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 5742747
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I did a public consultation in, I believe, the summer of 2024. Apologies if I misspeak; it feels so long ago. From memory, I think that it was launched in December, and the public were widely engaged. I think that we had around 800 responses. I had to chase the Construction Employers Federation a little because I was keen to get its views. The public were consulted, as were wider stakeholders. That was the point, and I hope that that has come across for everybody today. I have been keen to stress-test the Bill. I see DFI officials in the Officials' Box; I was happy to meet them as well. The term "unintended consequences" has come up several times during the debate: that is not what the Bill seeks to achieve, and that is why I wanted to consult as widely as possible.
I am having to hark back. I thank Mr Martin for raising that today. When a consultation is completed, a document is prepared and published that contains a summary of what has gone on. That document should be on the Assembly website — I look to the Clerks for their agreement — and it definitely is.
199 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.