Business

U-turn on devolving regeneration powers branded 'control freakery'

Regeneration powers, such as implementing public realm schemes, were to be devolved to councils
Regeneration powers, such as implementing public realm schemes, were to be devolved to councils Regeneration powers, such as implementing public realm schemes, were to be devolved to councils

A MAJOR U-turn on transferring regeneration powers to councils has been slammed as "control freakery" by opponents.

Communities minister Paul Givan said the powers such as improving public realm and providing development grants would remain within his department.

It is under most of the north's main business bodies had including the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce had supported the proposed transfer of powers.

But in a statement to the Northern Ireland Assembly, Mr Givan said he was taking "a new direction of travel".

The powers had been due to be devolved when the 11 new council areas were set up last year but the necessary legislation did progress within the mandate of the previous assembly term.

"This is not the time to tinker with who is responsible for what, or to concern ourselves with the splitting up of the regeneration budget," Mr Givan said.

"Rather it is the time for all the stakeholders to work together to maximise our joint effect and achieve positive change in the issues that have bedevilled this society for too long.”

The plans have been slammed by opposition parties.

"After being delayed repeatedly by previous Ministers, now at least a decision has been taken- albeit the wrong decision," said Ulster Unionists' communities spokesman Andy Allen.

"Retaining urban regeneration and community development powers within the Department for Communities smacks of control freakery and is a case of the DUP/Sinn Fein coalition holding on to power for powers sake," he added.

Meanwhile, the minister appeared to pave the way for an end to the neighbourhood renewal programme which has invested £280m in deprived areas since it was set up in 2003.

"I wish to announce today that it is my intention to review the current strategies for tackling deprivation. It is in all our interests to see if we can design a programme which will have a greater impact on the intractable social and economic barriers which limit life chances for so many in our community," he said.

SDLP leader Colum Eastwood cautioned that any new scheme could not become another Social Investment Fund (SIF) - which has been heavily criticised in recent weeks.

"With the decision not to devolve further powers to local councils, the centralisation of regeneration initiatives raised further concerns," he said,

"The successor programme to Neighbourhood Renewal cannot become SIF mark two. It must find its basis in demonstrable, objective need and it must be completely transparent.

"The acid test of the executive's shambolic handling of the SIF controversy will be the lessons it learns and how it approaches future projects.

"We have already found this to be the most secretive government since the Good Friday Agreement. Its obsession with holding power close to the centre and refusing to share information is apparent for everyone to see."