NORTHERN IRELAND (STREETS) (Hansard, 8 July 1980)

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Philip Goodhart)
I beg to move, That the draft Private Streets (Northern Ireland) Order 1980, which was laid before this House on 25 June, be approved. The House will have noted that this draft order is very largely a consolidation of existing legislation. That legislation is the Private Streets Act (Northern Ireland) 1964 and the amendments made to it, particularly in 1973 when the functions of town and country planning, road authority and private street matters were transferred to the former Ministry of Development.
The Private Streets Act 1964 made a considerable advance on earlier legislation in bringing a number of matters into one compact code. These matters were the control under planning law of the layout of new streets; the requirements that those streets must be constructed to specific standards; and that their making up by developers must be guaranteed by their lodging adequate security with the responsible authority. The Act also contains procedures governing the making up and adoption of existing private streets.
Prior to 1964 there had been considerable public outcry about unfinished streets, particularly in new housing developments, and the Act has served its purpose well by reducing the number of cases where serious complaint nowadays arises that a street has not been provided or finished in a reasonable time.
The draft order now before the House is necessarily a complex measure. Part II of the order deals with the layout of new streets in planning terms and with the detailed way in which they are to be constructed. Part III deals with the adoption of streets into the public road system. Part IV sets out the procedures for departmental action either if there is default in new development or if older streets are needed to be made up to standard. Part V ensures that, before new buildings are begun, there is a legally binding assurance that the streets will be provided. All these provisions follow the long-established principle that streets to be adopted into the public road system are provided at the expense of the developer or, in older streets, the frontagers. 507 At the same time, an opportunity of appeal is provided at various stages.
In the main, therefore, the order is a re-enactment of existing law which has become difficult to read and understand because of the many amendments which have been made to it. The opportunity is, however, being taken to re-word a few provisions for the sake of clarity, and to include some other amendments dealing with detailed points.

§ Mr. Tom Pendry (Stalybridge and Hyde)
This is a consolidation order which also began its life under the previous Administration. It is basically sound, and we shall support it.
Will the Minister expand somewhat on the implications of article 15(1), the recovery of expenses by the Department? How do the Government intend to monitor the recovery of the expenses? Does the Minister foresee any particular difficulties? Does he, for instance, expect there to be an increase in the Department's staff arising from the recovery of these expenses?
Secondly, would the Minister care to elaborate on the instalment mechanism contained in article 20? Does he foresee a need for extra personnel? I know that I appear to be preoccupied tonight with the problems of increasing personnel. That is not because I believe that they ought not to be increased. That would be surprising as I am a Member sponsored by the National Union of Public Employees. But we are rather fond of the Minister and would hate to see him do a U-turn without anyone noticing.
Having made those points, I wish only to add that we support the order.

§ Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr. Richard Crawshaw)
The discussion is limited to the desirability of consolidation and to any amendments which are new to the legislation. We may not have a general discussion on the Bill.

§ Rev. Ian Paisley (Antrim, North)
I welcome the consolidation of these measures, but there is one point that I should like to put to the Minister. He mentioned that the consolidation arose largely out of the reorganisation of local government. As we are all aware, we 508 had various sections of responsibility divided and redivided. The Minister will know that there were council houses under the local authorities that were handed over to the Housing Executive. Some of these houses had back entrances to them, and as a result of the handing over there was a division of responsibility. The houses went to the Housing Executive and the back of the houses went to the environment Ministry.
As a result of the reorganisation, controversy has arisen over the streets and over the application of some of the laws that we have now in the order. I call the Minister's attention to this and especially to the matter that I have already raised with his Deparment in regard to the Moat Road, Ballymena, where there is a dispute over who is responsible for streets that back on to these houses. As I read the order, I find many things in it that are helpful, and I trust that they will apply to these entrances.
There is another matter to which I draw the attention of the Minister, relating to bonds. When a contractor is to build houses he enters into a bond and a sum of money is guaranteed in the bank so that the streets that will be fronted by the houses will be completed. A large number of building contractors in Northern Ireland have been going bankrupt and not finishing the jobs. As a result, many of the streets need the benefit of the laws that we are enacting tonight. There is a lot of work to be done under the order, as the Minister knows.
Why cannot the Minister's Department now take the money that has been lodged for bonds and proceed immediately with the work necessary to bring the streets into line with what is set out in the order?

§ Mr. Wm. Ross (Londonderry)
Like the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley), I shall be brief, because I am covering much the same ground.
The order consolidates and lays down the standards of construction of private streets. It is a matter that causes all of us who have private development on any sort of large scale a great deal of concern. We are continually confronted by complanning constituents, and my own experience is that officials seem to be extremely reluctant to carry out the enforcement procedure. One can very well understand that, but it is of small comfort to 509 the unfortunate people who have to live with the debris that is left behind.
Can we have an assurance from the Minister that whenever we have the problem which has already been touched on by the hon. Member for Antrim, North in regard to bonds—in some cases continuing bonds, perhaps a series of them, and perhaps more than one developer, with part of the land being sold—the Department will move in rather more quickly than in the past? Are we going about this in the wrong way? Should we be trying to deal with the problem from an entirely different angle to ensure that the streets are laid to a proper standard before the foundations are laid?

§ Mr. Goodhart
I am grateful for the kind reception the order has been accorded. I thank the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Mr. Pendry) for his kind words. We do not believe that article 15 will lead to any problems. It is a re-enactment of section 15 of the Private Streets Act (Northern Ireland) 1964. It should not put any additional burden either on the staff of my Department or on the road service. I do not accept that the provision in article 20 for the payment of expenses by instalment, which duplicates section 20 of the 1964 Act, will increase the number of people who will want to pay by instalment, nor that it will lead to any extra burden on the staff.
I note the words of the hon. Members for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley) and for Londonderry (Mr. Ross) about the necessity for the Department of the Environment to move more quickly where there have been problems with developers defaulting on their requirements. Given the restrictions of which we are all aware, I cannot guarantee that my Department will be able to move more quickly than it has in the past. At least we should have a clearer idea of the rules governing the responsibilities of all concerned. From my experience in my constituency, I realise the immense problems that that causes for some front-agers and for developers. The order will not cure that problem, but it will make the rules clearer. In that sense, I commend it to the House.