Debate contribution: Dilapidation Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Aoife Finnegan on 16 June 2026.

MLA: Ms Aoife Finnegan
Party at the time: Sinn Féin
Date: 16 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Dilapidation Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5624053

Text

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Stage, Sinn Féin supported the progression of the Bill, because we recognise that the current legislative framework is outdated and councils need stronger powers to address dangerous, neglected and dilapidated properties.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.
I will, yes.
I appreciate your input.
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.

816 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification