I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses deep concern over dereliction in Belfast city centre, particularly the Tribeca Belfast site, which has contributed to a growing sense of squalor and decay; recognises the consequences of prolonged dereliction, including lost revenue from unpaid rates on vacant properties, reduced footfall and lower community morale; calls on the Minister of Finance to address city centre dereliction through the introduction of a vacant land tax to discourage long-term landbanking, and to ensure that land in prime locations is used effectively for the benefit of the economy and community, including options to reflect the historic significance of the Assembly Rooms in the Enlightenment of Belfast; and further calls on the Minister to work with Land and Property Services (LPS) to conduct a full review of rates due across the Tribeca Belfast site, and to work with the Minister for Communities and the Minister for the Economy to engage proactively with Belfast City Council on its proposals for the site.

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have five minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that eight minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. Mr O'Toole, please open the debate on the motion.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I hope that people will see today as a robust and productive Opposition day, when we have put accountability on the record but also dealt with substantive policy issues. In our final motion of the day, the question that we will debate is not simply a local Belfast issue but something that affects the whole region, because our major city is a key economic and cultural driver of this region. None of us should be relaxed about the state of Belfast city centre.

A gateway project to revitalise the north-east quarter of Belfast city centre was first proposed 25 years ago, in 1999. Shockingly, not only has that part of the city — specifically, what is now known as the Tribeca Quarter or district — not been revitalised but it has fallen into the most appalling disrepair. There has been enormous improvement in what is now known as the Cathedral Quarter. In our hospitality and cultural offering, it is the go-to part of the city for visitors, but, right in the middle of it, there is a blot that stretches from Royal Avenue to St Anne's Cathedral. If you walk around there — I am sure that Members have done so, given that the issue does not just affect Members who represent the city of Belfast but is relevant to our entire region — you will see dereliction, antisocial behaviour and broken glass. You will see some of the most historic buildings in Ireland falling progressively into disrepair. It is obviously and self-evidently an eyesore, but it is not just that. It is robbing us of rates that we might have if productive businesses or houses were there and even from the properties that are there at the minute. Answers to questions that I asked of LPS have highlighted a shocking level of rates that has been forgone or given to the owners of those properties via reliefs that should not have been due. We have lost millions of pounds in rates revenue.

What is happening with this site? We simply do not know, is the honest answer. I do not want to spend all of this brief debate talking about the intentions or wishes of the current owners of the Tribeca site, because, frankly, I think that a little too much energy has been wasted on that already. I want to have a constructive and clear conversation about where we go from here, because it is simply not acceptable for us to allow such dereliction in the middle of the major city of this region to continue. It is not acceptable, and I do not believe that it would be accepted in any other major city on these islands. Can you imagine if this were the case in Dublin, London, Manchester or Glasgow? Of course, there is dereliction in those cities, but it is not to this extent and not in a such a strategically important place.

What do we do about it? Our motion calls for a number of things. It calls for the Minister of Finance to start to "address city centre dereliction" not just in Belfast and at the Tribeca site but throughout the region. It affects other places. We want to look at a:

"vacant land tax to discourage long-term landbanking", and, my God, we have a problem with landbanking. We also want a specific look at how we can revitalise and make use of the extraordinary opportunity of that part of the city. We are in the Northern Ireland Assembly now, but this Building is but a boy compared with the Assembly Rooms in the middle of the Cathedral Quarter. It is rich in radical history, including that of the dissenting Presbyterian tradition of 18th-century Belfast. We are allowing it to literally and shamefully fall into ruin.

This is not in our motion, but, today, we have put forward a specific proposal. I am happy for the Minister to explain to me why she thinks it is not a goer, as long as she and her colleagues are thinking about an alternative. We think that you could look at financial transactions capital (FTC). We in the Finance Committee are always shaking our heads about how much of that we give back. We have given back more than £300 million of financial transactions capital in the past half a dozen years. It is not grant funding and cannot simply be given to build a railway or a school; it has to go to an entity that is capable of completing a financial transaction. Why not look at a Laganside-style corporation, perhaps with commercial involvement, that could use unspent financial transactions capital to vest that site, which is now known as Tribeca, get it into proper hands and make use of it commercially, culturally and historically in order to properly celebrate the Enlightenment history of that part of the city, get rid of the dereliction, move on and turn the page on decades of shameful dereliction in that part of the Cathedral Quarter?

Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

It is time for us to take action. I hope that the Minister will do so with her colleagues in Belfast City Council, and I commend the motion. Let us finally get on and do something about this blot that is in the middle of our city.

I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out all after first "dereliction" and insert: "in parts of Belfast city centre, which has contributed to a growing sense of squalor and decay; expresses frustration at delays in the proposed urban regeneration of the Tribeca Belfast site, as well as dilapidation on a number of main arterial routes into the city centre, including the Newtownards Road, Peter's Hill and Sandy Row; recognises the consequences of prolonged dereliction, including lost revenue from unpaid rates on vacant properties, reduced footfall, antisocial behaviour and lower community morale; opposes long-term landbanking but is concerned that the introduction of a vacant land tax could create a chill factor for investment and unfairly penalise landowners in circumstances where developments stall for reasons beyond their control; calls on the Minister of Finance to address city centre dereliction and to ensure that publicly and privately owned land in prime locations is used effectively for the benefit of the economy and community, including through options to reflect the historic significance of the Assembly Rooms in the enlightenment of Belfast; and further calls on the Minister to work with Land and Property Services (LPS) to regularly review rates due across the Tribeca Belfast site, and to work alongside Executive colleagues to engage proactively with landowners and Belfast City Council on their proposals for the site."

You will have five minutes to propose and three minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have three minutes.

I thank the Opposition for highlighting in the motion the importance of Belfast — the capital city of Northern Ireland. As an MLA for South Down, I usually speak up to champion my part of the country and to showcase the Mourne Mountains, but, today, I am speaking to recognise the significance to us all of those issues in Belfast. The DUP wants to ensure that our capital city is a vibrant place to live, work and do business. We want to see Belfast and its city centre continue to grow and prosper. In recent years, we have welcomed investment to our city, and we want to continue to attract development, business and tourism. We would be wrong to ignore the projects that have benefited from being in Belfast city centre and have been a success. However, we fully agree that prolonged dereliction reduces footfall for businesses, reduces community morale, opens the door to antisocial behaviour and raises a number of health and safety issues.

The Finance Minister must take action to ensure that land and property that are in prime locations are used to the benefit of the economy and the community. That goes for public and private land, which is something that the motion does not seem to acknowledge. There are significant publicly owned sites in the city that present issues. Our amendment seeks to widen the focus of the motion beyond the city centre. As someone who commutes to greater Belfast on four days most weeks, I am well placed to speak to the image that is presented to people when they travel along main arterial routes, including the Newtownards Road, Peter's Hill and Sandy Row. They should not see the dilapidation and dereliction en route to our city centre. That is not attractive to residents and tourists or to businesses that are considering investment. It feeds into poor perceptions of community safety. There is a key role for the local council in addressing this, and we welcome the reference to the need for action from Belfast City Council. Ministers, their Departments and other partners, such as the councils, must work together to address dereliction. In particular, we look forward to Minister Muir introducing his dilapidation Bill. Delays to urban regeneration are not only unsightly but also have real financial consequences due to the lost rates revenue from vacant properties and reduced footfall.

The Finance, Economy and Infrastructure Ministers must encourage investment in Northern Ireland and work to attract developers. The DUP wants to promote continued and timely development in Belfast. However, we are aware that vacancy is a complex issue. A vacant land tax does not represent a silver bullet and risks simplifying the issues involved. It presents many significant questions. For example, would it create a chill factor for investment? What would the impacts be for publicly owned vacant land, which is also a key feature in our city centre? Would it unfairly penalise landowners for delays beyond their control? Is the SDLP proposing to apply a tax across Northern Ireland? There are derelict sites in isolated areas in my constituency of South Down for a variety of reasons, and I am concerned that a possible precedent could be set here. The SDLP has called for the introduction of a vacant land tax without any mitigation for consultation or indication of what scale or range of sites it might apply to. The Welsh example suggests that such a policy is problematic to implement.

