Debate contribution: Dilapidation Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Tom Buchanan on 1 July 2025.

MLA

Mr Tom Buchanan

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

1 July 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Dilapidation Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5061373

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I was somewhat amused earlier when I heard the SDLP say that too much legislation is coming. One day, the SDLP says that there is not enough, and, the next day, it says that there is too much. You wonder what sort of Opposition you have. It reminds me of a bit of Ulster-Scots poetry that says:

"In no other country, the likes of this you'd see."

That is what we are seeing. I will move on to the Bill. I welcome the Second Stage. We fully support the intent behind the Bill, which is to address the blight of dilapidated, defective and dangerous buildings in many of our towns and villages and the risks that those buildings pose to personal safety and the environment. At the last local government election, our manifesto pledged support for the creation of powers to enable local councils to tackle dilapidated buildings, and we renew that commitment today. However, we are conscious of the fact that the Bill needs careful scrutiny. While it needs to be robust, it needs careful drafting so that no extra pressure is put on councils. Of course, that needs to come with financial support, as others have said. We look forward to examining the Bill's details at Committee Stage and working in the Committee to agree final legislation that is operable and gives local councils the wherewithal and clarity that they need to take strides in addressing a problem whilst ensuring that property owners and tenants are afforded fairness and due process. There can be no doubt that, leaving aside all the architecture of the powers set out in the Bill, much will depend on the content of the guidance envisaged in clause 20. That issue has already been raised during the debate. There can be no ambiguity around the thresholds of buildings that are deemed dilapidated, defective or dangerous. To protect the taxpayer, clear direction will be required for councils when they are taking emergency remedial action. We would welcome further information from the Minister on the rationale, in clause 11, for giving the councils powers to intervene and start remedial work on defective premises within nine days of a notice being served. That seems like a fairly expedited time frame, and consideration needs to be given to whether that unduly infringes on the ability of the owner or occupant to engage constructively and in good faith with any notice that is issued. Moreover, is it not the case that, if a risk to health and safety is adjudged to necessitate intervention after such a period, the use of the powers in clause 10 might be more appropriate than those in clause 11? I also ask the Minister to confirm whether he has explored the potential for a grant scheme to support, in limited circumstances, those individuals who find themselves in possession of dilapidated premises through inheritance or other circumstances, despite not having the financial means to take the remedial action that would otherwise be required in a council notice. Perhaps the Minister could elaborate on whether he has looked at such a scheme or whether he intends to do so. I would also like to hear in greater detail about the sorts of reasonable excuses that the Department envisages being appropriate where owners or occupiers fail to comply with conditions or notices that have been issued by councils. Again, there needs to be clarity on that. We support the Bill. As the Committee Chair said, we want a Bill that is workable and makes a difference in our constituencies, including our rural towns and villages. We look forward to the opportunity to scrutinise the legislation at the Committee and to a positive Bill passing through the House that everyone can support.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:20 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