Debate contribution: Rates (Temporary Rebate) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
Debate contribution by Dr Caoimhe Archibald on .
- MLA
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 14 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Rates (Temporary Rebate) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490198
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Chair of the Finance Committee and the Members who contributed to the debate. This scheme is worth reintroducing because it can breathe new life into our high streets, after what has been a difficult time for many businesses, while, at the same time, helping traders old and new deal with the cost of doing business. Vacant commercial property is a blight on the appearance of our high streets. It undermines our towns and cities, which is something that the Assembly and Executive should address. This measure can go some way towards addressing that. Back in Business is also a good example of what we should try to do more of: strategic low-cost interventions that make a critical difference to businesses, especially in a climate of fiscal restraint. I will pick up on a couple of the comments that Members made. Matthew O'Toole made some observations that the Committee had raised queries about and had some responses on the fact that businesses receiving this rate relief are unable to also avail themselves of other rate reliefs. Recipients have been evaluating the outworkings of the previous iteration of it, mostly small, independent businesses. He also mentioned the rate revenue-raising consultation, the responses to which I am considering at the moment. Some 1,400 people took the time to reply to that consultation, so it is well worthwhile to consider what those people had to say about our rating system. As Mr Tennyson said, I am undertaking a strategic assessment of our rating system. It is important that it aligns with our economic vision. Mr O'Toole specifically referenced the non-domestic vacant property rating relief, which was one of the measures that was considered as part of the rate revenue-raising consultation. We will be looking at the responses as part of the feedback on that broader piece of work. Also, Mr Tennyson commented on how this scheme fits into the broader regeneration of the high street. I agree that a cross-departmental effort is required there and that it should also involve local government. The high street task force reported back in 2022, and its recommendation relevant to the Department of Finance was in respect of the Back in Business scheme, so we have undertaken to ensure that that is put back in place. I ask Members to support this measure and I commend the order to the Assembly.
396 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 (0.88).
- 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 | 0.88 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:23 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.