Debate contribution: Housing and the Programme for Government
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 17 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Housing and the Programme for Government
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5013719
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will attempt to respond to several of the points that have come up in the debate, but I will not cover all of them, because I have a relatively brief period of time. First, I want to tackle the idea that, purely by the Opposition being an Opposition, we are somehow not being constructive. We have said from the very beginning that we would be a constructive Opposition, but let me be absolutely clear: being robust and pressing the Executive for delivery on their own targets is the essence of opposition and of democracy. Some people in this Chamber may not like democratic debate and challenge and may think that we should all come here and agree with one another and wring our hands collectively and go out and pretend that we all agree with one another, but, if we were to do that, we would be failing our citizens. I will give way to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I appreciate the Minister making that clarification, and I acknowledge that we have been robust with him in the past few days. We will continue to have very strong differences of opinion on events of the past week. I acknowledge that he has at least offered a degree of explanation for what is a striking failure to deliver on social housing targets. I acknowledge that, so far, he has engaged in some detail. That is fair enough, but it is very difficult to see how the Executive can come anywhere near meeting their target — one of the very few specific targets in the Programme for Government — of 6,000 social homes by the end of the mandate. If we are lucky, we will deliver 1,000 this year. That means that, in all probability, that target will be missed. In all probability, it is extremely likely that it will be missed.
Mr Kingston said earlier that we were indulging in the "luxury of being in opposition". He and his colleagues and others in the Chamber have the privilege and the responsibility of government. Our job, as the Opposition, is to hold them to account. I think that Mr Allen asked for an intervention.
That is absolutely true. Yes, at one time, our party held that portfolio. We could all go back and find out that Paddy Devlin said something in a meeting of Belfast City Council back in 1970 or whatever. Fair enough. That is fine. I acknowledge that. It is a joint responsibility, but we have to take responsibility, as the Opposition, for holding the Executive parties to account.
I will not give way on absolutely every single point. I have been generous in taking interventions. I will perhaps take another in a few minutes' time. Let me say this. The Executive will, in all likelihood, miss their social housing targets. Let us be clear about that. The Minister at least made a bid to get the amount of money needed, but the Finance Minister did not meet it. We know that one of the other issues that is plaguing the delivery of social housing and all other forms of construction is the situation with NI Water. That is not this Minister's responsibility; it is the Executive's responsibility. The failure to even engage with the problems at NI Water is a shameful indictment of the Infrastructure Minister and the Finance Minister. Yesterday, in the Chamber, the Finance Minister practically brushed me off when I asked him about investment in NI Water. Last week, the independent Fiscal Council said that the funding model was not fit for purpose. Yesterday, the Finance Minister said, "I don't agree" and just brushed it off. Later tonight, about 100 miles south of here, there will be a protest. Someone has put up a social media post about the housing crisis in the other part of this island. The person who posted that message asks:
"Fed up with rip off rents & house prices?"
Yes, I would say that lots of people in the North are. The post continues:
"Angry at ever rising homelessness?"
Yes, I am, and lots of my constituents certainly are. It goes on:
"Dismayed by missed social & affordable housing delivery?"
Yes, yes, yes. I agree with Eoin Ó Broin, the Sinn Féin housing spokesperson in the Dáil, that this is not acceptable. All that the Opposition and I are asking for is that the citizens of the North, who are experiencing a housing emergency, get the same kind of opposition and the same kind of delivery that Sinn Féin is demanding in the other part of this island. Simply announcing strategies, as Sinn Féin housing Ministers did —. By the way, during this debate, which is now over, we have heard from one Sinn Féin spokesperson. That speaks volumes about the seriousness with which that party takes its responsibilities to its citizens in the North. What is good enough in Dublin is not good enough for those of us in the North. It is pathetic. Genuinely pathetic.
Does Ms Ennis want to come in? I will give way.
I have held the Minister to account. I am talking about the Minister too, because the Minister and others are responsible for their failure to deliver for the people of Northern Ireland. However, they are part of an Executive in which the Finance Minister and Infrastructure Minister are unable and unwilling to engage on the most serious issues. I will give way briefly to Mr Carroll.
I agree with that, and we will not support the amendments, not because we are being difficult but because we are the Opposition. Our job is to hold to account the parties in the Chamber that are in government. Lots of important things are happening, and I welcome the fact that there is finally a serious discussion with the Treasury about the classification of the Housing Executive and borrowing powers. That is a good thing. We will be constructive in welcoming that. I also welcome the fact that there is now agreement on some of the land use points that we raised. Progress has been made, and I do not think that the Minister is not serious about all those things. There will, however, be a failure to deliver on the target that was in the Programme for Government just a few weeks ago. There is nowhere near the budget to deliver social homes, and there is a complete denial about the crisis facing NI Water.
If Members think that the job of the official Opposition is to come in here and glad-hand, shake hands and pretend —
— that all is fine, I am afraid that they have another thing coming. I commend the motion to the House.
1,129 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: 0.09 (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 (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.10 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.95 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.04 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.91 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.06 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| 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.