My party supports the general thrust of what Mr ONeill has advocated. It is worth making the point that several large planning applications are being made for housing estates in Northern Ireland. It would be in the interest of the less well-to-do or first-time buyers if part of the planning application ensured that they could afford some of the properties on the estate.

Mr ONeill's words about the Northern Ireland Co-Ownership Housing Association were wise and timely. The acquisition of 16,000 new homes for people who might not otherwise have been able to afford them is a great achievement. I am happy to say that that occurred at a time when I had a fair amount to do with housing.

Another way to help the less well off was the self-build scheme, which got off to a good start in Northern Ireland. The Housing Executive paid for advisers to ensure that people did not embark on the scheme without knowing what was required to build a house, and that it did not fall down or turn out to be a useless property. It may be worth looking at that scheme again. There is no doubt that people need to get their feet on the first rung of the housing ladder. If we do not enable them to do so, it will cause disruption for the rest of their lives, whether they are married or not.

As Mr ONeill pointed out, there is a degree of naivety among those who have never embarked on anything that approaches the required sums of money that are being talked about. One hears of figures in the region of £70,000 or £80,000 as if they were throwaway prices. Imagine two young people attempting to visualise that amount of money in their hands. We must ensure that a sufficient amount of social housing, which the Minister for Social Development is eager to have, is made available. We must also ensure that when people are thinking of buying a house, they get all the help possible. The seller's pack - or even a buyer's pack - would be a sensible way to do that. The Council of Mortgage Lenders Northern Ireland might be prepared to put money into that, because it would suit that body.

It would not be too difficult to reduce the co-ownership quotient from 50% to 40%. If we do not tackle that matter, we shall have many disgruntled and unhappy young people who will never be able to achieve what nearly all of us have achieved.

I support Mr ONeill's motion. This is an opportune time to try to address some of the issues of concern, not just to Mr ONeill as an elected representative, but also to me. People have visited my advice centre with the same problems that have been reiterated today. If we cast our minds back to the first time that we purchased a house - presumably all Members have done so - the process of borrowing the money and working out the system of repayment was simple. Today it is not. We are trying to address that.

I want to make a couple of points about some relevant issues that my constituents have raised. From time to time estate agents hand out personal telephone numbers. Perhaps the Assembly cannot make a ruling on that, but it does happen. Those numbers then become the method of contact between the vendor and the purchaser. However, that system bypasses the estate agent. In many cases, it can cause heartache. Disagreements can arise over the completion date, for example, all because the estate agent gave out the telephone number. That point should be taken on board at an early stage.

I also hear many complaints about bidding wars. I use that terminology because that is exactly what they are. In the past month, people have told me of cases where the person who put in a higher bid has suddenly backed out and the estate agent has come back with his tail between his legs to ask if they will still hold firm to their earlier bid. Bidding wars and the role that some estate agents play in them is a matter that must be addressed. It is ridiculous that house prices should soar simply because some estate agents are acting in that way - presumably higher prices mean more commission.

We are not only highlighting the issues here; we are also seeking solutions. An independent third party should monitor the process. That party should not be in receipt of commission on completion of the sale. That is one way to address the issue. It would guarantee the vendor and the purchaser complete impartiality, and the sale could go ahead. The third party would not be concerned about selling at a higher price to get more commission or about delaying the sale to see what happens.

I also want to highlight the issue of fixed interest rates. It is important that first-time buyers get a foothold in the market. They are penalised for the housing market's rise and fall, and they are being priced out of the market by mortgage rates. The mover of the motion mentioned that some people are unable to get mortgages because they are impossible to bring together. The Assembly is in the business of giving first-time buyers the opportunity to purchase houses, but to do so we must ensure that they have a mortgage that they can pay back in a time that they can cope with. We must also ensure that they are given all the help they need to ensure that the process runs smoothly.

First-time buyers should know all the options available to them. They should be presented in a clear and simple way. They should know about co-ownership, about social housing and about all the different aspects of the house-buying process, so that they can make a decision based upon all the available information.

There should be a level playing field in the housing market, so that people who buy to invest do not monopolise the market and therefore reduce the number of homes available to young couples starting out. I make that point because it has happened to some people that I have been involved with, and those concerns come directly from my constituents. Those who are buying to address their need or buying for the first time should receive help; not those who are buying houses to sell later on and make a profit. I am not against property investment, but it is unfair in that it penalises those buying for the first time.

