Debate contribution: High Street and Town Centre Rejuvenation
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 4 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- High Street and Town Centre Rejuvenation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4625926
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for South Belfast for moving this important motion. My party has for many years recognised how vital our town and city centres are to our communities across Northern Ireland. As the motion focuses on changing habits from the COVID pandemic, I again pay tribute to the work of the former Economy Minister, the Member for Upper Bann, who ensured that over £260 million of support went to our high streets and town centres during that very difficult time for our traders. As the Member for Foyle articulated, the important work of the high street task force needs to continue in earnest. I welcome the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister wrote on 10 October to all relevant Ministers about the outworkings and recommendations of the task force's report and called for their work streams to take forward the important work. The junior Minister, who is more than ably standing in for the Economy Minister, will be able to inform the House of the work that the Department for the Economy will take forward in that regard. The Department for the Economy needs to take a leading role on the issue, but it goes wider than that. It is a cross-cutting issue on which many Departments need to focus. In particular, following the Budget allocation and the decisions made by the Chancellor, there is a game-changing opportunity for the Finance Minister when she comes before the House in the coming weeks and months. The Finance Minister has the opportunity to introduce a rating scheme that, for once in a generation, is fair and balanced and ensures that high street businesses are not taxed to such a level that they are unprofitable or that makes them want to move online. It is an opportunity, as highlighted by the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone Mrs Armstrong, to ensure that the dereliction of our town centres is not rewarded but rightly penalised. There is a long-standing need for that reform, and I hope that that will be the focus of the proposals that the Finance Minister brings to the Executive. We need to see support for our hospitality sector across Northern Ireland. In our current economic climate, our hospitality sector is the driving force that brings people into our town and city centres. It needs to get the support that it deserves. The amendments proposed by Members are important, and we will support them. We will support the amendment proposed by the Member for Foyle Ms McLaughlin. We will support Mr Carroll's amendment. He eloquently outlined the case against extending Sunday trading hours much better than I could have. I did not think that I would be saying that, so congratulations to Mr Carroll. My party will also support Ms Armstrong's important amendment. Dereliction impacts massively on my constituency. The Castlebrooke development in the city of Belfast and my constituency of North Belfast is a complete and utter disgrace. It has been left derelict for years. Businesses that continue to pay rates and try their best in the economic climate are surrounded by scaffolding and dereliction. I know that all parties will continue to push for that development to take place as soon as possible. I highlight the important work that the Department for Infrastructure needs to take forward in town and city centre regeneration. First, it is a well-rehearsed argument, but our planning system is not fit for purpose.
How often do businesses come to us to say that they want to expand and invest in our town centres, only for them to be told that they cannot get a planning permission in a timely manner, meaning that they instead decide to proceed with another investment?
We have a Department for Infrastructure that cannot seem to pedestrianise a single street in the cultural heart of our capital. Hopefully, with the £608 million that has been allocated in the Budget, Minister O'Dowd might be able to afford a few barriers so that we can ensure that Hill Street is finally pedestrianised and that Belfast city centre can continue to have that cultural heart. The Nightmovers scheme is vital to ensuring that our night-time economy is supported, but, again, the Department for Infrastructure says that it does not have the funding to run public transport late at night. That type of scheme is key to attracting people back into our city. After receiving the letter that was sent by the First Minister and the deputy First Minister on 12 October, Executive Ministers now have their tasks, and I think that the House speaks with one voice in saying that all Ministers need to get together and start to deliver for our town centres right across Northern Ireland.
790 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: 0.03 (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 (0.94).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 11:28 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.