Our amendment expands the motion, noting the opposition to long-term landbanking, but records concern over introducing a new tax and highlights that land affected is both public- and private-sector-owned. A proactive solution, rather than the punitive approach suggested by the Opposition, is required. The Finance Minister should regularly review the rates across the Tribeca Belfast site. Indeed, responses to questions by the leader of the Opposition suggest that LPS is already having some success in ensuring rates reliefs are applied effectively. The full review proposed by the leader of the Opposition is unquantified and raises questions about why any future review or revaluation should be limited to one area when dereliction is a common problem across towns and villages in Northern Ireland. The Finance Minister and colleagues should absolutely engage with landowners and Belfast City Council on their proposals. The Minister should work with the investors and landowners, rather than moving to penalise them. As I said, our amendment seeks to widen the scope of the area included in the motion and notes our concerns. I commend the amendment to the House.

Members, as the business in the Order Paper is not expected to be disposed of by 6.00 pm, in accordance with Standing Order 10(3), I will allow business to continue until 7.00 pm or until the business is completed.

I welcome the debate. It is important because of the vital role that Belfast plays, the population that resides here and those who work, visit and do business. There is no doubt that a prolonged period of dereliction has impacted on the city centre and, indeed, sites across the city, including in our neighbourhoods. Landbanking of key sites, the Primark fire, COVID, the cost of living, the change in retail trends, out-of-town shopping and the policy of austerity have all impacted on the situation.

The absence of adequate housing in the city's core and the failed regeneration policies of the 70s, 80s and 90s, which segregated the city centre working-class communities from the city's core, have also played a part, and the impacts of those policies are still being felt today. Developer-led regeneration and traditional economic development practices are failing to address the challenges of our time. That has been demonstrated in the Tribeca area, and I warn against simply transferring the land from one developer to another. Trying to secure sites via paid lobbyists could potentially lead to a conflict of interest. What we need is a new people-centred approach to economic development that redirects wealth back into our local economy and places control and benefits into the hands of local people, communities and businesses. We need to build an inclusive and shared city for all, regardless of ethnic and socio-economic status, and where economic power works for local places and people. We need to learn from the mistakes of Laganside and others in not engaging communities, and proactively excluding them is not the way to do it.

I live in one of the communities that was affected when Laganside drew its strict boundaries that excluded all the inner-city communities. We know that that was policy: it was by design. Communities feel the negative impact of that approach, and I implore anyone who promotes that approach to speak to all those communities.

Greater citizen and community involvement and meaningful participation are viewed as improving the quality and legitimacy of decision-making, thus building democratic accountability. We need a community wealth-building vision with underpinning principles and outcomes and time-bound actions that will direct all future development and ensure that sites are developed in a way that meets the needs of our people, communities and economy. That includes all communities, not just the few that are mentioned in the amendment. That is why we have a concern about the amendment: all working-class communities should be included.

We want Belfast city centre and, indeed, the city to be a place that thrives, where people can live and access services that are open and accessible to all no matter your socio-economic status, and that reflects the rich heritage —

Will the Member draw her remarks to a close, please?

— of our city, such as the Assembly Rooms.

I am glad to speak on the motion. Many of the aims and ambitions set out in the text were reflected in the Alliance motion on the rejuvenation of high streets across Northern Ireland. I am always happy to talk about tackling dereliction, which plays an important part in creating more vibrant high streets. As any MLA for Belfast will attest, we know how deeply that has impacted on our city centre.

While a range of factors are at play in the motion, a key priority for Alliance is the devolution of regeneration powers. For many years, Alliance has been clear that we need to secure the devolution of regeneration powers to our councils. We have been waiting too long for them to transfer. I am an unashamed, proud champion of Belfast — I love our city — and I genuinely believe that councils are at the heart of our communities and are best placed to deliver local solutions for our towns and cities. While planning has been devolved to councils, it is long past time for those powers to follow suit.

On Belfast City Council, our councillors have been working hard to tackle the dereliction and regeneration of our city centre, and, while the substance of the motion is really important, I do not want to discount that important work. The work on supporting the Vibrant Business Destinations programme, including on high streets, which can support and complement the city centre in improving street furniture, is really important. Fighting for the recently announced expansion of the Vacant to Vibrant scheme outside the city centre to help revitalise neighbourhoods and inject vibrancy into vacant commercial properties is also so important. We have been pushing to secure the creation of a small business champion, and I am excited about the delivery of Belfast Stories and other city deal projects, such as the Lagan footbridge. We are working to ensure that all projects are accessible, inclusive and sustainable. So much work has been happening, but that is not to say that there is no room for much more. We believe that it is time to reform our rates system, including through the potential expansion of the small business rate relief scheme and making it easier for businesses to set up in vacant premises and promote growth. Especially when we look at our arts sector, we see how regenerative small businesses are.

