensure that we find the right way to fix it.

Concerns have been raised about our amendments and their consequences. Some Members have said that they place an extra burden on councils. We ask Members to consider the amendments; they are designed to strengthen transparency, accountability and public confidence in the operation of the legislation, so that we are clear at all times about the scale of the problem and how we resolve the issues.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Daniel, please resume your seat.

The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm today. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the first Member to be called to speak will be Daniel McCrossan to continue his contribution.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.59 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Economy

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

1. Ms Bradshaw asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any work being undertaken by her Department to support the sustainability of the hospitality sector. (AQO 3732/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

My Department, along with partner organisations, offers a wide range of supports to help hospitality businesses to become more sustainable. That includes promoting energy efficiency, encouraging innovation, developing skills and helping them to explore new markets. Invest NI provides advice, guidance, innovation grants and access to finance for small and medium-sized businesses. Tourism NI has launched a business resilience programme to support tourism businesses by offering expert financial guidance and a bespoke action plan.

Earlier this year, I met Hospitality Ulster and the NI Food To Go Association about a VAT reduction pilot scheme to address differences between the North and the South. Following that meeting, the Minister of Finance and I wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, seeking a meeting on the issue. Members may also be aware that I have recently published research into the night-time economy, which was undertaken in partnership with Tourism NI and the Belfast business improvement district. That has already led to funding for a late-night transport pilot in Belfast, supporting a safe and vibrant night-time economy.

My Department will continue to monitor business sentiment and engaging with stakeholders to support a sustainable and thriving hospitality sector, in line with our four economic priorities.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. My office is on the Ormeau Road, which I walked up last week just after the disturbances and riots. The only businesses that were shut were the businesses, restaurants and cafes that are run by ethnic minority communities. Obviously, they lost out on income, which they can ill afford. The staff also lost out on tips, wages and stuff. It was really disappointing that they did not feel that it was safe enough to open. There was obviously an information vacuum, because other restaurants and cafes etc were open; other businesses felt safe enough. What plans can you put in place so that, if there is any such eventuality in the future, there is better communication with those business owners so that they do not lose out on the income that their businesses deserve?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for the question. It is important that I put on record my unequivocal condemnation of the recent disorder. It has caused significant damage and disruption not just to public services but to our local economy. Many businesses have been affected. Obviously, that comes at a time, as you said, when they can ill afford it; our businesses are already under considerable pressure due to the rising costs of doing business and the increased cost of living, which impacts on their customers. As you outlined, many of those business owners are from minority ethnic backgrounds, but so too are their staff. It is important that people feel safe while going to their place of work and feel that they can open their businesses safely.

I had the opportunity last week to meet Steve Lazars from the Ethnic Minority Employment and Entrepreneurship Network and hear directly about the experiences of some of our minority ethnic businesses. I will follow that up next week to get a greater insight. It is important to understand the direct experience, as well as trying to respond to it, which, obviously, we will seek to do. It is important that we look at the experiences of the past week, and at the response in general. I raised some issues about messaging with the Chief Constable when he attended the Executive last week. It is important that we reflect on all of that.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for her leadership on this issue, especially given that leadership has been lacking from so many others in our society.

Minister, you mentioned research that has been undertaken into the night-time economy. Will you elaborate on that and on what that means when it comes to supporting our businesses?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for that question. The Department published what is first-of-its-kind research into our night-time economy in collaboration with Tourism NI and the three business improvement districts of Belfast, which are Belfast One, Destination Cathedral Quarter and the Linen Quarter. The research was conducted by Ipsos and Nordicity and has already been instrumental in securing that funding for the late-night transport pilot scheme in Belfast. The research shows that our night-time economy contributed between £2·8 billion and £3·7 billion in gross value added in 2024 and supports over 100,000 full-time equivalent jobs. The research will further the development of a safe, thriving and diverse night-time economy that works for the hospitality and tourism sectors and for our communities. To support that ambition, the Department has already taken a number of steps, including working with Tourism NI to explore tourism's potential in the night-time economy.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Minister, do you agree that those operating in the sector outside the greater Belfast area face significantly greater challenges and require enhanced support to ensure their sustainability?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question, and I think that there is merit in what he is saying. Obviously, if you are in a city centre with all its attractions, you have the ability to attract more people to boost your night-time economy. The research that I referred to looked at Derry and Enniskillen, and that also gives important insights. The work that our councils are doing through the local economic partnerships gives us an opportunity to look at how the night-time economy can contribute and be supported across our different council areas. Obviously, the contexts that they work in will differ, and it is important to reflect that in the plans that are being introduced so that they are responsive to the needs of the local areas. I certainly encourage pursuing conversations about that with local councils. Your council area and my council area have significant tourism attractions, and opportunities for the night-time economy are directly linked to that. Again, there are opportunities to work with Tourism NI on how we can better support our night-time economy across the board.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, as we move towards July and the further lowering of the VAT rate for food and hospitality in the Republic of Ireland, the hospitality sector is looking at changing its operating models to address what it sees as a situation that is almost perilous to the operation of its businesses. How will you monitor the impact that that will have on businesses in the short, medium and long term, and what steps can the Department take to assist those businesses?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for that question. It is certainly of significant concern to me, and I know that it is of significant concern to many of our tourism and hospitality businesses and those who represent them. I mentioned that we previously met Hospitality Ulster and the Food to Go Association. We have, obviously, corresponded with Treasury on the matter. We are yet to have a response from Treasury, which is outrageous, given the impact that we are seeing on our local businesses and the further impact that we will see in the near future as the differential widens further. The Finance Minister and I will follow up on that correspondence, and we will continue to engage with the sector. It is important that we monitor the situation as that differential widens further, and I will ask the Department to look at how we can do that in a quantitative way as well as in the qualitative way that we hear from the sector directly.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

2. Mr Brett asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any measures in place to ensure there are no conflicts of interest when making appointments to the board of Invest NI. (AQO 3733/22-27)

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

3. Miss McIlveen asked the Minister for the Economy to outline how the Nolan principles are applied when appointing members to the board of Invest NI. (AQO 3734/22-27)

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

8. Mr Brooks asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any steps taken to avoid conflicts of interest when appointments are made to the board of Invest NI. (AQO 3739/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will group questions 2, 3 and 8.

