Debate contribution: Tribeca, Belfast: Development

Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .

MLA
Mr Phillip Brett
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
30 September 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Adjournment
Heading
Tribeca, Belfast: Development
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5143426

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Like Members on all sides of the House, I got involved in politics because I love my community and the city that I am honoured to represent. It would be churlish of me not to recognise the massive progress that has been made in our city, particularly in North Belfast, over many years. A constituency that was once blighted by sectarian violence has been transformed, and, while we in that constituency face unique pressures, we continue to build back in the positive image that we all want to see. North Belfast now leads the way in our city's night-time economy offering. It is a cultural capital part of our city, and it has an offering for tourists and those who call North Belfast "home" alike. In recent years, Crumlin Road Gaol has been redeveloped, and there is ongoing investment at Clifton Street Orange Hall, the forthcoming development of Belfast Stories, as well as the MAC, the Oh Yeah centre and the Cathedral Quarter. I could go on and on. Those places are the result of the dedication of the business men and women who have taken the lead and rebuilt our city. The actions of government since the return of this place have also been welcome. I massively welcomed the huge progress that has been made on providing year-round, late-night public transport, which will be a massive regeneration for our part of North Belfast. When the Minister speaks, he might wish to say a little about his support for that initiative. The pedestrianisation of Hill Street next month, while a small step forward, shows the ambition of all sides and that, when we work together, we can deliver. Although all that progress has been made, there is a glaring omission. The once bustling heart of inner-city North Belfast — North Street and the surrounding streets — now looks like a bomb site. It is a stain on our capital city, and I am, frankly, embarrassed by the current condition of what is now called the "Tribeca" site. Such blight would not be accepted in any other part of Belfast. I am not saying it just because the leader of the Opposition is here, but, if that site were on the Malone Road, it would have been dealt with a long time ago. The clear message from those who are honoured to represent North Belfast is that the issue now needs to be tackled. It is a citywide interest, and I thank those from other constituencies who are present. Progress has clearly been achieved in some aspects with Belfast City Council's decision to purchase the Assembly Rooms. That is a welcome step forward, but we need more details on it. If we are providing £2 million of ratepayers' money in Belfast to Tribeca's owners, Castlebrooke Investments, what conditions has Belfast City Council placed on it to develop the rest of the site? Handing over £2 million to a development company that clearly has no interest in taking the rest of the development forward is yet another waste of ratepayers' money. Other businesses in that area deserve a medal for how they have managed to continue operating, trading and investing in that part of the city despite the horrendous conditions in which they work. At the weekend, I walked up Lower Garfield Street. I know that the Deer's Head has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds to ensure that it has a great offering for locals and tourists. Yet, when people walk out of its doors, they are hit in the face with scaffolding, falling bricks and a disgraceful sight. The businesses in the area pay tens of thousands of pounds in rates every year. They employ our constituents, and the conditions in which they operate would not be accepted in any other part of our city.

They say that success has many mothers and fathers, but, on this occasion, maybe failure does as well. I pay tribute to all political parties for their work on the issue. It is not an issue of my or my party's making, but there is genuine interest, from all sides of the House, in trying to move the situation forward. I pay tribute to our group leader on Belfast City Council, Sarah Bunting, who organised a number of meetings between me and Castlebrooke, so that I could make the need for development clear. Séamas de Faoite, Brian Smyth and Sinn Féin have all been involved in trying to move the situation forward, as has Michael Long from the Alliance Party. I give credit to all political parties for that. I think that we will hear colleagues say that that cross-party message is the strength of the case as we try to move it forward and have it delivered. I also pay tribute to some of the business organisations that continue to raise this vital issue daily: the Belfast One business improvement district (BID) and Martina Connolly, who continues to champion the need for the redevelopment; the Cathedral Quarter Trust; Save CQ; and the Cathedral Quarter BID, led by Damien Corr. As I said, progress has been made on the redevelopment of that part of North Belfast, but we need to see strong leadership from central government and the council. A clear message needs to be sent to Castlebrooke that it must use its development rights and planning permission, or it will lose them. As I have continually said, in no other part of the city would such a situation be allowed to drag on. I perfectly understand that market conditions have changed since the initial planning permissions were granted, but people can be expected to wait for only so long for the development to take place. We were told that it would be retail-led, but that changed to it being office space. The newest incarnation may be a housing-led development. All those uses are important and welcome, but the redevelopment needs to be delivered. People, frankly, are fed up. It is not my job to make excuses for Castlebrooke; my job is to stand up for the people who elected me. They want to see action taken on the site. We should send a strong message from the Chamber today so that Castlebrooke is put on notice. It needs to get on with developing the site and stop expecting the people of North Belfast and our wider city to accept second best.

1,067 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.06 (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 (0.88).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
  • Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.05No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.03No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.05No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.88Yes
Overall judgement0.06At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.98
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.01
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.83
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.12
No identity-related subject0.04
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:17 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