The Assembly Rooms is a venue that can show its cultural and artistic values to a new generation, and we should maximise that potential by showcasing and supporting our brilliant local talent. That is why we have supported a proposal to offer support for artists to take over vacant space and secure long-term tenancies at council level: to better support our arts sector.

There are roles for Departments, councils and a multitude of stakeholders who must be included in the conversations, which is why we have called on the Economy Minister to develop a comprehensive strategy to rejuvenate high streets and town centres. No one action can tackle the dereliction or bring vibrancy to our high streets. The winding down of the high street task force following the publication of the 'Delivering a 21st Century High Street' report was bitterly disappointing, particularly in the context of that 2022 report being left to gather dust —

Will the Member draw her remarks to a close?

— while problems mounted.

Dereliction in Belfast city centre, particularly around the Tribeca Belfast site, demands urgent attention. What should have been a symbol of regeneration has become a site of neglect, impacting on the city's appearance and economy and on community morale. Derelict properties and vacant land result in lost revenue from unpaid rates — funds that could support essential local services — and deter footfall, harming businesses and undermining Belfast's potential as a vibrant hub of activity. A proactive approach to tackling those issues is essential. Introducing a vacant land tax may incentivise property owners to develop or release unused sites, unlocking opportunities for investment and growth. However, such a proposal must be examined in detail to avoid any adverse impacts or unintended consequences that cause a chill factor, as per the concern raised in the amendment.

A renewed Living over the Shop scheme, for example, could help transform unused spaces into much-needed housing, boosting footfall and supporting local businesses while helping with the housing crisis. As has been mentioned, Belfast City Council's Vacant to Vibrant programme is a promising step forward and has already breathed new life into 26 properties in the city centre, with more projects under way. In addition, other important work is being taken forward. For example, in east Belfast, an action group has been convened, and I look forward to attending the launch of a vision for the Newtownards Road next week.

We must also prioritise the preservation of historic buildings such as the Assembly Rooms and turn them into cultural and economic assets. By celebrating Belfast's heritage while fostering growth, we can create a city centre that balances its past with a vision for the future. With focused, collaborative and innovative policies and investment, we can transform derelict spaces into thriving hubs of community and commerce, ensuring that Belfast becomes a source of pride and opportunity for all.

Belfast has been on a similar journey to that of many other cities that expanded rapidly during the Industrial Revolution, such as Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and Newcastle, with old industrial and warehousing land being repurposed for modern-day use. Whilst other cities also experienced Blitz attacks during the Second World War, Belfast suffered more than any other city from the terrorist onslaught of the Provisional IRA, which tried to destroy the economy of the city and held back investment for 30 years. That is the reality.

Belfast has been on a similar journey to many other cities that expanded rapidly during the Industrial Revolution, such as Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and Newcastle, where old industrial and warehousing land has been repurposed for modern-day use. Whilst other cities also experienced the Blitz attacks during the Second World War, Belfast suffered more than any other city from the terrorist onslaught of the Provisional IRA, which tried to destroy the economy of the city and held back investment for 30 years. That is the reality.

Our capital city has had to play catch-up, but there has been notable progress in recent years, particularly in hotels and tourism; student accommodation; modern office development, including at City Quays; the fabulous new Ulster University campus; and retail, residential and leisure developments. The fact that Deloitte carries out an annual Belfast crane survey to count new developments in the city centre is a positive sign. I recall attending the launch of its first crane survey in 2016, when I was Lord Mayor.

Looking at the wording of the motion, we can understand the appeal of a vacant land tax to work against land banking and delay. However, we must assess whether applying more stick would actually be a disincentive to investment.

Will the Member give way?

I will not have time. Sorry.

In my experience, new developments, whether in the public or private sector, always take longer than expected for a host of reasons. It is necessary to work with developers to resolve issues and urge them to make progress.