I wish to suggest a way of trying to address some of the heartaches and problems that arise in house-buying, especially for first-time buyers. Estate agents could publish a booklet that would explain the whole system. It could detail what is available; where the help is; the types of housing available; and the terminology involved. It should also detail the fees involved, such as stamp duty and search fees, because people need an idea of what the process of buying a house costs so that they can budget accordingly. It should detail all the moneys involved so that there are no hidden add-ons or costs that they are unaware of. In many cases first-time buyers are on a finite budget, and they need to know how far their money will have to go.

The booklet should outline the responsibilities of the sellers, the buyers and all others involved in house purchase. We must get the details down, safeguard the first-time buyer and give them the protection that they need. It should not be a rule book; it should be a guideline or Highway Code for first-time buyers.

I suggest the use of an independent negotiator, who can resolve issues around such items as completion dates. Many people approach us about problems with completion dates; they are annoyed at being put off month after month and the process becomes laborious and awkward. It would be helpful to have someone to negotiate on that type of problem. The negotiator should not have a vested interest - like an estate agent's commission or a solicitor's fee - in the completion of the contract. The negotiator should be independent.

Many people are frustrated, angry and bewildered with the paperwork involved in buying a house, and they need help. The motion gives us the opportunity to bring the issues forward. I am sure that the Minister will be able to respond to our constituents' concerns and, it is to be hoped, able to bring forward ideas to address those concerns.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion, and the people who are trying to buy their first home. I declare an interest, as I have been an estate agent. After the next Assembly election I may return to that type of work. I have two children who will potentially become first-time buyers in the not too distant future.

The motion calls for the implementation of procedures to simplify the process, and we must identify all the bodies involved in house purchase. The motion deals specifically with estate agents, and I will return to that. However, there is a range of professionals and institutions involved in the house-buying process that the first-time buyer has to deal with.

First-time buyers face a major challenge in dealing with estate agents, banks, building societies, financial institutions, conveyancers, solicitors, financial advisers, life assurance companies, insurance companies, valuers and surveyors, all of whom have two things in common. First, they cost the purchaser money, and, secondly, they use esoteric, incomprehensible terminology that would put anyone off.

Often estate agents are the first professionals with whom a first-time buyer comes into contact. Although many transactions with estate agents take place without problems, buyers can experience difficulties in their dealings with them. Although a first-time buyer might have viewed a property, decided to buy it, made an offer, paid a deposit, reached the "sale agreed" stage and dealt with the other professionals who are needed to secure the purchase, the estate agent may later tell him or her that someone else has bought, or agreed to buy, the property, or that the price has increased.

I agree that the activity of estate agents must be regulated to prevent gazumping, in particular. The Assembly should consider introducing a requirement that estate agents issue an offer-acceptance certificate when a deposit is paid for the purchase of a property. That certificate should identify clearly the property, the price that was agreed, the deposit paid and the fact that the sale was agreed. At present a "sale agreed" sign means nothing, and, until the contract is signed and completed, the estate agent or the vendor can withdraw from the sale. The estate agent, the purchaser and the vendor should sign the certificate so that when a purchaser pays a deposit, the vendor will be bound to a sale, subject to the finance and property title being in order.

The real challenge begins when first-time buyers go to see a financial adviser. They are bombarded with financial and insurance terminology. They must choose between capital repayment or endowment mortgages; fixed-rate or variable-rate mortgages; one-year discount mortgages, with or without payment protection; and term assurance, with or without critical illness cover, and with or without accident cover. Then they will hear a spiel about endowment policies, unit-linked funds, trust-managed funds, index-linked premiums, loan-devalue percentages and indemnity premiums. After that they must choose home and contents insurance, with or without accidental cover, with or without voluntary excess, and with or without an annual value adjustment. That is off-putting to all but the strong-hearted. I imagine that most people leave their financial adviser's office knowing much less about the house-buying process than they did when they arrived. A message must be sent to financial advisers and everyone involved in the process that they must speak in plain English, especially to the first-time buyer.

Solicitors must also speak in simple language. They use terminology such as title searches, way leaves, rights of way and encumbrances. Often they will talk about everything except their fees, and there is a wide disparity in the charges of different solicitors for doing the same basic job. Someone once told me that an expert is an ordinary man away from home. However, an expert in any field is someone who can explain a difficult, complicated concept or procedure in plain English. All the professionals involved in a house purchase must speak to their clients in plain English or nó as Gaeilge más mian leo.

The proposer of the motion mentioned some of the possible financial concessions that could be made for first-time buyers. The South operates a scheme that provides a grant to genuine first-time buyers. The Assembly should consider the provision of such a grant for genuine first-time buyers that would at least cover the fees that they face when purchasing a house.

