High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for setting the scene so well. The reason so many hon. Members are present is because the future of our high streets is of great concern to everyone, myself in particular.

Each high street is different and should reflect the unique character and personality of each community. High street restoration requires shared visions, creative thinkers and strategic planning. I always bring a Northern Ireland perspective, and the high street in Newtownards is important to me because it is in our major town. High streets should be home to places that provide important functional services, alongside cultural, community and leisure functions. Regeneration should be community-led, ensuring that local voices are heard and that our high streets reflect the genuine needs of our communities, fostering a sense of belonging in our town centres.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is up to each local authority in Northern Ireland to bring forward a marketing, tourism and economic plan for each high street to get under the bonnet and start fixing this problem, which has been around for so long?

[Jim Shannon]

I certainly do, and I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention.

To ensure that regeneration is lasting, work must continue to be done by all councils across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to prevent unlawful shopfronts and enforce planning permission breaches. The number of enforcement actions carried out increased by nearly 25% in 2025, compared with 2022. However, significant disparities remain between local authorities, with evidence indicating that some councils are considerably more proactive than others in monitoring such activity.

In Strangford, £1 million has been provided for the Supporting Thriving High Streets programme to create safer and more attractive streetscapes, boost footfall and attract new businesses. These transformations do not happen overnight, and a significant amount of planning and work has already been done to begin the project. All four UK nations record year-on-year declines in footfall. Shopfronts lie deserted, a visual reminder of the economic pressures. Regular health checks should be carried out to assess the effectiveness of these efforts. That would ensure that investment is not only delivered effectively but protected over time, creating resilient, responsive high streets.

I look to the Minister to ensure that UK-wide funding is available to support high streets, to ensure that banks have a high street presence and to re-engage people with the joy of shopping local and sowing into their local economy. That can be achieved, and together we must achieve it.

High Streets

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mr Campbell]

The hon. Member is right. I agree that edge-of-town and out-of-town retailing are having an impact on city centres and town centres.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

rose—

[Mr Campbell]

I give way to my hon. Friend, who I think is the only hon. Member I have not yet given way to in this debate.

[Carla Lockhart]

“The best till last”—I am sure that was coming. I agree that we need to take a real look at town centres and their problems and issues, but does my hon. Friend agree that the biggest complaint from the businesses that still exist and are still working hard in our town centres is about business rates? He mentioned charity shops; they are rates-exempt. He mentioned online businesses; they do not have business rates to deal with and cope with. Does he agree that a UK-wide look at business rates is needed and that we should really start supporting our businesses in that way?

[Mr Campbell]

Yes, I agree. Edge-of-town and out-of-town retailers have the advantage in one sense, while the huge multinational online retailers have the advantage in another sense—and they have both put our high streets at a major disadvantage.

I move on to some of the positive contributions that have been made. In Northern Ireland, our own Department for Communities has a Shaping Sustainable Places programme under my colleague Gordon Lyons, the Minister for Communities. That draws together a range of Departments to try to revitalise town centres and co-ordinate more closely on how that can best be sustainably delivered for the future.

Here in Westminster, along with colleagues, I have been pressing the Government for the past 12 to 18 months to complete the future towns fund, as they now have. As a result, Londonderry and Coleraine—one is entirely in my constituency and the other is partially in it—will get £2 million per year over the next 10 years. That is progress and something of a start, but it must become part of a co-ordinated approach that includes other Departments and some of the local councils that have been mentioned, to radically reassess where we take town councils in the future.

I hope the Minister will agree that discussions are needed between devolved Ministers and their Departments on whether an agreement can be reached about a pilot scheme in the English regions, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, to see how to transform town and city centre landscapes—not just over the next year or two, but the next decade or two. If the decline continues, it might not be me back here in 10 years’ time—I probably will not be, or anywhere else for that matter—but someone will be, saying, “When are we going to do something to transform and revitalise our town and city centres?” We need a radical overhaul. I hope the Minister responds positively so that various Government Departments and devolved institutions can co-ordinate to deliver the tangible change that people want.

Holocaust Memorial Bill

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Consideration of Lords amendments
Tuesday 20th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Miatta Fahnbulleh]

With the leave of the House, I rise to thank hon. Members of all parties for their contribution to this important debate. I appreciate that although the Government’s commitment to establish a new national Holocaust memorial and learning centre has cross-party support, there are strongly held views in many quarters about how that vision is made a reality, and we are committed to listening and to engaging as we move forward.

I would like to start by thanking the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly) for the work that his party did to initiate this important scheme and the Bill, and for maintaining cross-party consensus and working constructively with us to find solutions to move forward. He was right to focus our minds on the purpose of the Bill and the key mission of the learning centre.

My hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) was right to remind us of the need for pace and urgency. This process was initiated in 2015; it has taken far too long to get to this point. As he pointed out, as we delay and take time, the hope and ambition that the last survivors could see the construction of this memorial and learning centre moves further out of sight. We are determined to move at pace with construction, should we get the support of the House, to conclude it while the last remaining survivors are still here.

The hon. Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman) gave a powerful contribution highlighting the reason for the Bill and the need constantly to remember, so that “never again” is not a hollow slogan or empty words. She was right that we are having this debate in the context of a rising tide of hate and division across our country. The collective task before us is to make sure that we move, deliver, remember and learn for this generation and future generations.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

It is timely to remind us all that if we held a minute’s silence for every person killed in the Holocaust, we would be silent for 11 and a half years. It is right and proper that we have a national memorial. Can the Minister reassure the House? Antisemitism is not confined to history; it is happening daily. Whether it be attacks at football matches or in our streets, around us our Jewish friends face hostility simply for being Jews. As this centre remembers the Holocaust, will it also deal with the antisemitism prevalent in our society today? Will those Jewish friends feel confident that they will not be attacked when they go to the centre?

[Miatta Fahnbulleh]

The hon. Member is absolutely right. We are seeing increased antisemitism. We see case after case in all our communities. I spend a lot of time talking to the Jewish community and our faith leaders. I hear the fear, anxiety and worry. The Government are absolutely committed to responding to that and to making sure that we take action so that our Jewish friends in this country feel safe and feel that they can live their lives without fear of attack or prejudice. That is a collective ambition across the House, and one that we have to work day in and day out to deliver. Remembering, and remembering where this can take us, is part of that journey, which is why the Bill and the memorial centre are absolutely key.

I thank the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) for paying tribute to his constituent Dorit Oliver-Wolff, her legacy and her impact. There are so many survivors who have made such a huge contribution and have continued to give and continued to remind us. I hope that, collectively, we deliver this Bill for them and deliver the construction of this site.

The Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), is right to point out that there have been issues about the location. There have been large debates about this. I gently point out that there has been extensive consultation throughout the planning process; 4,500 responses were submitted to the planning application and a planning inquiry was held publicly. We have consulted, and we have heard and listened. The issue of the location is increasingly settled, but we will continue to work with the community and the council to get the design right. Critically, we will protect the garden, as the site will take up only 7.5% of the area of Victoria Tower Gardens. We will do a huge amount of work to make sure that the memorial centre is aligned and consistent with that public park. Critically, we are doing work to enhance the park, including the playground.

Let me end by reflecting on the contribution from the right hon. Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Steve Barclay) and his plea for transparency, which we hear. There is consensus and we want to maintain that consensus. That requires us to continue listening and engaging, and to keep the House updated. Any construction has difficulties going through planning but also delivery. Our commitment is that, because all Members have worked together to get to this point, we will continue to update the House.

I close by underlining the Government’s determination to ensure that the learning centre remains firmly focused on education about the Holocaust and antisemitism. We will ensure that that determination is embedded in the future governance arrangements for the memorial and learning centre, so that there can be no dilution of or digression from that intent. We do that, as Members across the House have highlighted eloquently and passionately, to ensure that we remember that dark moment and learn the lessons of history so that it can never happen again. I hope we can now move ahead as quickly as possible to establish the Holocaust memorial and learning centre with the consent and the support of Members across the House.

Lords amendment 1 disagreed to.

Ordered, That a Committee be appointed to draw up Reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing with their amendment 1;

That Miatta Fahnbulleh, Deirdre Costigan, Laura Kyrke-Smith, Mark Sewards, Peter Prinsley, Sir James Cleverly and Zöe Franklin be members of the Committee;

That Miatta Fahnbulleh be the Chair of the Committee;

That three be the quorum of the Committee.

That the Committee do withdraw immediately.—(Taiwo Owatemi.)

Committee to withdraw immediately; reasons to be reported and communicated to the Lords.

Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill (Programme) (No. 2)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83A(7)),

That the following provisions shall apply to the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill for the purpose of supplementing the Order of 9 September 2025 (Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill: Programme):

Consideration of Lords Amendments

(1) Proceedings on the Lords Amendments shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours after their commencement.

(2) The Lords Amendments shall be considered in the following order: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 4.

Subsequent stages

(3) Any further Message from the Lords may be considered forthwith without any Question being put.

(4) The proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.—(Taiwo Owatemi.)

Question agreed to.

Chinese Embassy

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Matthew Pennycook]

Planning Ministers will make a decision taking into account all material planning considerations.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

The proposed Chinese embassy includes a subterranean facility just centimetres from cables carrying highly sensitive financial data. Any hostile intelligence service designing an espionage target would struggle to find a better location. Northern Ireland has learned that strategic assets must not be put at unnecessary risk for the sake of diplomatic symbolism. National security cannot be an afterthought. At a time when this House voices concerns about foreign influence online, we must also confront the real-world threat of hostile states exploiting our critical infrastructure. Will the Minister do the right thing and agree that national security should trump planning? Will he therefore say no to this proposal?

[Matthew Pennycook]

I simply cannot provide a running commentary on a live case, but I assure all hon. Members that national security is the first duty of Government generally and that all relevant planning considerations will be taken into account when making a decision.

Homelessness: Funding

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for bringing this subject forward for debate. Across the UK, a disproportionate number of homeless people are former military personnel. Does he agree that this Government need to get real about supporting those who serve this country in their hour of need? We cannot continue to abandon them.

[Bob Blackman]

Under the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, local authorities have a duty to assist veterans who have put their lives on the line for this country. They should be given full support.

The wider context of homelessness is important in discussions of funding. It demonstrates that if we simply allocate the funding to prevent homelessness to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and local authorities, we ignore the major drivers of homelessness and will not see the reduction that we all want to see. I have raised this issue many times, and it has become increasingly clear that we need the Government to take action. They need to set out in the forthcoming homelessness strategy a clear direction for how they will tackle the drivers of homelessness, with an approach that prioritises prevention rather than cure, and securing access to stable housing with support as quickly as possible. They also need to make serious reform to funding models to ensure that they are adequate and can deliver outcomes on preventing and ending homelessness.

The cross-Government strategy must address the drivers of homelessness and be clear on the outcomes that we are trying to achieve. We await its publication, which will be a key opportunity to set a clear strategic direction from the heart of Government on the outcomes that we want to see, and to design funding to maximise the chances of achieving them.

Changes to homelessness funding are not isolated from wider Government policy. The numbers show that welfare decisions, Home Office policy changes, and the ongoing failure to end street discharge from hospitals and prisons are pushing more and more people into homelessness. The Government must consider any changes to homelessness funding alongside wider policy and the cross-Government strategy for homelessness and rough sleeping—in particular, how welfare policy decisions increase demand on local government services.

Supporting High Streets

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Griffith]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and the choices that businesses face are enormously difficult. Every single day, they have to ask themselves whether they should put up prices to try to claw back some of the damage—some of that £25 billion cost—thereby increasing inflation and keeping interest rates higher for longer, pushing up the cost of living. Do they reduce the number of employees or the hours per employee, or do they simply fold in the face of disincentives, a lack of support and headwinds rather than tailwinds? Do they shut up shop before the Chancellor’s next intervention heaps on more and more burdens?

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

The hon. Member is making a very powerful speech. High streets across my constituency are struggling, and one additional burden that they carry is a parcels border in the Irish sea caused by the Windsor framework and the protocol. It cost a children’s clothes retailer over £200 to get a delivery from GB. Does the hon. Member agree that this is an extra burden that retailers should not have to carry, and that the Government need to do something about it quickly before businesses go out of business?

[Andrew Griffith]

Rather than giving away our fishing for 12 years and getting nothing in return because of a dogma, or spending time on international affairs—giving away the British Indian Ocean Territory and paying for the privilege—the Government should be prioritising the needs of business and focusing on the specific barriers mentioned by the hon. Member. Doing so would make a huge difference to businesses in her constituency.

It is not just the Chancellor. The Business Secretary seems to be doing his bit too, creating more small businesses by shrinking existing large ones. His 330-page unemployment Bill, which is due to come back before the House tomorrow, will make life a nightmare for every employer on our high streets. It will make flexible and seasonal working impossible, and will prevent employers from taking a risk on young people and work returners—some of the most vulnerable people in society—for fear of joining the backlog of 490,000 claims to employment tribunals.

Houses in Multiple Occupation: Planning Consent

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steve Yemm]

I agree, and I will turn to that later in my remarks.

Mansfield is built on community, and people look out for one another, but when planning makes it easier to convert family homes than to build them, the fabric of community life starts to fall apart a little. This is not an anti-HMO message; it is a pro-community message. Good landlords—I meet many of them—should be recognised and supported, but those who ignore rules should face real consequences, which speaks to the point the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) made.

Mansfield district council is doing all it can. It is using selective licensing powers to help address antisocial behaviour and poor housing in the private rented sector in certain designated areas, and I fully support it in doing so. It has also looked at using an article 4 direction to bring HMO conversions back under local planning control. I would also support that, but the process is relatively complex and costly, and feels a little stacked against local authorities.

Mansfield council would first have to gather extensive evidence to prove that uncontrolled HMO growth is genuinely harming the local area, whether that is parking pressures, waste issues or the erosion of family housing and so forth. That process alone involves months of costly data collection and consultation, and it puts more pressure on planning teams at a time when councils are recovering from years of cuts under the previous Government. We cannot expect them to do more with less while trying to respond to these real concerns from the community. Even with clear evidence—and Mansfield has plenty—councils have to jump through many hoops to justify what should be a straightforward decision giving local people a voice in what happens on their own streets.

So today I am asking the Minister to consider three things. First, we should simplify and strengthen the process for councils to use article 4 directions when there is a clear local need. Councils such as Mansfield should be trusted more and given the ability to protect their neighbourhoods. We should reinstate the principle that local authorities know their communities best.

Secondly, we should think about introducing a national framework that prevents over-concentration of HMOs in defined areas. Part of that could include the creation of a national register for HMOs, linking planning, licensing and council tax data so that local teams can more easily identify areas and locate unregistered properties.

Thirdly and finally, we should properly resource local authorities to enforce the rules they already have. Powers on paper mean nothing if councils do not have the people or funding to use them. We might consider, for example, the provision of ringfenced funding or allowing councils to use planning fees or licensing income to support enforcement.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for securing this important debate. As he said, the frustration among communities is felt deeply. Does he agree that whether it is HMOs, buy-to-lets, which are often problematic, or hostels, if there are breaches within them, or if landlords are not keeping to the rules, action should be taken swiftly by the authorities?

Neighbourhood Plans: Planning Decisions

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Wednesday 9th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I congratulate the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) on securing this important debate.

I have been struck when listening to all the speeches so far by the fact that so often when we talk about planning, we speak in terms of bricks and mortar and targets, but we are actually talking about the neighbourhoods that we want to live in—the places where our children can be near their grandparents, where working families can afford a home, where older people can remain in the communities that they helped to build.

In West Dorset, the system too often delivers not the homes we need, but the ones that developers choose to build—homes that are almost empty, unaffordable or ill-suited to the needs of local communities. We are told that planning holds up development, but many sites already have planning permission and are sitting unused. Far too often, the problem is not the approval of homes but the delivery of what is already agreed.

I often joke when I am talking to residents that there are only two things in politics that everyone agrees on: that we need more homes and that we need them somewhere else. Let me be very clear: Dorset needs new homes, but they must be the right homes, in the right places, for the people who actually need them, supported by proper infrastructure, guided by good planning and with water management built in from the start.

Neighbourhood plans are a crucial part of the solution. They are developed by communities, who know their areas best and understand where homes can go and where they should not, what infrastructure is needed, what characteristics must be preserved and what kinds of homes are actually required.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

Appropriate and adequate housing is key to the growth of any area. A lack of housing is a very real problem in Northern Ireland, particularly in my constituency. While we have a different planning system, our issues are the same. The hon. Member mentioned the lack of investment in water and sewerage infrastructure. Does he agree that, in the round of this planning discussion, we need to get the water services at the table to ensure that they are investing in areas so that the housing can be built when it is approved?

[Edward Morello]

I agree 100%. I will come on to the campaign that the Liberal Democrats have been running to make water companies statutory consultees, and the importance of their involvement.

In West Dorset, we need genuinely affordable social housing, affordable homes for key workers and smaller homes for older people who want to downsize but remain in their communities. In my constituency, nearly 80% of homes are under-occupied. Many residents, especially the half of the population over 55, are trapped in houses that are too large for their current needs, with no smaller suitable alternatives locally. Meanwhile, young families are priced out of the villages that they grew up in. Neighbourhood plans offer us a way forward, but they must be given real weight in planning decisions. Local voices must not be sidelined by arbitrary targets, and local planners must be given the tools and support to do the job properly and shape developments that fit our communities.

Planning should not just be about housing; it should be about protecting the natural environment and ensuring that the infrastructure is in place to support new developments. In West Dorset, more than 70% of our land is designated as a protected natural landscape. These landscapes are not only part of our heritage, but vital to our local economy; tourism brings in more than £320 million a year and supports more than 5,000 jobs. People come to Dorset for the natural beauty. If we lose that, we lose more than the countryside; we lose our livelihoods and our communities. That is why I believe that National Landscapes must be made a statutory consultee in the planning process and have a guaranteed seat at the table when decisions are made that could permanently alter the characteristics of our protected areas.

The same must be done with water companies, as mentioned. At present, they are not statutory consultees on new housing developments, despite the fact that every flush, every sink and every shower adds pressure to an already overstretched system. In 2024 alone, West Dorset saw more than 4,200 sewage spills, equating to a staggering 48,000 hours of sewage discharge. It is not just a planning issue; it is a public health crisis and an environmental disaster. When homes are built without the pipes and the run-off systems to support them, everyone pays the price. Water companies must be statutory consultees, so that new development does not simply add to the pollution burden and we can hold water companies accountable if the pollution continues. The planning system must build in environmental accountability from the start.

Neighbourhood plans should not just be maps of where homes go; they should be binding frameworks that connect housing with infrastructure, nature, transport and water. They must have teeth and they must be respected. We must also tackle the backlog of permissions already granted. Developers must not be allowed to sit on land when communities go without. “Use it or lose it” measures must be implemented to ensure that approved developments are built or planning permission is withdrawn.

Dorset will soon be consulting on its new local plan and I urge residents to get involved. Housing targets may be set by Whitehall, but homes are lived in by people, and people deserve a system that listens to local communities, delivers the right kind of housing and provides the infrastructure needed to make those homes liveable.

Oral Answers to Questions

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Wednesday 18th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Seema Malhotra]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that we need a focus on women’s health. Our priority is turning the commitments in the women’s health strategy into tangible actions, such as by setting out how we will eliminate cervical cancer by 2040 through the new cervical cancer plan. We have taken urgent action, through our elective reform plan, to support the nearly 600,000 women who are on gynaecology waiting lists.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

One in 10 women in Northern Ireland is thought to have endometriosis, and the average wait time for diagnosis is an unacceptable nine and a half years. Does the Minister agree that there needs to be a UK-wide strategy that equips our NHS with endo-experienced surgeons, fertility experts, mental health support and pain specialists in order to aid those women, who are on the most horrifically painful journey?

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank the hon. Member for raising this issue. She is right: it is unacceptable that women can wait up to 10 years for an endometriosis diagnosis. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s updated guidelines on endometriosis make firmer recommendations on referral and investigations, which will help women receive a diagnosis and effective treatment faster. It is important that we continue to work as closely we can on this issue across the whole UK.