Our amendment highlights areas of dilapidation along some of the arterial routes into our city centre, including the Newtownards Road, the Shankill Road and Sandy Row. In the Shankill area, the Democratic Unionist Party has supported the BUILD initiative since its inception. It is a community-led partnership that seeks to address issues of vacant and derelict land.

Developers often cite their frustration with our planning system. Northern Ireland needs a fit-for-purpose planning system to attract investment and development. The stalled Tribeca development is a negative in the north Belfast section of the city centre, and it should receive dedicated attention. Along with Upper North Street, it stands in stark contrast to the development and regeneration around the new campus.

We should be mindful that economic opportunities have changed in recent years, including with changes in shopping habits and the increase in homeworking, but we remain of the view that more can be achieved through engagement with site owners by Executive Ministers, elected representatives, Belfast City Council and relevant statutory, community and private agencies to minimise delay and enable ongoing regeneration of our city centre.

I call the Minister. Minister, you have 10 minutes.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the issue. We all want to see our town centres and shopping areas thrive. The difference that a bustling business, new homes or a vibrant community can make to once empty properties is striking. Regeneration, however, must be carried out in consultation with communities and done with communities and not to them. Local communities must benefit socially and economically from such regeneration. As Deirdre set out, redevelopment cannot exclude the communities that are already there. Regeneration must be done in a way that maximises the potential for all.

The motion is cross-cutting and spans a number of ministerial portfolios. The motion partly concedes that by recognising that there are fundamental responsibilities across the portfolios of the Communities Minister and the Economy Minister, as well as for Belfast City Council. There is also a key role not mentioned in the motion for the Agriculture Minister and the Environment Agency, which is a key arm's-length body pertaining to the issue and holds records dating back to 1834 on around 14,000 brownfield sites.

The policy issues with Tribeca arose not because of the rating system, which already imposes a liability on vacant commercial property — I have written to Executive colleagues about my intentions on that policy — but because of a wider civic policy on regeneration strategy at central and local government level, planning policy and the general ability for a group or entity to control a major area of land in one city or town. It is important to highlight that any ownership or management of contiguous or associated properties will increase the potential for a management entity to make opportune use of the features of a property tax system. That risk is, perhaps, the fundamental factor in any future decisions on whether paramount oversight of a fixed area should be permitted within the planning and regeneration systems.

While those issues are outside my remit, I am willing to work collectively at an inter-agency level to resolve the issue. The question now, though, is how to address the issue that has arisen and how to manage future development work that could lead to a similar situation. Neither of those points is neatly contained in the central two elements of the motion, which have been addressed to my portfolio, as the Minister of Finance, but they have been touched on in the wider debate.

The first element in the motion refers to:

"the introduction of a vacant land tax to discourage long-term land banking".

The question, of course, is this: what is meant by "vacant land"? My Department holds no such data set. While I am happy to be corrected, I am not aware of a central registry of such land being held at either central or local government level.

On the DUP amendment, while I am not sure about the "chill factor" that it references, there is a clear requirement for an evidence-based approach to such a significant tax intervention. As with the motion, the amendment asks me to do many actions that sit outside my policy portfolio, although I support the wider Executive's work to facilitate regeneration alongside local government bodies.

In order to implement a new and novel tax, establishing a vacant land data set would be the first step required to assess feasibility. That database would then need to incorporate the number and size of the individual sites that qualify, along with their ownership profile, location and other characteristics such as current zoning, the socio-economic context, the market context and previous use. What exemptions should apply in such a data set, and how do you distinguish between urban, rural and mixed areas? None of that detracts from the potential value of such a measure. However, the timescales for researching and establishing even the fundamental data to begin looking at the economic value of such a tax measure, let alone creating the administrative and IT infrastructure for developing and maintaining such a tax base, mean that that is not a short-term fix for the immediate situation pertaining to Tribeca.

Of course, the rating system already imposes a liability on vacant commercial property. That brings me to the second element of the motion, which calls on me to:

"work with Land and Property Services (LPS) to conduct a full review of rates due across the Tribeca Belfast site".

As implied in the text of the motion, the fact that rates are due for the Tribeca site is the first key point. Earlier this year, my Department concluded a consultation that looked at non-domestic vacant rating and increasing the liability level to raise revenue. That work highlighted that the policy issue was not one of simply escalating the liability level. Over 70% of respondents raised issues with such an approach in the immediate term for valid reasons. There are particular concerns about the increase in stranded assets in the office and retail sectors due to wider market changes, many of which have been accelerated by the COVID pandemic.

