Debate contribution: Dilapidation Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Gareth Wilson on 16 June 2026.

MLA

Mr Gareth Wilson

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

16 June 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Dilapidation Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5624106

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member for his intervention. He will appreciate that I came from a council quite recently — within the past six months. I have an affinity with my colleagues on Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough (ABC) Council — I know that one of them was on the Committee — and they said that they would very much like resources. The pressures on council resources are quite fresh in my mind. That is why I cannot not say that in the House. At times, a chasm exists between the House and councils that we should be working harder to bridge. The Bill is part of that process. The process is now at this point, and the legislation will, hopefully, soon become another tool in the shed of our councils across Northern Ireland. It is clear that, around Northern Ireland, there are a high number of dilapidated buildings and structures — that almost goes without saying — and this is an attempt to enable councils to have more powers to deal with those types of structures. The process involving the AERA Committee was considerable. It was a new experience for me as a new Member. It was interesting to scrutinise the legislation, taking it line by line and working through all the clauses and proposed amendments. That was an enlightening and enjoyable process for me. I have raised concerns about the potential for duplication of legislation, and I point to the existing powers of the Department for Infrastructure. I raised that with the Minister recently in a question for written answer. His response made particular reference to article 51 of the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993. He stated:

"As part of ongoing engagement with other departmental officials during the development of the Dilapidation Bill, no specific discussion took place between my officials and those from the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) in relation to DfI’s powers under Article 51 of the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993. Article 51 will continue to be available to DfI when the Dilapidation Bill is enacted. References to similar powers available to other departments and bodies will be highlighted in the forthcoming statutory guidance."

I recognise that, Minister, but, on that point, it is important to cite the article in the Order that relates to "Dangerous land adjoining roads". Article 51 states:

"If the Department"

— in this case, DFI —

"is of the opinion— (a) that a building, wall or other structure is in such a condition as to be dangerous to persons using a road; ... the Department may serve a notice on the owner of the structure or the owner or occupier of the land requiring him to carry out such works of repair, protection, removal, alteration or enclosure as will obviate the danger."

That is slightly concerning, given that, in my public representational role over the past 20 years, I have seen, on many occasions, a ping-pong approach between DFI and councils about who should deal with the dangers that are present on the edge of a public footpath or road. That is the main and clear domain of the Bill in attempting to refresh and update laws that have not been changed in many years. I feel that, even with this legislation, there will still be that ping-pong approach between councils and DFI in the circumstances.

From looking at the Roads Order, I feel that there remains very much a responsibility on DFI to take action. Like the AERA Minister, I am not in favour of a system that provides escape routes for one section of government. He should have a conversation with his counterpart in DFI about that, as that responsibility should be reasonably shared. I would like the Minister to respond on that matter, either in the House or to me in writing.

Given that there are 11 councils, it is possible, if not most likely, that there will be 11 different responses to the legislation and 11 methods of applying the law. NILGA has taken a keen interest in the legislation, and rightly so. Its involvement with the Committee was very useful. The fact that extra sessions were organised with the Bill Office and departmental officials was important and, in my view, necessary. At Committee, I made the point that, when legislation such as this, which is to be administered by our councils, is being developed, councils must be heard fully. Our councils are at a tier of government that cannot be detached from this legislature. Legislation with the greatest buy-in that has been worked up with the widest possible slate of opinions has the greatest chance of success. That having been said, in coming to the Assembly with my experience in local government, I know that councils still have concerns with the legislation. It is because I recognise that that I am not in favour of amendment Nos 33 or 35. I feel that they would place an even greater burden on our councils' already stretched resource requirements. As I said, I have an affinity with ABC Council and am acutely aware of the dilapidation issues that exist in the town and village centres in my constituency. The other amendments seek to streamline the legislation, and I understand their inclusion. It is important that amendment No 32 be progressed, as not to have a review mechanism for this significant legislation would be highly regrettable and lead to important points that councils would raise being missed, because, by the time of the review, the councils would have built up a considerable weight of experience. I therefore urge the Minister to resource the review properly to ensure that it is wide-ranging and encompasses fully the experience of all 11 councils. Indeed, should councils speak with one voice that a particular provision in the legislation has proven in practice to be ineffective, inefficient, too costly or not to have had the impact promised, I hope that the Minister will present with an attitude to adjust the legislation and ensure that the best possible legal outcomes are obtained for our councils. I take the opportunity to thank everyone who played their part in creating and contributing to the Bill.

1,029 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:52 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

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

Challenge this classification