Debate contribution: Housing and the Programme for Government
Debate contribution by Mr Colm Gildernew on .
- MLA
- Mr Colm Gildernew
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 17 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Housing and the Programme for Government
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5013589
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Members who brought this important motion to the House. Lack of housing is one of the biggest issues that we face as a society. Unfortunately, it is an issue on which too little progress has been made. Colleagues have set out the figures, so I will not go into them, but the fact that the social housing list continues to grow, month on month, is evidence enough that we are not building enough homes to meet the level of demand. The housing supply strategy sets out an ambitious target of 100,000 new homes over the next 15 years, one third of which are to be social housing. That is the scale of what is needed if we are ever to get the waiting lists moving in the right direction. As the motion states, in the Programme for Government, the Executive have given a commitment to build 5,850 homes before the end of the mandate, which shows that the Executive are serious about building more social and affordable homes. We have the plans and strategies in place; we now need to see them delivered upon. I have to say that it is disappointing that the budget has allocated only enough capital funding to build 1,000 new social homes this year, which goes only halfway to meeting the target of 2,000 per year. I welcome the Finance Minister's comments yesterday that he will work with the Communities Minister to secure extra funding throughout the year and that housing will be prioritised. Whilst that is far from ideal, we have seen how, last year, funding was secured for an extra 1,000 homes during the year, so it certainly can be done. However, we have to be realistic, as Kellie said, about what can be achieved under our current circumstances. It has long been Sinn Féin's view that, if we want to seriously tackle the housing shortage, the Housing Executive needs to start building homes again, and only by changing the funding model for the Housing Executive and giving it the ability to borrow money will that be achieved. To that end, former Communities Minister, Deirdre Hargey, initiated the revitalisation of the Housing Executive, with that outcome as a key priority. As Members will know, that change to the funding model must be agreed by Treasury. Disappointingly, it has so far refused, despite persistent lobbying by successive Finance Ministers. However, I very much welcome the confirmation from the Finance Minister that the Treasury has now agreed to consider that change as part of the ongoing negotiations on a final fiscal framework. We need those negotiations to take place as soon as practicable and an agreement found that will transform the Housing Executive and, more importantly, get the homes that we need built. Previously in the Chamber, we have debated the benefits of building homes on public land. Sinn Féin would like to see the creation of a land management agency that would assist with identifying and acquiring any public land that is suitable for housing.
504 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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | 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 | 0.96 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:47 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.