We need to ensure that, in increasing the liability, we do not simply increase the dereliction that often accompanies higher property tax levels in other jurisdictions. Despite that, I am attracted to the option of increasing liability in that area in a managed and coordinated way, and I have outlined to the Executive how I want to look at the area in the context of my strategic policy direction. That will, however, need to be coupled with work across the Executive on sequencing any increased liability in the area with our wider work to regenerate and decarbonise our built environment.

LPS assesses liability or grant relief in accordance with the statutory framework for the rating system, which, in turn, is set by the Assembly and the Executive. If a property qualifies in line with the statutory framework, it is entitled to that support. Of course, rates can be applied only to a property that is there. Occupiers of properties that are granted relief are awarded the support after a process of application, assessment and decision by the district valuer on the basis of the facts and evidence in each case. LPS will, however, update and backdate liability when changes in the area are identified. LPS is reviewing procedures to ensure that changes of occupier for properties benefiting from such rate reliefs are identified. Likewise, valuers in LPS continue to work with relevant stakeholders to provide professional valuation advice on proposals for the area.

The Member who proposed the motion spoke of using financial transactions capital coupled with land acquisition. Although that was not outlined in the motion, I will elaborate on the points made. FTC can be deployed by the public sector only as a loan or an equity investment in a private-sector entity. The investment fund that is managed by CBRE is an innovative way of using FTC to invest in long-term transformation, thus supporting economic development and regeneration and tackling regional imbalance. I have met representatives of a number of projects that have benefited from the investment fund, including two hotels in Belfast. The fund has also supported the provision of prime office developments in Belfast city centre, as well as new, purpose-built student accommodation. I have encouraged, and I continue to encourage, all project developers to check the fund's criteria and engage with the fund manager to see whether they are eligible for support.

On the distinct point about land acquisition, or vesting, I refer the Member to a previous report from Belfast City Council on the powers of vesting for the Tribeca Belfast development:

"The process of obtaining a Vesting Order in respect of the site will be complex and require a significant officer resource to satisfy the various steps set out within" section 97(1) of the Local Government Act 1972,

"not least of which is securing the approval of the relevant Department, that being the Department of Communities."

As I highlighted in my earlier comments, I suspect that the party that tabled the motion is somewhat misguided in its attempts to lay responsibility for the Tribeca situation on me, as Finance Minister. I understand and support the rating point that was made on revenue potential, but the rating system serves to assess and bill the built environment that is there, not that which is intended. Like the rest of the Executive, I am eager to see regeneration in the area, not least because of the anticipated revenue from rates. Since day 1 as Minister, I have spoken about how I want to realise tax-based growth here for that very reason. The vesting action that the Member advocates is for the council and the Department for Communities to take, but it would no doubt prove a difficult matter and one of cross-cutting legal complexity. In any event, it is a much more difficult and protracted process than tabling a motion for debate in the Assembly.

Although the council's assessment seems to be that it would be for the Communities Minister and the council to take forward that complex work, I am of course willing to do whatever I can, through my ministerial portfolio or as a member of the Executive, to facilitate and assist that consideration. We all want our town centres and shopping areas to thrive. As I have highlighted throughout my response, addressing the issue of long-term derelict properties is multifaceted, requires partnership working from all involved and must be done in consultation and agreement with local communities. I am happy to play my part in conjunction with Executive and other colleagues to take forward that work.

Thank you, Minister. That was just five seconds short of your allotted time. Well done.

I call Paul Frew. Paul, you will have to keep it short, because you have only three minutes. Try.

You are giving me a bad name, Mr Deputy Speaker. On a serious note, I do not know that three minutes is anywhere near sufficient for anybody to frame an argument in any debate. I ask the Opposition to consider that for the next time. When it comes to their aims and objectives, maybe less is more.

I thank the Member for giving way. May I suggest, in that case, that he and other parties implore their colleagues to show up and participate in our debates? When we have had four hours to spend, the time has often been used up simply because Members did not turn up to debate. I appreciate that he is not one of those Members, but that is one of the reasons why we have four motions today.

