Debate contribution: Defective Premises Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Daniel McCrossan on 11 June 2024.

MLA

Mr Daniel McCrossan

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

11 June 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Defective Premises Bill: Consideration Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4495703

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move the following amendment:

As outlined in a contribution to the Second Stage debate, this is not the way in which we prefer to do business. Accelerated passage is not the most appropriate way for legislators to consider legislation that will have a direct impact on the lives of our citizens. It is right and proper that we go through the accountability and scrutiny mechanisms that are there. On this occasion, the Committee process was bypassed. That said, we recognise the importance of the Bill. Although we have some concerns, we recognise the importance of aligning with the legislation that is in place for the rest of the UK. We also recognise that that should have been done some time ago. That said, there are wider issues here in Northern Ireland, and there will potentially be further issues down the line with defective materials, products and design features. In the amendment, we allow some protection for those who may be affected. As the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum explains, there is significant disparity between Northern Ireland and England and Wales on the limitation periods for legal action where a building is shown to be defective. That is why the Minister introduced the Bill. The purpose of the amendment is to address a particular gap in the Bill's provisions. At the outset, I emphasise that the amendment is Bill-friendly. By that, I mean that it does not interfere with the Bill's purposes: it imposes no direct burden on the Department, as the new clause is an enabling one that gives the Department permissive rather than prescriptive powers; it places no financial burden on the Department; and it is designed, in the spirit of the Bill, to extend its support a little wider. Members will notice that the amendment does not alter a single word of the Bill as laid but is constructed as an additional clause. That is my deliberate choice, to ensure that the Bill's overarching intentions are unaltered. I am sure that all Members are aware of the horror stories that have emanated from places such as Donegal, Mayo and other counties across the island of Ireland concerning the shocking effects of defective building materials, including mica, pyrite and reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC), on domestic premises. This affects not just domestic premises. There is every sign that various aspects of all infrastructure have been affected as a result of those defective materials. Young families have been left devastated as their homes cracked from bottom to top and leaked water, making them very difficult to live in and, in some instances, dangerous because they were literally falling down around them. It has also affected more mature couples, whose life savings, which they had put into building their dream homes, have disappeared overnight. In this instance, there is huge concern, particularly in border constituencies, that the issues that we have seen play out in Donegal and in other counties across Ireland will affect people here. I get the sense that people are reluctant to come forward because there is no mechanism to support them — no real advice is available — and there is huge fear as a result of what they have seen in Donegal. Here is a map of the border counties that are affected. There are 5,700 homes affected by those defective materials. If we look at the map, we can see the border, which shows clearly why there is huge concern that defective materials have undoubtedly appeared in homes across my constituency of West Tyrone, the constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone and across Derry and beyond. At some stage in the not-too-distant future, people will start to come forward, as some already have. In my constituency, a young family was affected. Their dreams were shattered, and their house was left in a terrible state of disrepair. They do not know where to turn to, and they cannot get advice or support. They believe that the future looks quite bleak when it comes to getting any support. In my colleagues' constituency of Foyle, we have seen families speak out as well, and we believe that there are examples right across the entirety of Northern Ireland and Ireland, North and South. The use of defective building materials will have a huge impact on people's mental health, as will their concerns about how the issue can be dealt with. Although the situation has happened as a result of the use of defective building materials and, for a long time, there seemingly being no fit-for-purpose remedy to the unfolding disaster, as I have previously stated in the Assembly, it is inconceivable that such defective building materials are to be found on only one side of the border. It is surely not a matter of whether they will be found but rather when they will be found, and to what extent. The amendment would enable the Assembly and the Department to be ready. I seek to extend the legal protections that the Bill provides to situations that previous experience tells us are likely to emerge in our jurisdiction. I appreciate that the Minister intends to bring a more substantive Bill to the House in the future and that its provisions may afford a remedy to the matters to which I draw Members' attention. Introducing such a Bill is some time off, however, particularly given the pace of movement in the Assembly and the uncertainty, which was very clear in the past, over whether this place will function. When an issue is foreseeable and a remedy is at hand, why would we not put plans for it in place today? The point of the amendment is to put protections in place today so that it readies the Department to act. I therefore urge the Assembly to support the amendment and its genuine intention.

I will put it this way: if the House or the Department finds itself in a similar situation with the scale of the number of homes affected, the Minister will not be asking, "What is the point?". The reality is that, in response to such a situation, people will be asking, "What are you doing about it?". The amendment would put in place regulations to specify areas that the Department must consider in order to protect those who may be affected as a result of defective building materials.

I will finish my point. The Minister said that the matter is already covered by regulations. Those regulations sit with the Department of Finance, as the Minister knows. In fact, it was only this week that the Minister did not even believe that it was a devolved matter, as far as I remember. Hopefully, he has sought clarification on that since. The legal advice that I obtained believes that the amendment would in no way have any effect on the Bill's current clauses. That is my view. I do not believe that it would in any way interfere with what is laid out in the Minister's Bill. The reality at the centre of the matter is this: homes across Northern Ireland will undoubtedly be affected by defective building materials. At this juncture, we can ensure that we put in place mechanisms that will allow people to seek help where they can. It also will prepare the Department and, indeed, the Executive for dealing with the issue. Does the Minister want in?

1,234 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:38 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