Consultation Response

Housing Rights believes that access to justice is paramount in any democracy.  The consultation paper sets out the cost of some of the areas which are proposed to be removed from Legal Aid and Advice (Green Form). Those areas which cover housing related issues, which HRS would be concerned with, amount to a small percentage of the overall Green Form expenditure. Despite it being a small proportion of the overall expenditure, removing such funding could have a devastating effect on the lives of people who potentially need this assistance. Therefore, we strongly feel that the funding of housing related cases should be protected.

Access to justice is widely accepted as a cornerstone of democracy and a vital ingredient in protecting weak and vulnerable citizens. Housing Rights Service therefore welcomes the opportunity of responding to this consultation paper. As a voluntary sector organisation which provides legal aid services and contributed to the consultation on the Access to Justice Review, we have a number of particular concerns which are detailed in this response. Given the nature of our work, our comments are largely confined to the area of civil legal services.

Housing Rights Service welcomes this long awaited consultation on proposals to introduce a developer contributions scheme for social and affordable housing in Northern Ireland. We believe the introduction of planning obligations to facilitate developer contributions presents an important opportunity to lever in additional investment for the provision of new social and affordable housing, particularly in this time of constrained public financing and sustained housing need. We therefore support the Department’s aim to “promote decent, affordable and sustainable housing, particularly in terms of tenure, price and household composition” and the recognition that “the provision of more affordable housing is a cornerstone of sustainable communities”.

Housing Rights Service is concerned about the new form of tenancy i.e. the Short Secure Tenancy (SST) which the DSD is proposing. We interpret the SST as a downgraded temporary tenancy for 6 months. After this time the SST either becomes secure again or possession is sought to bring the tenancy to an end using a largely administrative process. The court “would be required” to grant possession in such cases. In our view a system which allows for the removal of secure tenants’ rights by a largely administrative process runs contrary to the principle of natural justice and would interfere with human rights. Read our response.