You have an extra minute.

It has been an interesting debate. However, when I read the motion, I was horrified to see how eager the SDLP is to slap businesses, people and the community with a further tax. It seems that the SDLP thinks that the way to get out of all problems is by taxation. To impose such a tax would lead to massive consequences for economic drive, economic vision and every other issue that we have, be that cash flow, inflationary pressure or planning issues and the length of time that it takes planners to conduct their business. Slapping another tax on businesses and people who are trying to develop our cityscapes is a horrid suggestion. It would lead to more deprivation and dereliction. We should know and learn from history that taxation simply does not work when there are so many other issues involved.

I was glad to see mention in the motion of Belfast's Assembly Rooms as part of Belfast's rich history. The building is of historic significance not only to the Enlightenment but to the United Irishmen rebellion and the debate that was happening at that time in Belfast and throughout Ulster and Ireland. Not least, the building was known for its contribution to music and was the venue for the historic Belfast Harp Festival of 1792. Belfast is steeped in history. I always encourage people to learn their history, because it is multifaceted, detailed and complicated — exactly how this problem is today. I despair when I see dereliction and waste ground, not only in Belfast — our capital city — but in our other towns, such as Ballymena, Ballymoney, Ballycastle and Bushmills. I can rhyme them all off. Even the small villages in North Antrim suffer from dereliction, and we should all consider that. It is multifaceted, and it will not be solved by slapping a further tax burden on our people.

I mentioned the Assembly Rooms. I hark back to that time in Belfast when you had all the innovation and entrepreneurs. Think of the Joy family and the McCrackens. What would they think of the SDLP's plan for further taxation? If they were alive today and heard the SDLP's plans, what would they think? I think that they would be horrified, especially considering the amount of work that they did for poor people through their involvement with Clifton House. It is an intriguing debate, but I hope that the idea of a vacant land tax will not see the light of day.

I call Colin McGrath. Colin, you have five minutes.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It would be too easy to say that the DUP looks back to people from 200 or 300 years ago to ask for their impression of how to do things today. I hope that we can get the DUP modernised and moved right up to date.

The debate has been positive in the sense that, while we have different views and opinions on the outcome, everyone has the view that they want to see Belfast and, as has been referenced, town centres across Northern Ireland being vibrant places: places that people enjoy; places where people can work; and places that work for people. We want families and others to be able to go into the town and city centres and for those to be enjoyable places in which people can spend time.

It is fairly obvious from the example of the Tribeca site that something is not working. It has been like that for a long time. It is a grim part of the town, and the difficulty is that, if you have a business in that area, you are impacted on by the fact that the area is running down continually. Nobody wants to go to that part of town. That perpetrates the issue, and the dereliction moves further and further from the site at which it started. We know that that level of decay and squalor can spread and make places less attractive.

I hope that people will see as a constructive thing the fact that we are here, discussing the matter in another Opposition day debate and talking about how we can challenge it and that we are having conversations and trying to find solutions that will help our cities and towns right across the North. Tools are at the Executive's disposal that can help drive the regeneration of the city centre and maybe leave a more positive and lasting legacy.

We referenced the fact that a vacant land tax would help to incentivise people to take up premises. People are saying, "We do not think that that would do anything". Look at what not doing it has done. It is not helping. The place is not improving by people doing nothing, sitting back, not helping and saying "Ach, sure, maybe the council will get around to it. Maybe the Executive will get together so that all the Departments will do something." Those places have been lying like that for years and years, and they have not been improving. Maybe we need to think about doing something different and doing something in a different way to try and help.

Will the Member give way?

I am really short of time, so please be quick.

What would you suggest should be done about publicly owned land that lies vacant for years?

I would say that the Department should get its finger out and do something about it. Really, it should be down to that. It is down to Departments and public bodies. They should be doing something about it. They should be leading by example and actually using what they can in the likes of, for example, 2 Royal Avenue.

You have an extra minute.

The place at 2 Royal Avenue has been developed into a venue for arts and culture purposes, and it is providing those services. A building that was run down has been taken and turned into something that can be used for the good of the community, so there is an incentive for public bodies to do that type of work.