Stamp duty is a significant bill. In the current housing market, £75,000 is considered a fairly modest price for a property. However, a property at that price has a stamp duty of £750. As Sir John Gorman indicated, that is a significant bill for a young married couple who are venturing into buying their first home. Stamp duty should be abolished for first-time buyers.

Most financial institutions require a mortgage applicant to be in full-time permanent employment for a period of time prior to making the application, which is usually three years. Many people are employed on 12-month contracts. They may be employed by the same body and may be doing the same job for several years, but technically they are not in full-time permanent employment. It is extremely difficult - sometimes impossible - for them to be accepted for a mortgage. Indeed, some local authorities, Government Departments and agencies employ people, directly or indirectly, on 12-month contracts. The Assembly must examine the terms and conditions of people in that type of employment so that they can engage in the house-purchasing process and be eligible for a mortgage.

I support the motion.

I would like to join with other Members in welcoming the motion. Mr McNamee spoke "from the horse's mouth", as an expert. It was valuable to hear about the problems that are associated with the housing-buying system that he, as a former estate agent, understood.

The major issue concerns the host of organisations that are involved in the process and the associated problems. Mr McNamee mentioned all the different interests - estate agents, banks, solicitors, financial institutions, surveyors, and so on. There are also problems with the process: the type of mortgage - endowment or capital repayment; completion dates, which Mr Shannon mentioned; and the definition of fixtures and fittings, which has not yet been mentioned. People are unsure about the definition of fixtures and fittings. Carpets and curtains form part of the parcel that few people understand fully, even those who buy houses and move regularly, and more especially first-time buyers.

Gazumping can happen after a prospective buyer has agreed a sale, had a survey conducted, waited four to six weeks for legal issues to be resolved, and signed a contract. The prospective buyer will have spent money on the survey and on paying for lawyers for either party. At any time until the end point, before the transaction is binding, there is little to stop the seller from accepting another offer. Every Member who has spoken in the debate has mentioned that issue. The procedure is not clear and it must be made more transparent. A buyer should not have to risk so much before the transaction is binding.

It is important that the seller's pack, mentioned by Mr ONeill and advocated by the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland, is investigated because it could protect the consumer. The onus would then be on the seller to provide standard information and a house condition report.

It would reduce financial risk and the time between agreement and sale. Estate agents will be interested in that, because they see themselves as having a pretty bad reputation in the marketplace and would like it to be enhanced. It would be very valuable if the four- to six-week period - or longer - could be reduced.

Éamonn ONeill made an interesting point about the right of access to bidding books. Jim Shannon mentioned bidding: who bids against whom, and whether there are fictitious bidders. The facility to examine bidding books would be valuable. The seller's pack must be reliable and regulated so that it meets the standard, and house condition reports should be objective.

The regulation of estate agents is important because of their growing number. New estate agents have been springing up all over the market in recent years. I do not know how important it is that houses can be bought on the Internet. Nothing should stop that new form of transaction, but online buying must be regulated.

The industry is policed by the Office of Fair Trading, but is largely self-regulating. There must be some sort of independent complaints procedure. The UK Ombudsman For Estate Agents is a voluntary scheme, and 36% of UK estate agents subscribe to it. The possibility of requiring all estate agents to subscribe to an independent complaints procedure, such as an ombudsman, is worth exploring. If Northern Ireland is to have its own procedures, do we need an ombudsman, or would the UK ombudsman take Northern Ireland estate agents under his control?

The Assembly or the Department may have a role in monitoring and regularly reviewing the effectiveness of any complaints procedure. If the industry cannot regulate itself to the satisfaction of the consumer - which is the ultimate objective - we must create some type of complaints system, perhaps on a statutory footing, to give the consumer confidence.

I am grateful to Sir John Gorman for raising the issue of social mix housing, which is very important for first-time buyers. The fact that Housing Executive property is being sold off should not be neglected. Sir John talked about having estates and new developments with a social mix, with houses that are accessible to first-time buyers and to the less well off. They have no opportunity to get into the market otherwise. I support the motion.

The Minister for Social Development (Mr Dodds): I congratulate Mr ONeill on initiating the debate. It has been very useful, and some issues highlighted are of concern to constituents. The motion is wide-ranging and involves several Departments: not just the Department for Social Development. Members who contributed to the debate will appreciate that I am wearing my ministerial hat and do not have all the answers - I would never claim that anyway, but it is particularly true for this subject. I will ensure that any points that fall to other Departments are responded to in writing.