Appointments to the board of Invest NI are made in accordance with the code of practice issued by the Commissioner for Public Appointments (CPANI). The code provides a clear and robust framework for managing conflicts of interest at all stages of the appointments process. Applicants are required to declare any relevant interests, which are fully assessed by the selection panel as part of its evaluation of suitability. In addition, appointees are required to declare and manage interests on an ongoing basis once appointed. The selection panel is also required to declare any potential conflicts. They must be managed by the panel chair to ensure the integrity of the process.

My role is also clearly defined in the code. I make appointments from only those candidates deemed suitable by the selection panel, based on the evidence provided and assessed against the selection criteria agreed at the outset of the process. Those criteria were determined by me and informed by consultation with the chair of the Invest NI board and the chair of the selection panel.

The process, therefore, ensures that conflicts are identified, considered and managed appropriately before any appointment decision is made. The Nolan principles are reflected throughout the process. Appointments are made through fair and open competition, with independent assessment, appropriate declarations of interest and proper record-keeping to support accountability, openness and public confidence.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Thank you, Minister. One of your party colleagues whom you appointed to the board of Invest Northern Ireland, Mr Peter Lynch, was convicted of terrorist activity in 1993 for conspiracy to commit murder. Is there any crime that someone could carry out that, in your view, would disbar them from being appointed to public office? Or, is the sole qualification for appointment by you that they be a party colleague?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I completely reject the final part of the Member's question. Clearly, that is absolutely not the case. As I have outlined in detail, the appointments were made in line with the code of practice that was issued by the Commissioner for Public Appointments. The process was followed robustly. At all stages, the proper process was followed and records were taken to ensure its transparency and accountability.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

The Nolan principles exist to ensure that those who govern act solely in the public interest. The principles include avoiding obligations to outside individuals or organisations that might influence official duties; making decisions based on merit; being accountable to the public for actions and decisions; declaring private interests; and resolving conflict to protect the public interest. How can the public be assured of compliance with those principles when the Minister appoints a former IRA prisoner and a former Sinn Féin Minister to the same board?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As I have set out clearly, the process that was followed was fully in line with the CPANI guidance and code of practice. As the Member will be aware, given that she was a Minister, the Nolan principles guide everything that we do as Ministers. They were fully upheld within this process.

The people who were appointed will add value to the Invest NI board. Obviously, each one of them came through the process and was deemed appointable by the panel that selected them and put them forward to me for appointment. We have a good, strong board, and, as I said, the people who were appointed to it will add value.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

The Minister said that the candidates were presented to her for selection. Were the candidates presented to her in rank order? If so, which specific skills, expertise and experience did Peter Lynch display that made him particularly appointable?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As I have set out very clearly, the selection process was followed. The skill set that was asked for was set out as part of the application process, and all the candidates who passed the selection process had the skill set that deemed them to be appointable. They all fulfilled that criteria.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Minister, do you agree that the discrimination in employment and the political vetting that have been practised in this state for so long, and actively supported by some Members, have no place in today's society, and that appointment to government boards should be open to all sections of society, including such citizens as Peter Lynch?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. There is no place in modern society for discrimination of any kind. It is important that all our public boards are reflective of society and that the appointment process is open, inclusive and accessible to all sections of society.

That was clearly the case with the appointment process, where the guidance and code of practice were followed. Ensuring that appointment processes are open and transparent strengthens governance, enhances our decision-making and supports the delivery of high-quality public services. That is what people expect of us.

Regardless of people's political background or experiences, processes have to be followed, and that is clearly what happened in that case. As I have said to other Members, the five people who were appointed add significant value to the board. They have diverse experience across different sections of our economy, and that is exactly what we need on all public boards.

I take appointments to our public boards incredibly seriously. Board members do an important job. My Department's arm's-length bodies (ALBs) spend a significant part of my budget, so boards must hold those ALBs to account. It is therefore important that the people appointed to them have the necessary skills and experience, and appointing on the basis of merit ensures that that is the case.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Minister will be aware that, under the public appointments guide published by the Executive Office, it is clear that she is supposed to take independent advice before appointing board members. What independent advice did she receive, particularly about the board members selected?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

There is an application process and an interview process. At that point, the names of candidates who, according to the selection panel, have passed the interview process are presented to me by my officials for appointment. Nineteen candidates passed the interview process and were put forward for appointment. As I have said clearly to other Members, all five were deemed to be appointable on the basis that they added value to the Invest NI board and would bring different experience to it. The 14 others remain on a list for potential appointment for up to a year. The process was followed robustly, and I stand over it fully.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Given that the IRA bombed the heart out of Belfast and my home town of Ballymena, which resulted in the murder of Yvonne Dunlop, will you outline, Minister, exactly the skill set that former IRA man Peter Lynch brings to economic development that justifies him sitting on the board of Invest NI, apart from being one of the boyos?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I will take no lectures from any Member whose party continues to share platforms with those who speak on behalf of active paramilitaries. As I have said, the application process set out clearly the skill set required, and the people deemed appointable to the board of Invest NI passed that process; otherwise, their names would not have been presented to me for appointment. As I said, that shows that the process was followed robustly, and I believe that the people who have been appointed add value to the board.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

