Debate contribution: Planning System: Fundamental Appraisal

Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .

MLA
Mr Phillip Brett
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
12 February 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Planning System: Fundamental Appraisal
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4218269

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I will start by congratulating my friend and colleague Deborah Erskine on her appointment as Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure and for replacing me as the party's infrastructure spokesperson. You have a big act to follow there

I look forward to watching your progress. In my previous role as chairman of the planning committee of Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council, I had the pleasure of working with Mr Blair, who is now a Member for South Antrim. That council was a great example of how, when a local planning committee and local planners work together, you can get things right. However, in my role as infrastructure spokesperson for the party, I have seen examples across Northern Ireland of the impacts that the planning system can have when it does not work. I want to touch on a number of points that colleagues have raised. Mr Boylan summed it up perfectly by saying that everyone in the House wants to see an effective and efficient planning service. That is what we should all be working together to achieve. Mr McReynolds, I congratulate you on your maiden speech. Well done on making a speech on planning somewhat interesting. It is a hard thing to do. I pay tribute to you for being able to do that. As you rightly said, those major applications need to be high on all our agendas. I pay tribute to Mr Stewart on his election as Deputy Chairperson of the Committee. He accused Mrs Erskine of contributing with a "word salad" and of getting many words into her motion. I congratulate him on getting to speak for six minutes before catching the attention of Mr Speaker. I know that Mr Stewart will have an important role to play on the Committee. He highlighted a number of points, including the disparity in the local development plan. As someone whose constituency crosses both Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council and Belfast City Council, as other Members have said, I know that you can see applications approved at the Newtownabbey end that may be refused at the Belfast end — that is if you manage to get a Belfast application to decision, and I look to my colleague, Mr Brooks, to try to speed that up, hopefully. I agree with what Mr Durkan said about resourcing the planning section in councils. We should all encourage our council colleagues to do that, because, ultimately, if they have an efficient and effective planning service, they will attract investment and grow their own rates base, meaning that councils can invest for the future in order to attract more investment. That is certainly something that I focused on with colleagues, and I encourage all Members to urge their colleagues to do that. I agree with a number of points that Mr Dunne made about delays in statutory consultee responses. However, as the Minister articulated very well, that is something that we, as the House, also need to come to terms with in that we need to give funding to the Department so that it can employ people in Rivers Agency and Roads Service to take that work forward.

I congratulate Mr Brown on his maiden speech. He raised the issue of animal welfare. I, he and colleagues will continue to raise that through our participation in the all-party group on animal welfare. I particularly welcome his comments on the call-in process. It was frustrating to me during my time as chair of the planning committee that a democratically elected planning committee would make a decision, the Department would call it in, and it would sit on its desks for 10 or 12 weeks before the Department would simply say, "No problem", with no explanation of why it had been called in. The Department has an important role and can call in applications, but it should do that only in circumstances in which the Department believes that it has added value to give to the process. I pay tribute to Mr Buckley, who, as always, outlined his views in his trademark, very articulate manner. He highlighted the important role of regionally significant planning applications. The Minister highlighted that as something that he wants to focus his attention on, and I commend him for doing that. Mr Elliott highlighted the role of planning agents. That can be a huge bugbear for all of us elected representatives. You are contacted by a planning agent who says, "This council is holding up my planning application. It is terrible". You then contact the planning department, which says that the agent still needs to provide a raft of outstanding information. Agents also need to step up to the mark on that. I also pay tribute to Mr Honeyford for his maiden speech, and I join him in paying tribute to Pat Catney. Pat Catney is a gentleman and was a great addition to the House, and his loss will be felt not only by the Lagan Valley constituency but by all of us in the House. I wish him well for the future. I agree with many of the points that Mr Allister made to highlight the disparity between councils that I touched on earlier and the ping-pong between Departments and providers of consultee responses, neither of whom seem to want to step up to the mark and make a decision. I pay tribute to Ms Armstrong for recognising the vital role that our local planners play in our councils. All of us know the planners in our councils. Yes, we may get frustrated by them, but, when you pick up the phone or you try to get information, they try their best. We need to invest more in their development. Minister, I congratulate you on your appointment. I know that you understand the issue of planning. It was a pleasure to serve with you on the Northern Ireland Chamber's working group on trying to move the process forward. As you rightly say, we do not need a holistic, long-term review — I know that you understand that — but time-limited and focused actions, and I know that you are committed to achieving that. It is clear from the debate today that there is a collective will among all Members to work together to achieve the best outcomes possible. We also need to be prepared to invest in the system at all levels. Northern Ireland is open for business, and we should all continue to ensure that we promote Northern Ireland to the best of our ability and give the resources needed to make sure that our planning system can meet those needs. With that, I commend our motion to the House.

1,112 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 (0.84).
  • 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 politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.84Yes
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 subject0.99
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:36 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