The motion covers three topics: the home-buying process, the regulation of estate agents and the need to assist first-time buyers. As several Members noted, buying a home is a stressful event. For most people, it is the single biggest financial transaction that they will ever carry out. In Northern Ireland, where home ownership stands at approximately 70%, many people have first-hand experience of buying a house. It has been pointed out that buying a home is not only stressful, but time consuming and complex. For that reason, my Department and the Housing Executive jointly funded the General Consumer Council's report 'Improving the house buying process'. That report, which was launched almost two years ago to the day, made several recommendations. I commend the report to those Members who have participated in the debate. Those recommendations were aimed at enhancing the buying process, and at protecting buyers and sellers. The report contained recommendations addressed to Government, to the professions and to the industry in general. My Department actively encouraged other Departments to embrace the report's recommendations and, where possible, to adopt them as policy. I am pleased that many proposals were taken on board.

Several initiatives have been introduced to speed up the home-buying process. For example, the Department of the Environment's Planning Service has computerised and centralised its property certificates section. Before that, a request for a property certificate took at least six weeks to process; 95% of all transactions are now completed inside 10 working days.

Needless to say, Land Registry has a vital role to play. It is currently involved in a PFI project to computerise its systems and archives. That project, LandWeb Direct, will transform the agency's entire operation, and will include the digitising of maps into a geographical information system, providing image retrieval and workflow processes, building computerised archive services and integrating the management of customer telephone calls, faxes and e-mails.

Ms Morrice mooted Internet use, et cetera. The LandWeb Direct service marks the first stage in providing land registry services online, and will become available later in 2002. It will enable accredited users, such as solicitors and estate agents, to access Land Registry information electronically from their own offices. The service will also be available outside normal working hours, and it will be of particular benefit to customers in more remote areas.

The General Consumer Council's report recommended that the seller of a property should assemble a pack of such standard documents and information for prospective buyers as title documents and a house condition report, to be known as a seller's information pack. Several Members mentioned that. That recommendation was based on developments in Great Britain, where the idea was the subject of a major pilot study in Bristol. Since the study's completion there have been mixed reactions. One major area of concern was the house condition survey, which, it was felt, might not be of sufficient detail to satisfy the potential purchaser and - perhaps more importantly - the potential purchaser's lender. There were also concerns about the price of the seller's information pack, which could cost more than £500. Since the seller's information pack for the Bristol study was produced at nil cost, it was suggested that that did not give a true reflection of its advantages or disadvantages.

We continue to monitor developments in Great Britain, where the specific details of the proposals for the seller's information pack are now being developed. Publication of a consultation document in the summer of 2002 is proposed.

Several issues must be considered before the seller's information pack can become a legal requirement. Therefore, it makes sense for us to maintain a watching brief in order to learn from the experience of Great Britain. Meanwhile, I am confident that the changes already made, and those that are proposed, will considerably improve and simplify the house-buying process in Northern Ireland. It is important to bear in mind Mr ONeill's point that account must be taken of Northern Ireland's specific needs. We must learn from practice and experience elsewhere, while addressing specifically what must be done in Northern Ireland.

There is a difficulty in the seller's information pack with the surveyor's report. Can a potential purchaser have confidence in a surveyor's report prepared for the seller? We do not want a situation in which both buyer and seller feel compelled to have a surveyor's report.

The second aspect of the motion calls for the regulation of estate agents. It has been suggested that an ombudsman for estate agents be established. In Northern Ireland, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is responsible for enforcing the Estate Agents Act 1979 and the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991. The Estate Agents Act 1979 gives enforcement powers to the Director General of Fair Trading, and its purpose is to ensure that estate agents act in the best interests of their clients and that buyers and sellers are treated fairly, honestly and promptly.

The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is responsible for ensuring that estate agents comply with certain financial transactions between estate agents and house buyers and in particular ensure the safe keeping of deposits.

Under the Estate Agents Act 1979, the Director General of Fair Trading can issue warning and prohibition orders that can stop a person working as an estate agent. A warning order can also be issued if an estate agent breaks the law by, for example, making misleading statements, giving false information on charges or providing clients with misinformation about offers. A prohibition order can be issued if an estate agent breeches a warning order or is convicted of a serious offence such as fraud, other dishonesty or violence.

The Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 prohibits the use of false or misleading statements, made in the course of estate agency business, that relate to certain matters such as location or address, aspect, view, outlook or environment and fixtures and fittings. That legislation gives the Director General of Fair Trading much stronger powers than an ombudsman would have.

In the past three years, fewer than 1% of the complaints received by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment's consumer affairs branch related to estate agents. In the same period, no estate agent was prosecuted, nor were any warning or prohibition orders issued to estate agents in Northern Ireland. It is, therefore, that Department's view that the present legislation to regulate estate agents is sufficiently robust, and it has no immediate plans to amend it. The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment will read Members' comments about that.