Social Housing Tenants: Antisocial Behaviour

Carla Lockhart Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to speak in this debate and, as always, a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. Thank you so much for that opportunity.

I thank the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) for leading the debate and setting the scene. There is not one of us in this Chamber today who has not been impacted by this issue through our constituents. I want to give a couple of examples, and one of them will be incredibly extreme, but it does illustrate the issue. I know that this Minister has no responsibility for housing in Northern Ireland, but I know also that he has a deep interest in Northern Ireland. He has come over to Northern Ireland on a number of occasions, and we are always very pleased to see him there, because we know that he does that out of interest and wanting to help.

Issues involving antisocial behaviour impact all our constituencies, and we are no strangers to dealing with these issues in our offices. Unfortunately, probably nearly every week, I have at least one or two of these things to deal with. By the way, they are not always in social housing. Sometimes they are in private housing as well, so people should not ever think that it is just social housing where the problems are. There is more to be done to protect tenants and also give housing associations more rights to take control of their own properties, so it is great to be here to discuss that.

May I first commend the intervention by my hon. Friend the Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell)? He made a very pertinent comment. Many of those in social housing aspire to own their own house, whether the one they are living in, under the system of purchase, or a house elsewhere. To give one story as an example, many years ago someone came to me and said, “Jim, I’ve been offered a house up in a certain place, and I’m not sure whether I should take it, because it’s got a reputation.” I said, “My suggestion to you is: it’s a lovely house, it’s a lovely area, and I think you should take it. The reason I say that is that you could go there and have the best neighbour you ever had in your life, or you could go to somewhere really special and you could have the neighbour from hell. That’s how it works. You have no control over who your neighbour is.” The area does not always mean that the house itself is in a bad area. That person took that house, by the way, and they still live there. That is an example of taking an opportunity, and of having neighbours who are genuine and lovely.

I have a great working relationship with the Housing Executive in my constituency, and with Ards and North Down council and Newry, Mourne and Down council, because they take in a large portion of my constituency after the boundary changes. I believe it is important to have a good working relationship with the housing associations: first, with the Housing Executive, which is the biggest house owner in Northern Ireland, but also with Choice Housing, Radius Housing, Clanmil Housing, Alpha Housing and Habinteg. I name them all because they are important housing associations and providers in my constituency. Working together, we can ensure that tenants are safe and that their issues are dealt with quickly and efficiently.

I do not agree with the “three strikes and you’re out” rule mentioned earlier. If someone is continuing to party, causing noise, disturbance and damage, and if someone has addiction issues, all those around them are impacted, especially in flats. If, for example, there is a six-block flat and one flat is partying all the time, the other five are all impacted by that, and maybe the neighbours next door as well, so we cannot ignore what is happening. When a tenant signs for a house, there is a list of conditions and rules to which they are supposed to adhere. If they cannot adhere to those rules, then they are out—the hon. Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) referred to that, and I think that is right. It is only right for those who want a decent life, who aspire to other things, who aspire to a quality of life, and who—even if they do not aspire to own a house—aspire to live peacefully with their neighbours. Those are the priorities we should be trying to achieve. The hon. Member for Ashfield has done us justice by securing this debate on an issue with which many of us have contact every day and every week.

Antisocial behaviour encompasses numerous disruptive activities, such as excessive noise, vandalism, harassment and other actions that cause harm or distress to individuals or the community. Another such activity, which is prevalent specifically in my constituency, seems to drinking and taking drugs. I am sorry to say that. I know that people have addictions—I am not here to criticise anybody—but I gently say that those with addictions, whether to alcohol, drugs or whatever, have a responsibility to look after, and not cause a problem to, their neighbours.

