Debate contribution: MOT Testing: Backlog
Debate contribution by Mr Peter McReynolds on .
- MLA
- Mr Peter McReynolds
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 11 March 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- MOT Testing: Backlog
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4270189
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome today's motion. Similar to other Members, I start my remarks by putting on record my gratitude to DVA staff, who have consistently gone above and beyond during periods of significant disruption and rising demand. As we have just heard, 1·15 million MOTs were carried out in the past year, which is a 25% increase on the year before and the most on record. I commend the commitment and dedication of our staff across Northern Ireland. Today's motion is important and welcome. Like all Members here, my inbox and social media have been flooded with messages and emails of concern and frustration about how difficult it has been to get access to a reasonable and timely appointment for vehicle testing. That has led to concern and anxiety for individuals and families who rely on their car for living and working in our communities, as the proposer noted in the motion. It has also led to completely unnecessary and lengthy car journeys in the face of increased congestion and cars on our roads. Just yesterday, for example, a friend messaged to say that he was booking his annual MOT but there were no appointments in any of our centres across Northern Ireland. They joked how they were considering a ferry to Stranraer. I heard a lot of that over the weekend. Another example was of someone living in Ballyclare being able to obtain one at New Buildings. Another had to cancel their appointment due to illness but was then required to drive an hour from where they lived to get a last-minute appointment. Another recurring issue is that of those who are unable to get an appointment. Unable, therefore, to renew their car tax, subsequently, they are being unfairly fined. I fully appreciate that that is the responsibility of the DVLA, but perhaps the Minister could tell us what he and his officials are doing to make the case to it to reiterate our different circumstances here and the challenges that many have been facing. Another key issue that has been brought to my attention in the past few days specifically on this issue is the date of the renewal letters, as we have heard today. Perhaps the letters could be issued sooner so that people can be better prepared. Moreover, I would be keen to know whether temporary exemption certificates could again play a role in reducing waiting times if used in specific and limited circumstances. I would be grateful if the Minister could respond to that point when closing the debate. As someone who is new to the Assembly and the Infrastructure Committee, I have spent my time over the past few weeks reading up on the issues facing the Department and the Minister, meeting officials and groups and looking back over the work of the previous Committee, which did great work on providing suggestions about how to improve the MOT testing system. I was pleased to see, as we heard from Mr Durkan, that the previous Minister, Nichola Mallon, conducted a call for evidence on the introduction of biennial testing, which is the subject of today's amendment. There are some good points in that document. Moving towards a consultation and potentially even a pilot would be a welcome and reasonable approach to explore, as it is clear that there are many adaptions that could be made to the current system to improve things. As we have heard, there are various reasons for the current lengthy waiting times, from cracks in lifts to people driving older cars and more people driving than ever before. It would be remiss of me not to speak to that last point, given our reliance and dependence on private vehicles in Northern Ireland. I hope to always be a voice in the Chamber for public transport and active travel. A key part of the debate and discussion should always be addressing our reliance and dependency on private cars and ensuring that the public have access to good multimodal transport that enables them to move around, not least in the face of a climate emergency.
I welcome the motion and the amendment. I look forward to working on the matter in the Infrastructure Committee and to the Minister's response.
705 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.02 (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 (0.94).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.98 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:52 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.