John Stewart is not in his place.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

5. Miss Hargey asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on the 'good jobs' employment rights Bill. (AQO 3736/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I am profoundly disappointed that I have been prevented from bringing the Bill to the Assembly at this time and that MLAs have not yet had the fullest opportunity to consider it in detail. It is my view that workers and their families are being let down by the delay. The Bill has been designed to support good jobs and fair workplaces, while recognising the needs of business, and I intend to continue to seek its introduction in the Assembly as soon as possible. I have listened to businesses, and the Bill has been drafted to be a carefully balanced package. In spite of the delay, I am firmly of the view that there is still time in the mandate to progress the Bill and deliver progressive reforms for our economy. I encourage my Executive and Assembly colleagues to support that aim.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thanks very much, Minister. It appears that some do not like working-class people or, indeed, trade unions. Trade unions play an integral role in the social and economic fabric here and have done so for well over 100 years on our streets. Do you agree that, in 2026, they still play a vital role in informing workers of their rights and, importantly, helping them to exercise those rights?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I completely agree that trade unions play a positive role in helping workers understand and exercise their rights. Where trade unions are present, they provide workers with access to information, advice and representation, which can make it easier to raise concerns and to seek improvements in the workplace. Trade unions also perform a recognised role in negotiating pay and conditions on behalf of their members and in providing a structured channel for dialogue between employers and employees.

Evidence shows that effective worker voice and representation, including through trade unions, is associated with higher job quality, stronger workplace relationships and, in some contexts, improved organisational performance. Extending access to independent representation is particularly important in the parts of our economy where worker voice is currently limited, as it will help ensure that workers are aware of their rights and able to exercise them in practice.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, your party has shamefully used vulnerable people for its own party political aims around the employment rights Bill. You and your colleagues wrongly stated that the DUP blocked provision for neonatal parental leave, despite your having taken two years to bring the legislation to the Executive table. Will you apologise to neonatal parents like me for disgracefully using children and carers for party campaigning on the issue? Take my party leader and my deputy First Minister up on their offer to split the Bill and let the aims for parental leave —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Can we have the question now?

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— progress in this mandate.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I completely reject the Member's assertions. We have developed a Bill that is balanced in its aims and objectives. It will provide workers with additional rights and the ability to exercise them.

[Interruption.]

Your party is blocking the Bill in the Executive. It has not allowed it on the Executive agenda for decision; therefore, it is blocking it.

[Interruption.]

The Bill as a whole is drafted and sitting ready to go. Where it should be debated and scrutinised is in the Chamber. Every MLA should have the opportunity to take a view on the Bill and allow it to progress to Committee Stage for scrutiny. If Members want to table amendments to the Bill, they are absolutely free to do so. That is the democratic process that should be followed.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

I know that the Minister agrees that it is in the Chamber that we will create a Bill that will work for the trade unions, business and everyone; it is in the Chamber that we should make the right legislation. What is the last date on which the Bill can be introduced for us to scrutinise it to the required level before the end of the mandate?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. I have repeatedly stated my preference for the Bill to be with the Committee for the summer recess to allow the longest possible time for scrutiny. Members have talked about how the Bill needs scrutiny and said that people need to have their say on it. I fully support that, which is why I would have liked there to be the longest possible time for it.

As I have also said, there is plenty of time for the Bill to be scrutinised. The Committee Stage of the equivalent Westminster legislation took seven weeks. That gives us guidance on the time frame that we are talking about to allow for scrutiny. The Committee can take the time that it wants. I want the Bill to be in Committee at the earliest opportunity, so I would like to see the proposal passed by the Executive. I see absolutely no reason why it cannot be passed at the next Executive meeting or over the summer months so that the Bill can be introduced at the earliest opportunity in September.

I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Executive. I have had constructive conversations with all my ministerial colleagues, the vast majority of whom are on record as supporting it. I want to ensure that that work continues so that all Members will see the content of the Bill and that everybody who wants to give a view on it has the ability to do so, which means seeing it as it has been drafted.

Julie Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

6. Mrs Middleton asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any engagement she has had with the Minister for Infrastructure to ensure that the expansion of City of Derry Airport and north-west rail networks are prioritised to bolster regional trade. (AQO 3737/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I have ongoing engagement with the Minister for Infrastructure on issues relating to the north-west.

I am aware that DFI is considering the strategic vision of the all-island strategic rail review and that its focus is currently on prioritisation and appraisal, with no decisions yet having been taken on the progression of specific projects, including those affecting the north-west.

My Department will, of course, provide support to DFI as necessary to ensure that the economy in the north-west is underpinned by strong transport links.

My Department's aviation policy consultation, which recently closed, set out a number of proposals to support our airports and air connectivity. The responses are being considered. My Department will, of course, continue to work closely with DFI, including on any proposals for airport expansion that are brought forward, given the importance of air connectivity to our local economy.

