Debate contribution: Tree Protection Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Peter McReynolds on .
- MLA
- Mr Peter McReynolds
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 21 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Tree Protection Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5742477
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
I welcome the opportunity to open the Second Stage debate on the Tree Protection Bill. I start by putting on record my sincere gratitude to Barbara Love and Frank Geddis for their advice and support in getting the Bill to this point and for putting up with my phone calls, which, usually, as a party colleague told me recently, could have been an email. By way of background, Members and colleagues probably know me well enough by now to realise that I tend to just get on with things. I set a goal and put in the work to make it happen, hopefully without too much fuss.
Shortly after my election to the Assembly, I began to engage with key stakeholders and groups as a newly elected MLA, and it became clear to me at that stage that Northern Ireland lagged behind when it came to legislative protections for our oldest and most significant trees and woodland. To put that into context, it is well documented that Northern Ireland has the lowest urban tree coverage in the UK and the lowest woodland cover on these islands, at just 8·6%, which is, unfortunately, one of the lowest figures in Europe.
That is despite the overwhelmingly positive role that trees play in all our lives through tackling climate change, reducing the risk of flooding, improving air quality, offering physical and mental health benefits and creating positive spaces for the public to enjoy. Moreover, the public in Northern Ireland just really like trees.
Thank you to the DUP tree spokesperson.
That is reflected in YouGov polling and in the outcry when trees are cut down in haste. That is why the purpose of the Bill is to improve the protections for trees and ancient woodland by amending the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. There are three core elements. First, the Bill aims to improve and upscale the protections afforded to trees by tree preservation orders or TPOs. I will use that abbreviation a lot today. Secondly, it provides our oldest and most significant trees with a dedicated pathway for legal protection. Lastly, the Bill introduces stronger legal protections for ancient and long-established woodland. I will address each element in turn. The Bill seeks to enhance tree preservation orders by strengthening protections in primary legislation. At present, TPOs are limited in effectiveness, because primary Northern Irish legislation does not make it an offence to cause or permit the breach of a TPO, as is the case in England and Wales, thereby creating enforcement challenges and loopholes that can be exploited. The inclusion of "permit" in the legislation will ensure that TPOs better reflect the reality of how unlawful works can occur and make it clear that a TPO may prohibit not only the direct carrying out of unauthorised works but also the authorisation, facilitation or permitting of them. At this stage, I should say that the many local council officers whom I met throughout the consultation on these proposals try to meet that standard. However, should a case reach the courts, judges have to go by the legislation that is in front of them. The problems with that situation were laid bare in a 2023 report by the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO) on tree protection in the planning system. She found that, despite 369 tree protection breaches being reported between 2019 and 2022, with 144 relating specifically to TPOs, none was enforced during that period, and there were no prosecutions. The Tree Protection Bill closes the gap in cases of TPO breaches.
The Member makes a valid point. During the formal consultation period, I met the tree forum, which is a body of directors from across Northern Ireland, at Belfast City Council. That was one of the points that came up with them. It is fair to say that there is frustration on the part of a lot of tree officers. Many of them are formally trained planners and are not given the skills or the expertise to assess trees or carry out the work that they are being asked to do as local council officers. I have engaged proactively with the Woodland Trust, which is more than happy to facilitate training to ensure that officers are best equipped with the skills needed to enact what is in the Bill, and to do it in a more systemic way. We noticed that, across the 11 councils, some are doing well and have lots of officers who can carry out what we seek to achieve in the Bill, while others lag behind. If the Bill is enacted, there is a real opportunity to have good, green jobs and council officers who are supported to carry out the Bill's ambitions. As well as making it easier to close the gap in enforcement of TPOs, the Bill makes remedial actions for the removal of a TPO tree more robust.