The amendment references a number of arterial routes. Mind you, you could find a common thread in the amendment, because if you look at the routes that are referenced, you will see that they may be from a particular side of the city or cover particular parts of the community. Much more could have been made of the amendment. The amendment tries to water down what we are suggesting. By simply highlighting an issue, it merely asks Ministers to actually do their job. Ministers should be out working with their colleagues to see whether there is a way to help regenerate and revitalise areas. Having an amendment that says that Ministers should be meeting and trying to help areas feels like we are just asking them to do their job. It simply asks for a "review", so I feel that the amendment is a bit weak. It does not have that punch behind it that would help to bring some sort of resolution to the problems that we can see.

There were references in the debate to there being a number of new issues to consider. Those include COVID-19 and what has happened as a result of that and the reprofiling of high streets, which we are all aware of. That is happening everywhere, not just in Belfast. My colleague from South Down referenced that as well. We in Downpatrick are suffering from that lack of footfall because people have changed their shopping habits, so we need to try to reprioritise how we deliver things in the high street. However, that will not happen if big empty buildings are left lying for years.

Buildings on two of the corners of the main junction in Downpatrick are lying empty. One has been lying empty, doing nothing, for decades, nearly. It is right in the heart of our town, so if something could be done to try to incentivise those who own the land to do something with that building, it could help to turn around and repurpose the high street, which we also need to do.

There were some references to schemes such as Living Over the Shop. We did that successfully in Downpatrick. I am sure that it would also work in Belfast. It was done for a number of years, and it helped to encourage a wee bit more footfall in the city centres and town centres in the evening because people were living there, rather than them just being work-based areas.

There was reference to the carrot and the stick. As I said, the problem may be that those are the wrong way around. There has been too much carrot and not enough stick. That is why we are where we are with so many of the town centres left languishing. I accept the Minister's saying that there were no data sets from which to get the information to deliver some of what we have asked for. Let us do it. Let us not always just look and say, "We cannot do that". That does not reflect a forward-looking Executive that will try to deliver for our local communities, which is what the SDLP wants to do.

Thank you, Colin.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Assembly divided:

<SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;"> Ayes 21; Noes 37

AYES

Mr Allen, Mr Bradley, Mr Brooks, Mr K Buchanan, Mr Buckley, Ms Bunting, Mr Clarke, Mr Crawford, Mrs Dodds, Mr Dunne, Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe, Mr Frew, Mr Harvey, Mr Kingston, Mrs Little-Pengelly, Mr Lyons, Miss McIlveen, Mr Martin, Mr Middleton, Mr Robinson

Tellers for the Ayes: Ms Forsythe, Mr Frew

NOES

Dr Archibald, Ms K Armstrong, Mr Baker, Mr Blair, Mr Boylan, Ms Bradshaw, Mr Dickson, Ms Dolan, Mr Donnelly, Mr Durkan, Ms Egan, Ms Ennis, Ms Ferguson, Mr Gildernew, Mrs Guy, Miss Hargey, Mr Honeyford, Ms Hunter, Mr Kelly, Mr McAleer, Mr McCrossan, Mr McGrath, Mr McGuigan, Ms McLaughlin, Mr McMurray, Mr McReynolds, Mrs Mason, Mr Mathison, Ms Á Murphy, Ms Ní Chuilín, Ms Nicholl, Mr O'Dowd, Mrs O'Neill, Mr O'Toole, Mr Sheehan, Ms Sheerin, Mr Tennyson

Tellers for the Noes: Mr McGrath, Mr O'Toole

Question accordingly negatived.

Main Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly expresses deep concern over dereliction in Belfast city centre, particularly the Tribeca Belfast site, which has contributed to a growing sense of squalor and decay; recognises the consequences of prolonged dereliction, including lost revenue from unpaid rates on vacant properties, reduced footfall and lower community morale; calls on the Minister of Finance to address city centre dereliction through the introduction of a vacant land tax to discourage long-term land banking, and to ensure that land in prime locations is used effectively for the benefit of the economy and community, including options to reflect the historic significance of the Assembly Rooms in the Enlightenment of Belfast; and further calls on the Minister to work with Land and Property Services (LPS) to conduct a full review of rates due across the Tribeca Belfast site, and to work with the Minister for Communities and the Minister for the Economy to engage proactively with Belfast City Council on its proposals for the site.

Adjourned at 6.26 pm.