Julie Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. Tourism NI-funded events in the north-west are projected to pull in £21 million for the local economy in 2026-27. Minister, how are you working with the airport and other key stakeholders to ensure that we have the capacity to accommodate the massive tourist influx for some of our most significant events?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for that question. I have ongoing engagement with Tourism NI and Derry City and Strabane District Council. I am delighted that we are able to support those events in the north-west, given the significant value that they will add to the local economy. I am particularly excited about the 40th anniversary of Derry Halloween in October. The success of that event, which people from all over the world come to enjoy, shows how well we can do tourism locally and how we can support local events. We will continue to work in partnership with Tourism NI and Tourism Ireland and alongside the council to support anything that is necessary to deliver on forthcoming events this year in order to ensure that they are a success and that we can build on them for the future.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you to the Minister for her commitment to the north-west in particular in addressing regional balance. Minister, how are you supporting the viability of City of Derry Airport?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As the Member will be aware, I previously announced that my Department had assumed responsibility for providing operating funding of up to £3 million per annum for City of Derry Airport until 31 March 2029. That demonstrated my commitment to the long-term future of the airport and to protecting an important element of the north-west's economic infrastructure. The support provides greater certainty for the airport, as it continues to maintain connectivity and support trade, tourism and, of course, inward investment across the north-west. It will also help facilitate the proposed Derry to Dublin public service obligation (PSO) by underpinning the airport's operational sustainability and strengthening its ability to support additional socially and economically important services, including that commuter route from the north-west to Dublin.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Minister, if we are serious about growing aviation and regional connectivity, we need the widest possible pool of talent, including pilots and engineers. Your Department has identified the problem that exists, but what concrete action is it taking with the Irish Government to improve mutual recognition of qualifications and skills across the island?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. He will be aware of the Irelandia report on aviation on the island. I have discussed that with colleagues in the South. I have had ongoing engagements with my counterpart James Lawless, Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, on how we can better join up skills programmes and qualification recognition across the island. On Friday past, I had a meeting about the potential for an all-island apprenticeship. We have seen the accounting technician apprenticeship, which was a really good first step. There are significant opportunities to do things jointly for our mutual benefit where there are skill sets that we need to develop across the island. The Member will also be aware of the work on offshore energy, which, again, has significant potential. To support the development of all those things, we have to make sure that we have skilled people coming through. I will continue to work with my colleagues across the island to make that happen.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

7. Miss McAllister asked the Minister for the Economy how the Belfast local economic partnership will ensure that investment reaches North Belfast, given that it contains five of Northern Ireland’s 10 most deprived areas. (AQO 3738/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

In establishing the £45 million regional balance fund, I have empowered councils, working with businesses and community partners in local economic partnerships (LEPs) to identify their own priorities and bring forward locally led projects to increase productivity. Decisions on what to deliver and where to deliver it are taken by the Belfast local economic partnership. I am pleased to report that the Belfast LEP has agreed an action plan for 2026-28. The plan includes flexibility to target support by location through, for example, enhanced business support that can be directed to specific parts of the city. Importantly, the plan is not yet fully allocated, with around £938,000 still to be committed, giving the partnership further scope to bring forward additional targeted interventions as priorities are refined. Taken together, that local decision-making, the built-in flexibility and the remaining funding will give the Belfast LEP lots of opportunities to target actions to the groups that it deems to be most appropriate.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move on to topicals.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Last Monday, my Regional Balance Bill hit the floor of the Assembly for its First Stage. I was delighted, as it had been a long time coming. I have long argued that, if regional balance is good policy, it should be good legislation as well.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

T1. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister for the Economy whether she will support the Regional Balance Bill and work with her to ensure that regional balance is embedded across all Departments. (AQT 2461/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question and congratulate her on the introduction of her Bill. I have not yet got the full read-out on the Bill and all its proposals; officials are working through that. The Member knows my views on the Bill and that I am open to legislation, if it is necessary and the proposals are appropriate and workable. I will absolutely consider all of that.

I completely agree about regional balance — the Member knows that. It is one of my priorities under the economic vision and is reflected in the Programme for Government. Every Department has a responsibility to make sure that regional balance happens and that we drive prosperity and opportunity across the North.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you for that answer, Minister: it sounded positive.

Despite regional balance being a stated Executive priority, no legislation has been introduced by your Department or the Executive, and the gaps between the regions are getting bigger. My Bill would strengthen the Executive's response and put regional balance on a statutory footing.

I want to work with you on this, Minister. It is really important that the Department for the Economy works effectively on the Bill. Will you agree to meet me, as soon as you get feedback from your officials, so that we can move forward collectively? I will work with my colleagues on the Economy Committee in the coming weeks.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her follow-up question. While there has been no legislation on regional balance from the Department for the Economy, it goes through everything that we do in the Department, as well as, now, all its arm's-length bodies. Invest NI has reflected it in its business plan. Of course, I will be happy to meet the Member to discuss the principles and proposals set out in her Bill, as I said before you got to the point of introducing it, and it is important that we work together to further our shared aims.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

T2. Miss Hargey asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on the energy strategy, particularly the grid connections policy and the scheme to promote the use of biomethane. (AQT 2462/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. I am pleased to say that we are making sustained and measurable progress in delivering against the energy strategy. There is a clear focus on removing barriers, enabling investment to come in and accelerating the transition to cleaner, more secure energy. My Department has been driving forward a programme of delivery across electricity, heat and energy efficiency. One example of that is our fairer grid connections policy, which delivers fundamental reform of how electricity connection charging operates. By removing the unfair upfront reinforcement costs, we make it easier and more affordable for homes and businesses to connect to the grid, particularly in rural areas and parts of the network where capacity is more limited. Those new arrangements are due to come into effect on 1 July.

Alongside that, we are determined to see progress on other measures, including those relating to low-carbon heat. We have a plan to redeploy any residual renewable heat incentive (RHI) annually managed expenditure (AME) funding following the closure of the scheme to support a biomethane support scheme. That has now been agreed in principle with the Treasury, subject, obviously, to the detailed development and approval of a business case.