Both the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the housing associations offer clear guidelines on what constitutes antisocial behaviour and provide mechanisms for residents to report incidents.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and commend the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) for securing this excellent debate. Does my hon. Friend agree that many good, hard-working families, predominantly in our working-class estates, are being absolutely tortured because of the inappropriate placing of people within their estates? Often, we see people with addictions placed beside elderly residents and folks. There needs to be appropriate placing by our housing authorities and, when a problem is identified, action needs to be taken against them. It cannot take three, four or five years just to get these people into court.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank my hon. Friend and colleague for that intervention. I am mindful that I am not allowed to name certain things in Hansard, so I will give the example without naming the estates. We had an occasion that was the very thing that she refers to, where individuals with problems seemed to be moved. Why were they moved out of estates in Belfast, Newtownabbey and further afield to come to Newtownards? I will tell you why: because they caused bother in those estates and they had to be moved elsewhere. An estate in my town, Newtownards, was their destination, and they brought their problems with them.

We had to have meetings with the police, the Housing Executive and an intermediary body that tries to find solutions, as well as with the Tenants Association and the local representatives. It is a massive problem. The hon. Member for Ashfield referred to an example where the people who cause problems were all put together on one street. There is a responsibility on the tenants—they must adhere to the rules. The Northern Ireland Housing Executive emphasises earlier intervention and prevention strategies to address antisocial behaviours effectively.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland—it is important to have police working alongside—is instrumental in providing support for keeping the peace, because there are many cases where it comes to blows and fighting, which spills out on to the street, and sometimes worse things happen. The police’s first objective is to keep the peace and ensure that there is as little disruption as possible.

To give a perspective of the issue in Northern Ireland, in the 12-month period from March 2023 to February 2024, which is not that far back, there were 45,355 antisocial behaviour instances recorded by the PSNI, and the population in Northern Ireland is 1.9 million. My goodness! Those statistics give us an idea of the scale of the issue—in theory, they represent a decrease, and it is still an enormous figure.

Many may be aware—again, this is an extreme example—that one of the housing associations built a housing estate in Newtownards, and at the very beginning we expressed some concern that estates could potentially become aligned with one paramilitary group. I met the housing association at the very beginning to express that concern and ensure that that would not happen, and the housing association told me that it was constrained by the points system for allocating properties.

That estate was Weavers Grange in Newtownards— I will put this one on the record, because it became a fairly provincial story on a weekly basis over a period of time—where one organisation tried to ensure that the only people who could live in that estate were those who belonged to a certain group, and everyone else who wanted to go there found it impossible to stay there. Several homes were targeted, with windows smashed and graffiti sprayed—this was considered to be part of local, ongoing disputes. It has taken almost the last three years to erase that as a possibility.

By the way, the houses are lovely and really gorgeous—anyone would love to have one to live in, because they are modern and sought after—but if we cannot get peace in those estates, then we have a really serious problem to address. The housing association came round at the end of the day and understood the issues, and helped, along with the local community groups, which are critical to finding solutions and making places acceptable—the hon. Member for Mansfield referred to that as well.

Some of the instances of intimidation were actually death threats, so it was pretty heavy stuff. Efforts have been made by local neighbourhood policing teams, which include the community policing officers, the community groups, the housing associations and elected representatives, including myself, Members of the Legislative Assembly, councillors and community councillors. This is a clear example of the impact that antisocial behaviour can have on social housing developments, and in particular the impact it can have on other the tenants in the area.

When it comes to evicting a tenant, they have to go to court, and it takes such a long time, so my question is whether there is anything legislative that the Minister—who is always very helpful in his responses—could do to make the system quicker and take the niggle or aggravation out of the whole thing at an earlier stage?

I will commit to working alongside partners in my constituency to help to combat instances of antisocial behaviour. In the past, I have met members from the local policing teams to discuss strategies for combating ASB in local areas such as Newtownards, Killyleagh and Portavogie. I am sorry, Ms McVey, I am going on a wee bit; I am on the last paragraph now.

To conclude, there is more work to be done to tackle instances of antisocial behaviour in social housing areas, and the key word is collaboration. It is important that we have the collaboration among all the bodies, in conjunction with local police, housing associations, Members and other community politicians. There are so many other avenues that we can utilise to put an end to instances of ASB; and it is essential that we do this to make our towns and communities safer, happier and better places to live and work.

As I always do, I look to the Minister positively for his response, and for his commitment to ensure that more is done across the whole of the United Kingdom. I know that he will be in touch with the representatives and bodies back home as well; perhaps he can give us some assurance on that.