Members commented on the need to make financial concessions available to first-time buyers. As the Minister responsible for housing, my vision is one of a society in which everybody has a home that is safe, affordable, in the area of his or her choice, of an acceptable quality and designed to meet the needs of its occupants. The media regularly report on the rising house prices here and the difficulty that that causes first-time buyers. Much of that reporting is fuelled by recent problems in the South of England and the Republic of Ireland, where house prices increased dramatically in a short time.

House prices in Northern Ireland have risen. In recent years, those increases have been considerably higher than the increases in other parts of the United Kingdom. However, it must be borne in mind that our increases started from a much lower baseline. For many years, house prices here were significantly lower than in the rest of the United Kingdom, so in some respects there is a catch-up process.

The ratio between house prices and wages remains relatively healthy in Northern Ireland. Although some areas have localised affordability issues, particularly in parts of Belfast and north Down, home ownership remains a viable option for most prospective first-time buyers.

Sir John Gorman mentioned the idea of making planning applications conditional on the provision of affordable housing. That is a matter for the Department for Regional Development, and was addressed in the regional strategic framework.

I am aware that the situation must be monitored carefully, particularly with regard to first-time buyers. I want to do whatever I can to ensure that those who wish to become homeowners have the opportunity to do so.

The co-ownership scheme was mentioned, and I agree with Mr ONeill about its popularity, value and usefulness. Since becoming Minister, I have made co-ownership one of my top priorities. I have made available considerable additional funding to ensure that the scheme can meet growing demand, and in the last financial year, I doubled the allocation for co-ownership - from £5 million to £10 million. I have made a commitment in the Programme for Government to continue to fund this important programme.

The Housing Executive sales programme is an important method of getting people into the housing market, and that also applies to Housing Association tenants. Financial and lending institutions have a major role to play, and I have built up close contacts with their representative body, the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

At the end of the day, we have a free market, and we must recognise that there are limits to what the Government can do. We are conscious of the situation and will continue to monitor it closely.

I thank Members who participated in and gave their attention to this debate - some good points were made. Regrettably we had only an hour, and Members who may have wished to participate but did not have time. However, the quality of the contributions reflects the concern that Members have about this serious situation.

John Gorman, with his wealth of experience and wisdom, drew attention to several important issues, and I welcome his comments. When we studied the situation with the Minister in the South, he explored a policy that he had of zoning certain land for social housing, although not necessarily for affordability. He said that regardless of what he did, there were problems, such as developers wanting to maximise the best part of the site and not use the rest. Although there are difficulties with that approach, it is a sound suggestion. It is important that we get the right mix and ensure that all developments offer a range of housing and house prices.

Jim Shannon dealt with a large number of important issues. He expressed concern about the bidding process. Access to the bidding book, which Jane Morrice also mentioned, is important, as it ensures that people have confidence in the process. That is part of the policy of transparency that I hope an ombudsman would propose.

Jim Shannon also referred to the delay and problems people experience in agreeing completion dates, and the fact that buying a house can be a long-drawn-out process. Along with Pat McNamee and other Members, he hinted at the delay that the legal process can cause. We must help to simplify that process, particularly for the first-time buyer. The long-drawn-out process is difficult for them, as they have to negotiate to put together the financial package and loans that they need. We must consider how to reduce the time that that takes and put a better formulation together.

I was interested in Pat McNamee's practical comments. He emphasised the effect of jargon on first-time buyers, for whom that language is totally alien. He painted a picture of a jungle of jargon, and he is right to say that we must reduce it. That is exactly what I was trying to get at in the motion.

Jane Morrice came up with a good point about Internet selling, which I had not thought of. This is actually growing, and I came across some information on the growth of Internet sales in the work I was doing. Like other things, it is quite difficult to control Internet buying and selling. I know of emigrants wishing to return home who are using the Internet to purchase properties in Northern Ireland. There is a real problem there, and Ms Morrice made an important contribution.

I also thank the Minister for becoming involved in this. I recognise that not every issue here falls within his particular bailiwick, but as the lead Minister I can depend on him to expedite those points that do not belong to him through the various agencies. The Minister gave a good rundown on what has been done in support for the General Consumer Council's proposals and the simplification of the house-buying process.

He expressed some concerns about the seller's pack that have emerged from the pilot scheme in Bristol, and he is right to do so. Indeed, there are some other points about the seller's pack that we need to take into consideration - not least its shelf life. That could actually accrue an extra cost because there is only three to six months before another valuation is needed. I welcome his emphasis on the need for Northern Ireland, which he did in his summary. I still think that there is sufficient merit in the proposal of a seller's pack and in this simplification of the process that we are all trying to achieve.