I want to see the development of a biomethane sector that works towards delivering decarbonisation but is also environmentally sustainable and, crucially, works for local energy consumers. We have strong indigenous biomethane potential and opportunities to support decarbonisation, energy security and our rural economy. We are working closely with DAERA on the development of a coordinated biomethane policy framework that will go out for consultation later in the year. Together, all those actions, alongside others, will then be —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister, Ms Hargey will have a second bite at asking a question.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thanks very much, Minister. The grid connection policy is welcome because it will put money back into people's pockets. Can you provide a further update on the renewable targets and particularly on the renewable electricity price guarantee scheme (REPG), which will help to achieve those targets?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. On 26 March, the Executive agreed the renewable electricity price guarantee scheme policy intent and that work would progress on the primary Bill required to implement the scheme. Officials have now concluded the work with the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC). The draft primary Bill is complete, and the newly titled renewable electricity generation Bill was sent to the Executive for consideration at the last Executive meeting. Subject to Executive approval, the Bill will be introduced to the Assembly, and, once the primary Bill is in place, we will bring forward the subordinate regulations to set out the operational arrangements.

Members will have heard me say at different times that our statutory targets are ambitious and that we need to have the schemes in place to help us to meet those targets. The REPG scheme in particular is key to the delivery of 80% renewable electricity by 2030 and, of course, our net zero target.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T3. Ms Ferguson asked the Minister for the Economy, in light of her ongoing investment in tourism in Derry, which is very welcome, to comment on recent tourism performance, (AQT 2463/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. The NISRA tourism statistics for 2025 have only recently been published. They show that tourism is flourishing in the north-west, with overnight stays increasing in Derry City and Strabane District Council and Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council areas. The latest figures indicated that the two areas together welcomed more than one and a half million overnight trips during 2025, generating total visitor spend of £278 million.

It is particularly encouraging to see the growth in Derry City and Strabane, where all the key metrics increased compared with 2024. Overnight trips increased by 35%, the number of overnight visitors increased by 28%, and visitor expenditure increased by 13·5%. The figures are hugely encouraging and reflect the growing appeal of the city and district and the work that is going on there to develop the tourism offering.

As I mentioned in previous answers, we announced funding for a number of events across the north-west, including the 40th anniversary of Derry's Halloween festival.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for the update. It is really positive news, and it is due to the ongoing investment by the Department and the fantastic tourism industry that we have in the city. Does the Minister agree that the images of racial violence that were portrayed throughout the world do not represent who we are and that we are, in fact, a welcoming place for tourists?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I completely agree with the Member. I mentioned to Paula Bradshaw earlier that what we saw on our streets last week was absolutely disgraceful and has to be unequivocally condemned by everybody. It caused significant damage and disruption to public services, businesses and our local economy, and it came at a time when businesses were already under pressure.

My Department has reached out to business representatives to better understand how they have been impacted. The sector is keen to get back to business as usual as quickly as possible and to demonstrate that we remain open for business. We are a welcoming people, and we have a lot to offer, and that is what we want to present to the world. We will continue to support businesses owned by people from minority ethnic backgrounds and the workforce, who are hugely important to our local economy and society.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

T4. Ms Egan asked the Minister for the Economy to outline when the review of higher education funding will be completed and she will present its findings and the options to the House, given that our higher education sector is in an extremely challenging financial position, with job cuts at Ulster University following redundancies at Queen's University, which has damaged morale and left the staff and students in uncertain positions. (AQT 2464/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. Her question reflects the difficult position that we are in because the Executive have not yet been able to agree a Budget. I note the Fiscal Council's annual review that was published today, which supports the Executive's case that we are not funded in the same way as Scotland and Wales, and I hope that the Treasury takes that on board. We need to see a sustainable Budget that will allow us to invest in our public services; one that will allow me, as the Economy Minister, to invest in our universities in order to develop our local economy.

The first piece of work in the higher education funding review was the financial needs assessment, and that has been completed and published. We are developing the terms of reference for the next phase of the work. That is ongoing. We anticipate that the review will take about 18 months to complete. It is important to undertake the work to get a proper insight into the needs of our higher education sector. However, to invest in the sector in the way that we need to, we need a Budget that the Executive can work with, and, as Economy Minister, I need my fair share of it.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Minister. The review does not seem to command the support that is required to deliver meaningful change and transformation. What engagement have you had with the universities in recent weeks to design a review process that will have support and buy-in from those who will be most affected by its outcomes?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. As I mentioned, the first stage of the review was the financial needs assessment, which was undertaken by Higher Futures. It was an independent analysis, and we will continue to work with independent experts as we take the review forward.

It is important that we get buy-in from our higher education institutions, and I will continue to work with them. However, we also need to make sure that the review goes forward. It is important that we try to get a consensus, but it is also important to move the process on. As you would expect, I have had considerable engagement with all our higher education institutions, and I will continue to work with them to get the process moving.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Burrows is not in his place.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

T6. Mr Bradley asked the Minister for the Economy to outline the level of match funding, if any, that her Department has set aside to support the development and expansion of the world-leading research capabilities at Ulster University's Coleraine campus and how that funding compares with the significant investment and support that has been directed towards the development of the Magee campus in recent years. (AQT 2466/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. The Member will be aware of the significant and positive work that is being undertaken through the Causeway Coast and Glens growth deal that will support the already fantastic capabilities at Ulster University's Coleraine campus. The Member will also, I hope, be aware of the 12% increase in student numbers at the Coleraine campus since the Executive returned, alongside the increase that we have seen at the Magee campus.

