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 4495724

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The Minister has said enough. He did not want to take advice in Committee. Some Executive Ministers want to take advice only when it suits them. They wanted to bypass the Committee Stage of this legislation and avoid due scrutiny of the Bill. I could go into the intricacies of the legal advice received and the concerns about the legislation, of which the Minister will be well aware, as he will be aware of the concerns expressed by various stakeholders and witnesses about the Minister's pace in getting it through the House. The Minister should understand that, with great caution, we support the Bill, but we are raising considerable concern about it. If the Minister wants to ensure that there is as wide a net as possible to protect people who are affected by defective premises, and if mica, RAAC and pyrite are in the homes of people in Tyrone, Donegal and Derry, the Minister would do well to remember his words in the House today. If he supports the amendment, at least he can say that he was ahead of the ball, which is not something that can be said very often of the DUP, let alone the Executive. I put to the House this important amendment. The reach, if I may describe it that way, of the amendment is contained in paragraph 4B(1), sub-paragraphs (a) to (d). Those provisions enable the Department to specify by regulation, as the Minister has pointed out, deficiencies that could give cause for action, and they will greatly strengthen the hand of anyone seeking redress through the courts. I regret not being able to speak to colleagues in other parties before today about the amendment, particularly those on the Communities Committee, of which I am a member. The use of accelerated passage made that impossible, and the timing was challenging. However, I can provide a measure of assurance by noting that the Bill Office was very helpful. Indeed, the Bill Office has provided invaluable advice and support to enable me to draft this important amendment with appropriate wording and to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Members will note that the Department, in taking action by making regulations, is required to "have due regard" to our existing building regulations and that those new regulations:

"may not be made unless a draft of the regulation has been laid before and approved by ... the Assembly."

As I indicated earlier, I know that these building regulations are under the responsibility of the Department of Finance and some cross-departmental working between Executive Ministers will be required — something that, again, does not happen as much as it should. Furthermore, a report must be provided to the Assembly:

"detailing the factors which will inform the content of the regulations."

The measures ensure that the Committee for Communities and, indeed, the Assembly can scrutinise developments in future. I trust that those "safety features" — that is what I describe them as — will give the Assembly enough confidence in the amendment to support it. If we in Northern Ireland are affected to the same extent as homeowners across Ireland, we will face a major crisis. I do not say that my amendment saves the day, but it lays a clear pathway for people who are affected to seek support and action where appropriate. In reality, for the past number of years, in the time that the House has been sitting, I have written to multiple Ministers of each relevant Department, asking what they are doing to help to identify traces of pyrite, RAAC and mica in homes across Northern Ireland.

I received a very blunt, one-line response to say, "I have no knowledge of it". It is a partitionist mentality that believes those materials did not cross the border, and, indeed, it is arrogant to assume that no other quarry has manufactured products that may be defective and affecting homes across Northern Ireland.

Have any lessons been learned on this side of the border from how the crisis in the South unfolded that left 5,700 families in dire circumstances? The Minister is far away from Tyrone, but when the chickens come home to roost, as I believe they will, the House had better be ready, because it will be a huge crisis. Closing your eyes and blocking your ears will not resolve what, potentially, could be on the track. The amendment is positive; it adds protections for people who are affected or potentially will be affected, right across the North of Ireland. The reality is that I have already heard about and visited multiple affected homes. People's concern is that there is no support, Stormont is not listening — if it is even functioning at various points — and if they are in that situation, what are they going to do and where will they turn? The only authority that I have seen take any action is Derry City and Strabane District Council, which allowed people to come forward and register concern if they believed that their home was affected. That is the only positive action that I have seen during a crisis that is five minutes from my doorstep, where thousands of people’s homes and dreams have been destroyed. If the House chooses to ignore what potentially could be a huge crisis, it will reap the consequences, but if we get ahead of the ball and start reaching out to identify the number of homes that are, or potentially will be, affected, we can mitigate what could be a disaster for public finances in Northern Ireland but also for homeowners right across Northern Ireland. This is here; people need to recognise it. The scale of it will only be determined in the future, but the Departments and the Executive need to be conscious that there is a very serious problem down the line.

977 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