Debate contribution: New Deal for Private Renters in Northern Ireland
Debate contribution by Mr Gordon Lyons on .
- MLA
- Mr Gordon Lyons
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- New Deal for Private Renters in Northern Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4814002
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank all the Members for their contributions. It has been highlighted, rightly, that housing is the number-one issue that — I am sure, for every Member of the House — is brought to us by our constituents. I recognise that and have seen it for a long time in my role as a Member for East Antrim. Since coming into post as Minister, I have made it a priority to deal with the housing issues that we face. This question has been asked: what is the root cause of our housing challenges? The root cause is supply. Constrained housing supply in the wider housing market will always create pressures in the private rented sector first. That is why that sector is important, and that is why I am taking a balanced approach to regulating the sector. I will talk more about that shortly. I recognise the problem, especially for those in the private rented sector. I understand that, because those concerns come in to me. We have heard some eye-watering sums of money being talked about and about the challenges that people face. I agree with much of the motion's content and commentary. I have a particular concern about one or two issues, however, and I will come to those in a moment. If we are serious about tackling the issue, it is important that we take a whole-system approach. My determination was to ensure that housing be included as a priority in the Programme for Government, because addressing our housing challenges requires a whole-system approach. In December, the Executive endorsed my housing supply strategy and the whole-system approach. I am determined to deliver on the objectives of the strategy and to tackle the challenges that prevent us from delivering the type and number of homes that we need in order to meet our housing needs over the next 15 years. Work is well under way on setting up cross-departmental structures to develop the first of the short-term action plans as part of the implementation of the strategy. In reference to Mr Gaston's comments, I say that, absolutely, there is a responsibility on other Ministers to deliver. I will remind other Ministers that they have signed up to the strategy; there are individual actions and responsibilities for each of them. It is no longer just a DFC strategy; it is an Executive strategy, and everyone needs to work and pull together to make sure that we deliver on it. I will not be afraid of reminding other Ministers of the commitments that they have made, because it is such a critical issue. It is critical not just because of the people and the number of people whom we are talking about or the real-life impact that it has on them now; it is critical for the future. I have said many times in the House and out of it that, if we get housing right and can provide a warm, safe and stable place for people to live and grow up in, it can completely transform their life chances. I therefore see housing as an investment and expect the rest of the Executive to see it that way as well. Social housing is a significant part of housing supply, and I will continue to allocate the majority of my Department's capital budget — around £170 million this year — to the provision of new social homes. We worked very hard to secure additional money in this year's monitoring rounds to increase the number of new starts. Although that is welcome, we will not be able to deliver the 2,000 homes that I would like to have delivered at the start of this year. I will, however, continue to bid for the additional money that is needed in order to deliver the new-build programme. We know that many people in the private rented sector ultimately want to own their own home. I have heard, loud and clear, the voices of the people who feel trapped renting. Since 2020, DFC has provided over £150 million in financial transactions capital funding to Co-ownership. That has helped over 4,000 people purchase a home, and about half of the people buying with Co-ownership come from the private rented sector. I am committed to continuing with that funding so that we can relieve pressure in that way. I am also keenly aware of another group of private renters who are struggling: working families who are paying far too much of their income in rent and who are not able to access social housing or homeownership. We need to do something different to help that group, and I am determined to do so. That is why I have launched a completely new and innovative project, which I am driving forward by funding the delivery of a new supply of affordable, intermediate rent homes. The intermediate rent scheme will provide good-quality and affordable private rented housing with enhanced security of tenure to lower-income households. The discounted rents available — at 80% of rental costs on the open market — can make a huge difference to those struggling with cost, quality and security of tenure in the private rented sector. I look forward to making a further announcement on that very soon, and I hope that we can ramp up the scheme in future years as well. For those who find themselves in the private rented sector right now, action has been taken. Many people privately rent because it is the tenure that suits them best, but I want to make sure that it is improved for them. The programme of private rented reform that I am taking though is therefore aimed at addressing issues that are raised in the motion, namely affordability, security of tenure and quality. The programme will deliver what the Assembly mandated the Department to do through the Private Tenancies Act 2022. That work strikes a balance by making improvements in the private rented sector without exacerbating supply challenges. As for affordability, I am acutely aware of increasing rents in the private rented sector and of some tenants who face such increases mid-tenancy. That is why I have been given the primary legislative power to introduce a restriction on the frequency of rent increases through the Private Tenancies Act. I have instructed my officials to take that work forward as a matter of urgency. That is a form of third-generation rent control, as suggested in the motion, and will mean that, from April 2025, a private landlord will not be able to increase rent within 12 months of granting a tenancy or in the 12 months following the date of the previous rent increase. It will also specify that landlords must give tenants three months' written notice of any rent increase. Commencing the legislation will therefore help tenants plan for the future by providing them with an assurance that they will not face multiple or unexpected rent increases over a short period. Landlords here do not have to specify a reason for eviction. Security of tenure is therefore a major concern for tenants. I have been mandated by the Assembly to introduce much longer notice to quit periods, and I am taking forward that work. I am committed to fulfilling my duty to the Assembly. My officials are working on drafting exceptions to the notice periods, as is required by the legislation and to ensure that our action complies with the Human Rights Act 1998. As for fitness and quality, every tenant is entitled to live in a safe and affordable home, and I have completed work on regulations to improve fire and electrical safety for tenants. Officials will now examine how best to set minimum energy-efficiency standards in the private rented sector. Doing so will help improve the quality of our housing, while also improving comfort levels and helping to address fuel poverty, particularly for low-income tenants. Other piece of work that I am undertaking to improve standards and enforcement is the transfer of the landlord registration scheme to councils. The aim of that work is to increase the number of landlords who comply with the requirement to register. We already have evidence to suggest that registered landlords are more aware of and compliant with their legislative responsibilities. In addition, the landlord registration fee revenue will support the scheme's running costs and the development of potential pilot projects to improve compliance. The programme that I have set out has an ambitious agenda. A lot of private renters might be better off living in social housing, so we will build more social homes, but I want to deliver more than that. Many private renters aspire to homeownership, and I want to make sure that they can have a house of their own. I will continue to improve the security, affordability and quality of the private rented sector for those who live in it. It must be done in a balanced way. We cannot exacerbate supply challenges in an already stretched market. I believe that my reform programme achieves the balance, but, ultimately, more than anything else, we need to make sure that we increase the supply of homes in Northern Ireland. That is my number-one goal for housing, and I hope that, with cooperation from other Departments, that will be exactly what we deliver.
1,557 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-qualifying 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 | 0.97 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:01 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.