Of course, the investment in the Magee campus is an Executive-agreed priority and a Programme for Government commitment, and that is why the investment has been focused in that way. It is important that we ensure the development of the economy in the north-west and deliver on the potential of the area. Clearly, from a constituency perspective, I also want to see a strong and thriving campus in Coleraine. I believe that we can see three campuses of Ulster University thriving, and that is why the work that I spoke about in response to Connie Egan's question is so important. We need a Budget that allows us to invest effectively in our universities, given their significant potential and the world-class research and innovation that is being undertaken at them.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for her answer, but she will appreciate my concern that anybody in the House, when talking about the north-west, means Londonderry and Strabane. The north and the north-east, which run from Greysteel to Cushendun and Cushendall and cover the hinterlands of Kilrea and Garvagh, are often forgotten about and overlooked in the Chamber, hence my question.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I can assure the Member that they are certainly not overlooked or forgotten by me, as someone who represents those areas. I do not accept the Member's assertion that the north-west means Derry and Strabane. It is much wider than Derry and Strabane. We should be looking at the significant potential of the whole economy of the north-west, because we have really significant institutions there that are doing really good work through our universities and colleges. There is cutting-edge, world-class research and innovation being undertaken, and it is important that we continue to support that. We are doing so through our growth deals in the Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council and the Derry City and Strabane District Council areas, and that is why, as I said, we need to see a sustainable Budget for the Executive. We need a sustainable Budget so that we can continue to support the investment that is required in order to deliver on our potential.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That brings to an end questions to the Minister for the Economy.

Executive Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Daniel McCrossan to resume his speech.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not have much more to say. A lot of the issues have been addressed so far.

The SDLP is asking for the House's support for our amendments. They are designed to strengthen transparency, accountability and public confidence in the operation of the legislation, and we believe that they would make the Bill more effective. Transparency is particularly important, because there will rightly be an expectation, as I said earlier, that action will follow once the powers become available. We need to manage the public's expectation of what the legislation will do. Communities should be able to see what action is being taken to address dilapidation in their areas, and that is the reason for some of our amendments. They seek to establish a clear baseline for measuring success, to improve public access to information about how and where the powers are being used and to ensure that those powers are used proportionately across council areas.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Dr Aiken] in the Chair)

If notices are being issued, interventions are taking place and public money is being spent, there should be a clear and accessible public record of that activity in order to ensure openness and transparency and good use of resources.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I will, yes.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

The Member has touched on the issue of public moneys. Dies he accept that a number of concerns have been raised about from where public moneys will come and, indeed, about the legal costs that may be incurred as a consequence?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Yes. That was well rehearsed at the Committee. All members had similar concerns about how we can ensure that the Bill, which is well intentioned, has some teeth and can therefore deliver for people on the ground without burdening the ratepayer any further, because there is already a very heavy rate burden across council areas. As I said earlier, that issue is raised with me continually. Councils do not have an endless pot of money at their disposal. In fact, they argue very strongly that they are less funded today than they were in previous years but that their money is expected to go much, much further. I have picked up a concern from councillors, including those from my party, that this is an attempt by the Executive simply to pass the buck to local councils, as opposed to the Executive's taking a more joined-up approach, which, as I indicated earlier, would be much more satisfactory and involve the Department of Finance, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Department for Communities.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Yes, I will give way to the Minister.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I recognise that the Member is relaying what he has been told, but the reality is much different. The issue was previously consulted on, and councils, for example, welcomed the move to allow maintenance notices to be served. I set that out in my opening remarks. It is a discretionary power for councils to use. Does the Member recognise that bringing dilapidated buildings back into use would also benefit councils' rates base?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Absolutely. I thank the Minister for that intervention and clarification. It is healthy and important to thrash out some of those issues, certainly, when it comes to the local authority. As someone who represents Strabane, Omagh and the surrounding towns and villages, I see how dereliction is a blight on the entire area. It absolutely needs to be resolved, and quickly.

We probably need to be a wee bit more imaginative about the Government's role in that and how we repurpose some of those structures in town centres, for instance. Could they be brought back into better use than their previous function? If they were formerly retail premises, for instance, they may not ever satisfy housing requirements in town centres, but that is where the Department for Communities could play a role because those buildings could help alleviate the housing pressures that it faces. If the Executive were a bit more creative and imaginative about how the Bill could play out, working alongside councils and the various Departments that are listed — your own Department, Minister, the Department of Finance, the Department for the Economy and, of course, the Department for Communities — the Bill has the potential to do good things. However, leaving it simply at the door of councils, in itself, raises questions and concerns, which I know that we will thrash out as we go forward in the process.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. He highlights very important points. The Bill is important. We all support dealing with dilapidation and agree that we must do it. The Minister highlighted in his intervention that a consultation had taken place. However, that consultation was 10 years ago. Does the Member agree that it was too long ago and that it was important to have had more communication with the sector before introducing the Bill?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Yes. That is a legitimate concern. Certainly, things change quite quickly. The dereliction of our towns and villages is much worse today than it was 10 years ago. A number of factors that are well beyond the control of any Minister have led to that. It would be helpful if a more up-to-date consultation were carried out to provide us with the most open view as to where things currently sit.

Good policy —

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I will, Minister, yes.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Does the Member accept that, whilst that consultation was undertaken in 2016, the Committee, during its deliberations, had a call for evidence and was able to engage with people on that? We need to strike a balance because, often, I hear from Members about the number of consultations that we undertake, rather than about our actual delivery. It is about trying to strike a balance, engage with people, get evidence and also deliver action on the ground, and we must do that in cooperation with local government, which is what we sought to do.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that. He is right to challenge me on that because I am often the person who is criticising him for all those consultations. When it comes to how we can be more imaginative and do something that will actually be beneficial and show a direct outcome and result, the Bill could be a strong starting point, particularly, as I have said, when you tie in all those other Departments and the Executive working collectively.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for giving way again. He makes a very valid point. In many of those town centres, some aspects, small buildings here and there and some not-so-small buildings have fallen into dereliction. I get where the Minister is coming from about bringing those back into use for ratepayers. However, many of our town centres, particularly the retail areas, have changed quite a bit, especially since lockdown. Will the Minister tell us what consultation there was with the likes of the Department for Communities around schemes such as the ones that existed in the past — for example, Living over the Shop (LOTS) — whereby, with a bit of seed funding, the centre of those towns could be changed very significantly and could, in fact, help to address many of the waiting lists that those of us who are in our constituencies see growing steadily?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank my colleague for that very helpful intervention. Other Members and I have raised that issue of living above the shop, if you like, in the past. Here is an example of dereliction. In the street on which my office is situated in Strabane, all the buildings, with the exception of mine and the solicitor's office across the road, are derelict. They could be repurposed very quickly for housing. It would actually force footfall into our town centres. We are all guilty of jumping in the car and, for convenience, nearly parking on the shoes of the person at the till to get into a shop. I say that as a rural person because we are forced to do it that way. The Bill could play a key part in the repurposing of town centres. However, it has to be done in conjunction with the other Departments. We need to be creative in how we can put the Bill to task.