My final point is about estate agencies. I welcome the Minister's comments about financial support and control. To a large extent he may be right about professional, inbuilt safeguards - but it is in-house. We are looking for a more independent agency, such as an ombudsman or an ombudsman-type service. People would have confidence going to the ombudsman because they would not be baffled by jargon and science. People would know that they would get satisfaction with an established, transparent procedure.

Closure of Limavady Courthouse

TOP

When I first put in for this Adjournment debate, my voice was a bit stronger. I hope you will forgive me if I take a drink of water now and again to clear my throat. With that in mind, perhaps my comments will be brief.

I bring forward this debate on the closure of Limavady courthouse following publication of a consultation document titled 'Court Accommodation in Northern Ireland 2001-2010', which deals with the accommodation needs of the Court Service for the next eight years n Northern Ireland. More specifically for people in the Limavady area, it proposes the closure of Limavady courthouse. This recommendation has caused great consternation in the borough of Limavady. Indeed, a petition bearing over 1,000 signatures and expressing opposition to this proposal has been presented to officials in Downing Street. The people of Limavady believe that this facility is vital.

A proposal to close the courthouse would contradict the comments of Rosie Winterton, a parliamentary secretary at the Lord Chancellor's Department, that appear in the foreword to the consultation document. She said that the Northern Ireland Court Service wished to address the needs of everyone who used the courts, especially those with special needs, disabilities and children, and vulnerable or intimidated witnesses. Such people would be better served by a court in an area that they know well and in which they feel comfortable.

Londonderry courthouse is the alternative venue that is offered. Although that courthouse's merits are in no doubt, given its recent refurbishment, Limavady courthouse also served the people of Londonderry during many years of sectarian strife, when the IRA targeted constantly Londonderry courthouse at Bishop Street, frequently rendering it unusable. If the Northern Ireland Court Service had consulted before publishing its document, solutions could have been proposed, at minimal cost, to provide the amenities that the Limavady facility lacked. The document seems to leave little room for manoeuvre; its authors seem to want it rubber-stamped even as it is published.

The other considerations for the Court Service are rationalisation and value for money; however, raw figures often do not give the true picture. The increased cost to the public of making the longer journey to Londonderry for court hearings, combined with the increased cost of legal aid and higher levels of policing, must also be considered.

The estimated saving of £300,000 in running costs, which would be made as a result of the closure, must be put into context. People should balance that saving against the costs of the many public inquiries that are taking place in the Province, which could fund the entire Northern Ireland Court Service many times over. Moreover, the expenses that will be paid to the Sinn Féin MPs at Westminster, despite their not taking their seats, could offset those court savings with £100,000 to spare. We must be realistic, and we should emphasise those points to the Government as often as possible, despite their current policy of placating and appeasing the lawbreakers at the expense of the decent, law-abiding citizens of this country.

Given that the Borough of Limavady has above-average unemployment levels, high levels of deprivation, many single parent families and low levels of educational achievement, many of the increased costs that would result from the closure would be intolerable. The Limavady area has felt a cold wind blow through it due to the so-called "peace dividend". Over the years, it provided vital court services in a reasonably safe venue. It also provided a home for many Court Service and police personnel. The town is feeling the effects of the loss of vital funds from those sources, along with the loss of traditional industry from the town. The further loss of the courthouse gives local people the impression that they are being treated as second-class citizens - that is disgraceful. Over the years, the people of Limavady have been among the most law-abiding citizens in the Province, making up much of the silent majority of decent people here. Consequently, it is fundamentally wrong that they should be subjected to wave after wave of public and private service closures that further downgrade the town.

The Assembly and the Executive have put in place a policy of rural proofing, which is being disregarded in the centralisation of many court facilities in the Province - not least the facility in Limavady, which is predominantly a rural borough. Many Members have pressed for the decentralisation of Civil Service jobs, which would result in rural invigoration by bringing more money into country areas. Although rationalisation is being carried out under the control of central Government, regional variances should be considered when formulating policies.

Those factors should be considered in conjunction with the fact that the natural affinity of the people of the area is more in keeping with the rest of the rural county of Londonderry rather than the city itself.

Many are loath to go to the west bank under normal circumstances, and more so when they are anxious about an impending court appearance. The fear and trepidation are such that people from the Waterside area of Londonderry would rather go to Limavady for their service than travel to the west bank of the city. Those are real concerns for decent people, and they should be addressed rather than ignored because it is inconvenient to do otherwise.

