Debate contribution: Housebuilding on Public Land

Debate contribution by Mr Andy Allen MBE on 31 March 2025.

MLA

Mr Andy Allen MBE

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

31 March 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Housebuilding on Public Land

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4871600

Read the official Assembly record

Text

When we talk about there being tens of thousands of people on our housing waiting lists, it is important to remember, as other Members have highlighted and as the Minister will no doubt highlight, that they are individuals, families and people, young and old, who are languishing in a housing system that is broken. Many of them despair of the housing system delivering for them and their family. There are older people in accommodation that is much larger than they need it to be. Indeed, many of them — I have spoken to them — want to downsize, especially in the context of a cost-of-living crisis, when individuals are trying to heat homes that are larger than they require, but the system does not support or enable them to do so. As has been highlighted, it is not a new crisis but one that we have spoken about time and time again. For those affected, however, every day without action feels like a lifetime. As we have heard so many times, it is about people who are in desperate need of a place to call home. While we welcome the Department's commitment to deliver at least 33,000 social homes under the housing supply strategy, we need to be honest and ask whether that is enough. At a recent Communities Committee meeting, the Housing Executive provided a briefing detailing the need for 25,000 new social homes between 2023 and 2028, which is obviously a five-year period — I raised this point with the Minister recently — whereas the housing supply strategy commitment to deliver 33,000 homes covers the period from 2024 to 2039. I am not dismissive of that, and I appreciate that other Members have highlighted the fact that it is ambitious. It represents many more homes than we are currently delivering, and it will deliver more much-needed homes for those for whom we are striving to deliver, but it appears to be out of sync with need. Again, however, I appreciate the context of the challenging Budget landscape that all our Departments face. The debate, rightly, focuses on the need for delivery for those whom I already highlighted and the many others who are in need of a home. An important component of that delivery is land. Land is not a technical detail; it is the foundation. Without land, nothing else happens. That brings me to the crux of the motion, which is the call to "establish a public land agency". There appear to be differing views on that, but we are not opposed to that idea. Why do I say that? It is because the fundamental reality is that we are not opposed to it for the simple fact that we will not oppose any proposal that will help bring about and achieve that delivery for all our people across Northern Ireland. However, fundamental questions need to be asked. We heard from Mr Kingston about the public land registry. I have been a Member for almost 10 years, and we have been hearing about that registry for a long time, so where is it? Why does everything in this place work at such a slow pace? Where is that public land registry? As I said, I am happy to support the call for a public land registry, but it cannot be just another meaningless body. It needs to have teeth and the ability to deliver, because the thousands of people who are on our housing waiting lists do not care how we go about achieving the homes that they need. They want to see us deliver. I acknowledge the steps that the Minister has taken over recent months on co-ownership, intermediate rent and other initiatives. Those steps have been taken in the context of the extremely difficult budget landscape that he faces. I am happy to support the motion, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister his thoughts on the issue. I encourage him, if his Department has not already done this, to look at international models. There are models in Singapore, the Netherlands and, closer to home, in London, for example, and I am sure a plethora of others. It is important that we analyse and assess the models that operate in other jurisdictions. I am not for one moment suggesting that we can lift those models and apply them directly, but there is important learning that we can perhaps take from them. I am happy to support the motion.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:15 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