Certainly, as I have said, it is good policy. I have no question that the Bill is well intended. We all want to see those issues tackled, but I fear, particularly given the Minister's clarification that those will be discretionary powers, just how this will be rolled out. Will it be rolled out more strongly in some council areas than in others? Will ratepayers be hit harder in some places than in others? Are some councils further behind than other councils because they have been starved of investment for generations and there is a lot of catching up to do? Will there be a huge amount of work to be done by the council to enforce the powers that they will now be given? There is a wide net here that needs to be looked at and looked at proportionately.

As I have said, I have no doubt that the Bill can play a role in addressing dilapidation, but its success will depend on councils having support. That has been well said, and I will continue to advocate on behalf of the councils, as I am sure that others will. Councils will need resources and partnership with the wider Executive, particularly the various Departments that I have mentioned.

We are keen to support the amendments tabled by the Minister, because it is clear that he has been listening to the concerns raised by the Committee and the robust process that we followed. I appreciate that. I believe that the Minister ears are open on the issue. I encourage him and his officials to explore further how he can strengthen his Department's role in order to ensure that councils are not left at a cliff edge, where they have a mass of enforcement to do, depending on the state of the buildings — we do not know, because there is no register — and how he can play a stronger role along with his Executive colleagues.

It is a priority issue. Dereliction covers more than our town centres; I see it in housing estates etc as well, but we have a more concentrated element of it in our town centres. That must be dealt with. As for previous research, Ulster University carried out a survey some years ago, Minister, that was in line with what we ask for in the amendment. I had it here earlier, but I have misplaced it. It is important that we have some record of and can closely monitor the level of dereliction and dilapidation that exists so that we know the scale of the problem that we face.

I am happy to engage and to continue engaging on the issue. The Bill could be positive, but, at the minute, it falls short and more needs to be done. I am happy to support the Minister's amendments, and I ask other Members of the House to consider the SDLP's amendments.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

At the outset, I want to be clear: no one in the Chamber disputes the impact that dangerous, neglected and dilapidated buildings have on our community. Every Member in the Chamber has dealt with residents who are frustrated by buildings that have been allowed to deteriorate and that attract antisocial behaviour; damage the appearance of our towns and villages; and, in some cases, present genuine risk to the public's safety. We have heard stories about that from Members around the House. Our communities have waited for far too long for meaningful action in this area. The objective behind the Bill is, therefore, one that Sinn Féin absolutely supports.

One of the greatest frustrations in the debate is that there was a genuine opportunity to introduce legislation that would finally provide councils with the tools that they have sought for many years in order to tackle dangerous and neglected buildings. The Minister had the benefit of a consultation process — it began in 2016, a decade ago, as has already been mentioned — of extensive, albeit late, engagement with the local government sector and the expertise of those who will, ultimately, have the responsibility to implement the powers. At Committee Stage, Sinn Féin supported the progression of the Bill, because we recognise that the current legislative framework is outdated and councils need stronger powers to address dangerous, neglected and dilapidated properties. However, our support at that stage was not the end of the conversation.

As the Bill progressed and detailed engagement took place with the local government sector, significant concerns emerged around legal uncertainty, financial liability, operational capacity and practical implementation. It is important to recognise that the local government sector did not enter the process seeking to oppose the Bill. It engaged constructively with the Department and sought to improve the legislation through amendments. Its objective was to take a Bill with significant shortcomings and make it workable enough to deliver the policy intention. However, despite that engagement, many of the fundamental concerns remain unresolved. I acknowledge that the Minister has tabled a number of amendments in response to concerns that were raised during our scrutiny. We will support those amendments where they improve the workable provisions of the Bill. However, where amendments relate to areas in which significant concerns remain around legal certainty, financial exposure, operational capacity and the absence of dedicated funding, we are not satisfied that the underlying issues have been addressed, and we will abstain on those.

Having considered the Bill in its entirety, Sinn Féin has sought to take a balanced and evidence-based approach. We will support the provisions that provide councils with stronger, workable powers to tackle dangerous and neglected properties. There are particular amendments that relate to the most significant intervention powers that are available to councils, including requiring substantial remedial works and, in certain circumstances, demolition. While we support the objective of providing councils with stronger powers to address severely neglected and derelict buildings, those are complex decisions that involve private property rights, significant enforcement action and the potential for lengthy legal challenges.

