Debate contribution: Dilapidation Bill: Final Stage

Debate contribution by Miss Nuala McAllister on .

MLA
Miss Nuala McAllister
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
8 September 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
Dilapidation Bill: Final Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5674237

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the Bill's Final Stage. I do not sit on the Committee, so I have not had as much opportunity as some other Members to listen to stakeholders, but, from the outside, I have engaged on the Bill with stakeholders in my constituency. It is very much welcomed by people in our local communities. I am glad that what seems to be a consensus in the House has been reached today. It is important to recognise that, and, of course, that another Alliance Minister is delivering legislation that will make a difference to our communities. How many people are fed up with seeing derelict and abandoned buildings, be they private houses, shops or any other commercial businesses?

We see too many derelict buildings in my North Belfast constituency, despite the efforts of local people and organisations to tackle them. When the Minister was in North Belfast, I had the opportunity to show him some of the sites across the city. If you take the Antrim Road from Glengormley into the city centre, or if you go down the Crumlin Road or the Shore Road, you will see that spots all over the place are blighted by derelict buildings. Some of the structures are very unsafe, and it has not been possible to ascertain who owns many of them. I therefore welcome the provisions that will fix that problem. We know that the Bill will not fix every problem when it comes to derelict buildings, but it is a start, and it is one that I am grateful for. In my previous role at Belfast City Council, I and other councillors sought to use the powers there to take enforcement action where there were issues, but it was too little and did not go far enough. How many of us in our constituency offices have tried to get the cleansing department and environmental health to come out? They serve what notice they can, and they clean up where they can, but it simply does not go far enough. That frustrates our constituents, and it frustrates us, too. I believe that the Bill will make a difference to a process that has already been exhausted. Hopefully, we will see a difference. We must highlight the fact that, when a building has fallen into disrepair or has been damaged and is unsafe, or where a commercial business has pulled out of a building and left it to ruin — when it is in such a sorry state — it has already gone too far. My hope is that the Bill — I know that this is the Minister's aim — will be not only a reactive tool to place notices, take remedial action and give councils greater powers but a preventative tool that can transform areas. I want to touch on a comment made by Daniel McCrossan. He highlighted that the Bill will not transform our high streets in their entirety. We agree that it will not, but it is one step towards doing just that. I know that the Alliance Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs is committed to doing what he can through his brief. We are in a collective Executive, and we must work together. It is therefore important that, working alongside the Department for the Economy and the Department for Infrastructure, we build on these positive steps from the Minister's Department. As I did in my speech at Second Stage, I will mention the housing need in North Belfast. North Belfast has one of the highest levels of housing need across Northern Ireland. People call our constituency office about so many sites and say, "Well, what about that house? That house is empty" or, "What about that building?". There have been some positive changes in North Belfast: for example, on the Shore Road, where the land that was derelict for years has been transformed by social and private housing. We hope that the legislation can provide something similar. In some areas, it is not that there is a stretch of streets with derelict houses but pockets with one or two derelict houses. People might think, "What kind of difference will one or two houses make?", but, when housing need is so stressed, every single home is needed in our constituencies. Dilapidation makes areas look run down, and it takes away people in such areas. People deserve to live in areas that they are proud of. I welcome the fact that we can work with building owners and occupiers. There was mention of area mapping and of not knowing the scale of the problem. It was mentioned that Derry City and Strabane District Council was one of the council areas that carried out area mapping. Belfast City Council undertook the same measure. I urge all councils to do that, because, in the local area plans, we all — the Executive, the Assembly and local councils — must work together to build on the work of our local communities. I hope that councils can get on board with doing that. While it is not contained in the Bill, there are the powers there to do just that. This is positive legislation. Whilst the Bill has some punitive measures, its aim is to ensure that we do not need to get that far, because councils will have the tools and mechanisms to serve notice and to get people to take action before it is too late. Ultimately, I hope that this is one step in the right direction in transforming our local communities and empowering people to contact councils and their local reps, because there are greater powers to deal with derelict sites. I very much welcome the Bill and congratulate the Minister on bringing it forward.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.85).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.85Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.97
Another identity-related subject0.02
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:18 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