Debate contribution: Intimidation Points: Housing Selection Scheme

Debate contribution by Mr Gordon Lyons on 28 January 2025.

MLA

Mr Gordon Lyons

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

28 January 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Ministerial Statements

Heading

Intimidation Points: Housing Selection Scheme

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4763657

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I will update the Assembly on the housing selection scheme and the ongoing, fundamental review of social housing allocations. I have carefully considered the evidence available and, today, made a decision on the matter of intimidation points. It has long been a source of frustration to me, along with many others in the Chamber, that the selection scheme treats victims of violence differently, based on the cause of that violence. A victim of terrorism receives more points than a victim of domestic abuse. Someone who has been targeted because of their ethnic identity receives more points than someone who has been targeted because of their gender. We must level the playing field for victims of violence. I am keen to ensure that victims of violence and those who are at risk of violence, including victims of domestic abuse, are prioritised appropriately. We must be more focused on how violence, or the threat of violence, affects a victim and their ability to remain in their home. My Department has worked with the Housing Executive on a fundamental review of how social homes are allocated, with the aim of making the process fairer and more transparent. A public consultation on 20 proposals for change took place in 2017. The Housing Executive commissioned independent research to inform the future of intimidation points through a range of options. Following careful consideration and in line with the Housing Executive's recommendation, I am announcing today that intimidation points, in the form of rule 23 of the selection scheme, will be removed.

The allocation of 200 points will cease. The independent research, which included extensive stakeholder engagement, and the Housing Executive's consideration of the options informed the decision. Applicants who have experienced violence or abuse or who are at risk of violence or abuse, whatever the motivation and whomever the perpetrator, will continue to be assessed and provided with emergency assistance under the homelessness legislation. The removal of intimidation points will not alter the Housing Executive's duty to support those who need such emergency assistance and find themselves unable to remain in their home. The provision of emergency temporary accommodation will remain under the homelessness legislation. Indeed, the Housing Executive will continue to facilitate specialist tailored support for customers who are impacted on by violence, abuse or trauma. My decision today is focused on the housing selection scheme, which operates separately from the provision of temporary emergency accommodation under the homelessness legislation. The housing selection scheme is the mechanism for assessing objective housing need in order to make an allocation of a permanent social home. Going forward, the points for violence or the threat of violence in the scheme will not exclude any victim of abuse, violence or trauma. Regardless of causation, victims will be assessed using the same criteria that are in the housing selection scheme. It is an important step forward that all those who are victims of violence, harassment or trauma for any reason, including domestic abuse, will be able to access the same categories of points in the scheme. I have tasked the Housing Executive with removing rule 23 by the end of this financial year. There will be transitional protection. Applicants who have alleged intimidation and whose circumstances are being considered under rule 23 prior to its removal will be investigated in line with the existing policies and procedures. Applicants who have already been awarded 200 points under rule 23 will retain those points until they are rehoused or until they refuse two reasonable offers of accommodation. Those are transitional arrangements to protect those who have already been awarded points and those whose application is in train. Work on the fundamental review of the scheme is making progress, with nine of the 20 proposals implemented already. Work continues on the remaining proposals. I want to use the opportunity to do more, so I have asked the Housing Executive to take forward work to review the primary social needs criteria and points for all victims of violence, abuse and trauma as soon as possible and to engage with stakeholders to inform what the prospective changes will look like. I will also consider the impact on the emergency grant. As it stands, if access to the grant were widened to all victims of violence, it would have substantial cost implications. Therefore, I will urgently consider how that support to victims may continue without there being an unsustainable impact on the budget. I assure Members that I will carefully consider the way forward, including any advice or recommendation that is received from the Housing Executive. I have taken the decision to ensure that the points for violence or threat of violence in the scheme will not exclude any victim of abuse, violence or trauma. That will level the playing field and enable the Housing Executive to award primary social needs points based on the impact on victims, regardless of the cause. As I have said, I want to do more. I want to go beyond removal, and I have asked the Housing Executive to review the primary social needs criteria and points in the scheme and to bring forward those proposals as part of the fundamental review. This decision will ultimately support the Executive’s focus on ending violence against women and girls as set out in the draft Programme for Government. I commend the statement to the House.

893 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:53 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