The local government sector raised concerns about councils' not having the level of legal certainty, protection and operational support that is required to exercise these powers with confidence. For that reason, while we support the objective behind the powers, we are not convinced that the amendments before us today provide the necessary safeguards, legal certainty and practical framework that are required for councils to exercise them with confidence.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I will, yes.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Does the Member understand my disappointment at hearing her contribution on this? It is an Executive Bill, to which I got Executive agreement to progress. The first time that those concerns have been outlined to me, as a partner in government with her party, has been in the Chamber today. I would have liked to have been able to engage with her and try to resolve some of those issues. I note the fact that the Committee agreed a report that expressed its satisfaction around that. For this to have occurred today concerns me when it comes to the future of these institutions.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I appreciate your input.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Does the Member agree that that is the very point of the process? Whilst I accept that it is an Executive Bill, the Member has been very clear that she wants to work with the Minister and try to address the issues that have been raised. The very point of bringing legislation to the House is to debate it, look at it, raise issues and fix things that may be wrong with it. No Executive Bill can come to the House and expect to have no scrutiny because it has gone through the Executive. That cannot be allowed to happen. That is what would put the institutions at risk.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Thank you for your intervention as well. I could not agree with you more. I welcome the fact that the Minister is trying to tackle the issue, but there are other issues, and that is what the scrutiny process is about, as he knows. Although his amendments are technical in nature and cover some of the gaps, there are fundamental flaws in the Bill that we have to scrutinise, and doing so is my job.

The most significant concerns about the amendments that remain relate to cost recovery, liability, enforcement, responsibilities and the practical operation of the new framework. The Department's position has been that councils will be able to recover costs from property owners. However, the practical reality is more complicated. There will be cases that involve unknown ownership, complex ownership arrangements, disputes around responsibility or circumstances where owners simply do not have the financial means to repay the costs incurred. Having the legal power to recover costs does not mean that those costs will always be recovered in practice. Where councils are unable to recover those costs, the financial burden does not simply disappear. Ultimately, it falls on the council and, therefore, the ratepayer. As elected representatives, it is our responsibility not only to improve our communities but to protect the public purse and stand up for and put money in the pockets of working people and families.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way, which I really appreciate. I want to ask this question in a constructive way so that we can look at the issues as a whole. Noting all the issues around cost recovery and the practical difficulties that the Member listed, does she accept that there is already a cost to those who live or trade beside dilapidated premises, in that their property loses value? If more buildings become dilapidated, the effect will be a knock-on loss in rates revenue for councils. We also have to look at those issues when it comes to the rates cost to councils and the prevention of further dilapidation. That can affect immediate neighbours as well as entire neighbourhoods and high streets.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I absolutely appreciate that, and that is why we agree with this in principle. I see that in Newry and Armagh every day of the week, and people come to my constituency office to express their frustration. However, we need to make this workable. It is not a huge ask for the Minister to listen to those who will have to implement the Bill's provisions and make those changes, and we have the opportunity to do that.

We recognise that the Minister's amendments in this area are an attempt to address some of the concerns raised during the Committee's scrutiny of the Bill. However, acknowledging a problem is not the same as resolving it. The Minister's amendments do not fully address the wider concerns about cost recovery. For that reason, while we recognise the intent behind the amendments and the objective of creating a stronger enforcement framework, we remain concerned that the necessary protections and resources are not in place. Therefore, we will abstain on some of the amendments.

The report by the Assembly's independent Research and Information Service (RaISe), which was prepared by Dr Ryan Kee, is particularly relevant to the debate. It is important to state that the report does not recommend supporting or opposing the Bill, but it provides independent evidence that reinforces many of the concerns raised by the local government sector. It challenges the assumption that the legislation will be cost-neutral. It highlights evidence from Building Control professionals who have questioned whether councils will, in practice, always be able to recover their costs and warned that councils could ultimately face significant financial liabilities.

The report also identifies the potential scale of the challenge, with approximately 34,500 vacant properties across the North. Of course, the fact that a property is vacant does not automatically mean that it is dilapidated or dangerous. However, if even a small proportion require intervention, councils could be dealing with thousands of additional enforcement cases. That raises serious questions around staffing, expertise and capacity. The report also raises concerns about whether the proposed fixed penalties would provide a sufficient deterrent. Evidence from Building Control professionals suggests that remediation works can cost between approximately £80,000 and £90,000 in standard cases and rise to approaching £2 million in more complex cases. Against that backdrop, some owners may be prepared to absorb a £500 fixed penalty rather than treat it as an incentive to carry out necessary works.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. She has raised some points of interest. Aside from the Bill at hand, the Department of Finance currently collects rates from property owners across Northern Ireland. I have found that there can be difficulties with that when properties have been lying vacant for a significant period. Two such properties in my constituency were left to two family members. The houses, which had been very valuable properties, were left in a terrible state. Rates have not been collected on either property for the past 10 years. Surely there could be a mechanism to incentivise action to be taken by the Department of Finance to get people to look after those properties; otherwise, they would be repossessed. Would your party consider a specific increase in the rates burden of people who deliberately let properties lie vacant?

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank you for your intervention. That conversation certainly needs to be had. I appreciate your point.

As I said, the concerns extend to the wider operational framework, which includes information-gathering powers, entry powers, fixed penalties and departmental guidance. Those provisions will require significant officer time, specialist expertise and increased administrative capacity. They will also, inevitably, create greater public expectation that councils will intervene. Despite placing those additional responsibilities on councils, DAERA has shown no commitment to provide dedicated core funding to allow councils to deliver the functions effectively. Unfortunately, that is where the Bill falls short. In other jurisdictions where comparative powers are in place, local authorities are provided with dedicated resources and funding to ensure that the powers can be exercised effectively and consistently. If we are serious about tackling dereliction, we cannot simply transfer responsibility from central government to local government and assume that uncertain cost recovery mechanisms will make the system pay for itself. A successful model requires investment, proper resourcing and a realistic understanding of the challenges that councils face on the ground. Without that support, the financial and operational pressure will fall on councils and, ultimately, on the ratepayer.