In the circumstances in which a tree with a TPO were removed, those found responsible could be required to ensure the planting of a replacement tree. The Bill would enhance that requirement by requiring replacement trees to be of a minimum heavy standard. That would correct what our constituents will have seen over the years: the felling of many trees and the replacing of older trees with saplings that may or may not survive the elements and fully replace the benefits of what went before. Currently, TPOs are awarded on the basis of expediency and amenity value, but that fails to recognise the broader benefits of trees. The Bill would therefore allow councils to create a TPO not only for amenity but for a broader range of benefits to people and communities. As with amenity, professional judgement would continue to be central in determining whether the contribution was worthy of a TPO. The Bill seeks to streamline the application of TPOs by automatically confirming provisional TPOs after six months in the case of no objections having been made. That would remove the need for councils to repeatedly revisit and reapply for provisional TPOs and provide a safety net to ensure that bottlenecks in the planning system did not result in provisional applications slipping through the net. Moreover, it would reduce bureaucracy and additional workload on the part of the local council. That came about through the initial consultation that I mentioned to Mrs Erskine. The second aim of the Bill is to protect our oldest and most significant trees as we protect listed buildings and scheduled monuments, not just how they look but their cultural, historic and heritage value, which are truly irreplaceable. That is important because, under the current TPO framework, ancient trees may be refused due to being diseased or dying. That does not take into consideration the fact that a tree can live for hundreds of years before being considered dead, which is often the case for ancient trees. To acknowledge that, the Bill would also allow for ancient trees to be granted a TPO solely on the basis that they have been confirmed to be ancient by an arboriculturist, that they are not at risk of causing harm and that they are not dead.
That issue came up during the consultation at director level with the various councils across Northern Ireland. Risk to human life should never come after a tree, so such a decision would be based on the judgement of an educated professional on trees. I absolutely agree with the Member. Initial draft proposals included creating a separate heritage designation. However, following positive and constructive engagement over the summer with Rosemary Daly and her departmental officials, that was replaced with the proposed pathway now in the Bill. I am grateful for that input from Rosemary and her team, which led to the final proposals in the spirit of constructive engagement and feedback. The third and final key element that my Bill would introduce is the protection of ancient and long-established woodland. As those ecosystems have been created over hundreds of years, they cannot be simply replaced through replanting. While I support development, it must not be at the expense of the fragments of remaining ancient woodland that we have, and I am confident that, when future generations look back, they will see that the Bill played some role in preserving and safeguarding ancient woodland in Northern Ireland. It would introduce the creation of a 15-metre buffer zone around ancient and long-established woodland to protect it from development that would cause loss, harm or degradation. In cases in which it is deemed necessary for development to take place, for whatever reason, on long-established or ancient woodland, there is a pragmatic provision for that to be overridden in the case of wholly exceptional circumstances. The importance of protecting the trees that we already have must not be understated. We will all be aware of the numerous planting and replanting schemes across Northern Ireland, but those are not doing enough to retain the tree coverage needed across the country. That is why the Bill would also bring in practical measures, such as a new online map to show all TPOs across Northern Ireland. While I appreciate that some councils already have a map, there are various inconsistencies, with some still not having the relevant map in place. The 2023 NIPSO report recommended the creation of a single map of TPOs to be managed by the Department for Infrastructure. That map would have the benefit of allowing people to know which trees in their area were protected in an accessible manner. In written guidance issued by the Speaker to Members about Members' Bills, he advised that he was seeking focused and clear legislative proposals. I am confident that that is what is in front of Members today. Throughout the development of the Bill, I have engaged with environmental organisations, developers, councils, planning bodies, departmental officials — on two separate occasions — and, crucially, the public, who are supportive of the measures in the Tree Protection Bill. That means that the Bill is not only ambitious but pragmatic and well informed and suitably stress-tested before coming to the House today. I am grateful to everyone who engaged with me during the consultation, and I look forward to working with Members from across the Chamber to ensure that it is effective and positive legislation for protecting our trees and woodland for generations to come.
Just before I finish, I will.
Do not make me regret it.
1,744 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.