The Court Service must re-examine the proposal, and come to Limavady to view the facility to see if the unused accommodation can be upgraded to meet people's needs. That might have already happened.

The document shows that the Magherafelt facility, which is also poor, will be upgraded due to its position. That should happen in Limavady because of the fear of travelling to Londonderry.

We must not have an inadequate, unjust evaluation imposed upon the people of the Borough of Limavady simply because that is expedient. There would be additional delays in hearing cases if they were moved to Londonderry courthouse. The court at Bishop Street is already working to capacity, and people from the whole area would face even greater delays and attendant worries.

Such a situation would be totally unacceptable and must not be allowed to happen. The Limavady facility should be upgraded and used more effectively to ease court time in Londonderry, thus speeding up the system in the division.

I support the motion. It has been tabled as a result of the Northern Ireland Court Service's consultation document 'Court Accommodation in Northern Ireland 2001-2010', which was launched in December of last year with the aim of charting the future of court accommodation in Northern Ireland.

The strategy proposes the rationalisation of courthouses, with the closure of several courts that are deemed to be inadequate. Venues to be closed include the court facilities in Banbridge, Larne, Clogher, Kilkeel, Cookstown and Limavady. It is envisaged that business will transfer to adjoining venues. Limavady's business will be transferred to Londonderry courthouse.

The review of court accommodation in Northern Ireland by the Court Service aims at improving the quality of court accommodation for court users. A press release issued by the Northern Ireland Court Service on 7 December 2001 stated that particular emphasis would be given to

Other Members may wish to speak about court closures in their constituencies; I shall highlight the imminent closure of Limavady courthouse.

Limavady courthouse is one of three court complexes in the Londonderry county court division. The others are located in Magherafelt and Londonderry. There are seven county court divisions in Northern Ireland, and the nearest major court complex to Limavady is Coleraine courthouse, which is within the boundary of the Antrim court division.

There are compelling reasons for rescinding the decision to close Limavady court. First, the closure of the courthouse would result in discrimination on the grounds of geography. Limavady lies in the north-east of the Londonderry court division. Transferring court proceedings to Londonderry would increase journey times unnecessarily and would be excessively expensive. Some of those who use the court system are among the less economically privileged. Financially, many of them would find it a strain to travel the extra 20 or 30 miles. What about the people mentioned earlier - parents with young children, the disabled and the vulnerable? How will the closure of Limavady courthouse affect them?

Secondly, Limavady is not a blink-and-you-have-missed-it village. It is a thriving town, which has grown substantially in recent years. It has a busy commercial core, with good tourist facilities and international branding, and it is getting a major infrastructure improvement, a bypass, to accommodate excess traffic.

The town has a distinctive identity and catchment area. It is bounded geographically by the Roe Valley to the west and a mountain plateau to the east. By virtue of its geography, Limavady has a distinct catchment area and rural hinterland, and people living there would find it alien to have to use court services elsewhere in the Londonderry county court division. The fact that the town is in the county court division is a good reason for repelling the threat of closure.

The courthouse, which is sited in the centre of Limavady, has provided the town with a raison d'être, a sense of purposefulness, character and employment for many years. Surely small funds could be channelled to any refurbishment programme deemed necessary to provide the judiciary and the public with modern facilities.

The Northern Ireland Court Service has stated that its aim is

That is a worthy aim, which I fully support. However, that ought not be at the expense of ill-judged rationalisation. Small town courthouses have provided a sense of justice to communities for decades, if not centuries. Closing Limavady courthouse would be to misinterpret community needs and perceptions, and it would contradict the objectives of ensuring equality of access and quality of provision.

I appeal to the Northern Ireland Court Service not to rationalise for the sake of expediency.

Those are not my words. They come from the Court Service's accommodation strategy document. Limavady courthouse fulfils that criterion. I support the motion and urge others to do likewise.

I commend Mr Douglas for tabling the motion. We are Colleagues on Limavady Borough Council as well as in the Assembly, and although we differ widely in our political beliefs and aspirations for the future of this country, we share a desire to do everything we can to protect and promote the well-being of our constituents. That well-being will be seriously compromised if the threat to close Limavady courthouse is realised.

I accept the case made by Limavady Solicitors' Association for retaining the wide range of services currently provided at the courthouse as well as for much needed improvement to its facilities and an expansion of services to include a family proceedings court. The case is made not just to allow the solicitors to continue to provide an efficient and cost effective service to their clients but to target the social needs of a mainly rural community, thus sparing those in need the cost and inconvenience of travelling a considerable distance to a large, unfamiliar and intimidating court that is already extremely busy.

