Debate contribution: Reval2026
Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .
- MLA
- Mr John O'Dowd
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 2 February 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Ministerial Statement
- Heading
- Reval2026
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5356298
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As I said, I conducted a safe U-turn, checking my rear-view mirror and looking across the road, paying attention to the environment around me at all times. This is how the process of fair maintainable trade (FMT) turnover operates. Fair maintainable trade turnover is the turnover that an efficient operator could achieve running a business. The rental value is a small percentage of the FMT after operating costs are deducted. At every revaluation, LPS has engaged with the hospitality sector to help to review and update the percentages used. I suspect that the conversation that we will have with the hospitality sector in the time ahead will be about a number of areas, including the percentage used to evaluate the rentable value of a property after taking into account all the overheads that it faces. I am more than happy to equip Members with information on the system, because there has been a lot of debate on it, some of which has been informed and some of which has not been so informed. I accept that it is complicated. I have the assistance of my officials to steer me through it. I am more than happy to place in the Library information on exactly how the system works. I suspect that the issue about the percentage etc will be the focus of our discussions with the hospitality sector.
My reference to you not knowing what you were talking about was a general comment.
Mr McNulty, I approach people as I find them. If those who speak to me treat me with common courtesy, I will treat them with common courtesy. You have an awful habit of standing in the Chamber and demeaning representatives of my party and other parties. Were you to adopt a slightly different tone, you would be surprised at how well you and I would get on.
I sense that the Member is largely talking about retail. Each business will now go back to its 2023 valuation. As I said in my answer to a previous question, the debate has been around the hospitality sector, perhaps understandably, but, if we are to move forward with a fair, open and transparent rating system, we have to hear the voices of all sectors. The retail sector has seen significant changes in shoppers' patterns as a result of the growth of online shopping etc. When Members debate the issues, it is important that they are mindful of the fact that it was a reval of all non-domestic properties, not simply one sector.
422 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: 0.08 (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 (0.68).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.15 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.68 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.87 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.12 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:18 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.