Debate contribution: Rates (Temporary Rebate) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025
Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .
- MLA
- Mr John O'Dowd
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 10 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Rates (Temporary Rebate) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4840976
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
Before dealing with the order itself, I will set out the background to the measure. The purpose of today's legislation is to extend the Back in Business scheme, which was reintroduced in May last year. The scheme serves to incentivise the occupation of property on the high street that is long-term vacant — property that has been unoccupied for the last 12 months and is therefore highly likely to remain unoccupied in the absence of any incentive. The scheme was first introduced as part of a package of measures aimed at assisting ailing businesses and improving the appearance of our town and city centres after the economic downturn. The original scheme provided a one-year concession that allowed a 50% reduction to apply for the new occupier for one year. That was available where a qualifying property had been empty for at least one year previously. In 2022, the then Finance Minister, Minister Murphy, amended the scheme to extend the duration of the 50% tax concession to 24 months in order to build a solid platform for new business occupations in the longer term. The scheme is viewed as a vital step in boosting footfall for all businesses, new and old, and in helping to restore a vibrant business landscape.
Since last May, 31 new and expanding businesses have availed themselves of the scheme, and that number continues to grow, along with a greater awareness of the provision. Today's extension of the scheme will allow Land and Property Services (LPS) to continue to receive new applications to the scheme up until 31 March 2026 and, critically, will allow the revised scheme, which has been in place for less than a year, to become better established. The policy serves to make a stable and substantive difference to helping grow businesses, particularly in our town centres and on arterial routes. Critically, it moderates the business rate liability in a difficult first two years of trading, providing businesses with some certainty about their overheads and helping them budget. It will also help them adjust to full rates liability in due course and grow the tax base. At the same time, the Department will generate the same revenue as it would have done had the property remained vacant. As was outlined at the time of its reintroduction last year, the Back in Business scheme is one of those rare taxation policies that can create a long-term win-win outcome. The Department has scheduled a review of the exclusions that apply in the derating of commercial property for the new rating year. As a Department, we hope that that process will build on the foundations established by the Back in Business scheme to address the issue of vacant commercial units in our towns and cities. Members of the Finance Committee received advice on the detail of the statutory rule (SR). At the SL1 stage, Committee members indicated that they were content for the scheme to continue until 31 March 2026. Article 1 of the order sets out the citation and the commencement date, while article 2 provides for the amendment of article 31D of the Rates (NI) Order 1977 by substituting a new end date of 31 March 2026. I look forward to Members' comments. I commend the Rates (Temporary Rebate) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025 to the Assembly.
556 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: 0.02 (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 (0.68).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.68 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 12:02 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.