I shall add another dimension to the issue with some trepidation, and I shall tread delicately, for I must introduce the controversial subject of symbols and symbolism. I am not referring to the use and misuse of flags and other emblems. This is a matter of great concern to those with a genuine commitment to civil rights and responsibilities. However, it is something criminally abused by the sad, bad, mad and dangerous, who exploit the fears and passions of people whose quality of life is so tragically disturbed and deprived. There is something abysmally evil about a society in which a young person can be killed for wearing a football jersey, or gangs claim some sick allegiance to extremists who are creating such misery in the near east.

The symbolism I am referring to is that which is created by some structures of the state, particularly those relating to justice and the law. It is a rather unfortunate coincidence that the possible closure of a courthouse comes at a time when predictions are rife about the shutting down of prisons and military installations. Prisons and courts of justice are at opposite ends of the spectrum. I stress the word "justice" rather than "law". Justice is an absolute, but the law is sometimes an accident - sometimes a bad accident.

The over-prevalence of prisons, H-blocks and houses of correction symbolise the failure of a society - Government and people - to be civilised. The shutting down of prisons and armed camps is an indication that society is, at least, struggling away from barbarism. The economic impact of that on workers and the community will initially be drastic, but with proper insight and planning that may be temporary. A healthier and more normal economy is possible when conditions are right for the attraction of inward and indigenous investment. That is particularly so in areas such as Limavady and the north-west with regard to tourism development.

The symbols of prisons and militarism are all negative. That is not so for courts of justice, so long as true justice is being administered. True justice drives out bad laws. Circumstances must exist, or be created, in which people can be convinced that they will receive justice from their courts. Courts must be close to the people; they should not be remote and threatening. The symbolism of a court is that of a society that is, at least, aspiring towards civilisation in its truest sense. People must have a sense of ownership of the system of justice that exercises a measure of control over how they relate to one another in society. The preservation and enhancement of petty session courts, such as that in Limavady, can give them that sense of ownership and can be a positive influence in civilising this confused and unhappy place.

I support the motion. Mr Arthur Doherty referred to the closure of prisons, and I hope that he will be able to support the campaign to retain Magilligan Prison, which the Limavady area is heavily dependent on to keep the economy buoyant, but we will come to that on a future date.

The Limavady Solicitors' Association is to be highly commended for the way in which it has taken the campaign to retain the courthouse to the people. I want to place on record that the association has carried out an assiduous campaign. I was glad to be able to use my offices at Westminster and, in my capacity as Member of Parliament for the area, to ensure that the petition was delivered to Downing Street.

The issue has been well aired and well supported in the locality. The Limavady Solicitors' Association and the greater public have rallied behind the campaign to retain the courthouse, and Members have spoken at some length about the necessity to retain it, so I do not want to duplicate what has been said. However, during the campaign two months ago I met with Rosie Winterton, the Parliamentary Secretary at the Lord Chancellor's Department who is responsible for the issue.

Even though the matter will be decided at Westminster, it is right that it be discussed in this appropriate forum. However, in discussions with Ms Winterton it became clear that, despite the list of courthouses earmarked for closure, she would be prepared to take a fresh look at the courthouse. To encourage that, there was a recent meeting between Limavady Borough Council and officials, which I had requested. The Northern Ireland Court Service has carried out a survey, the results of which will be released this week; the solicitors' association also conducted a survey. Both surveys concur with the views of the area's Members: people in Limavady do not wish to travel excessive distances to the nearest courthouse. In some parts of the constituency, as Mr Arthur Doherty will know, people would have to travel 25 miles to the nearest courthouse.

A chill factor affects parts of the community, and Mr Douglas mentioned that. However, an issue that has not been mentioned is that the small claims court meets in Limavady. Small claims cases by individuals or small businessmen can go either way, and the benefit may be offset against charges if the claimant loses. Solicitors in Limavady think that the number of small claims will fall. The burden of travel on top of the possibility of not winning the case will make people reluctant to go to the small claims court. In that case, justice would not be done and would not be seen to be done, because it is not available to people in the area.

Other issues came up in the Court Service's survey. The most important is that three quarters of the people surveyed in Limavady felt that they would be affected if court business were transferred to Londonderry. Ms Winterton and the Court Service cannot set aside a survey that states that three quarters of people would be adversely affected. That must be allied with the unanimous views of the local borough council and other public representatives, MLAs and the MP. I hope that the campaign to retain the courthouse in Limavady succeeds.

Adjourned at 5.48 pm