The Housing Selection Scheme – the set of policies governing social housing in the north -- dates from 2000 and remained basically unchanged for more than two decades. In response to calls for a review, the then-Department for Social Development commissioned research from Ulster University and the University of Cambridge. Their 2013 final report is the source of some of the ‘Fundamental Review of Allocations’ changes that began coming through the pipeline in the early 2020s, while others date from even earlier consultations no longer publicly available online (PPR obtained them through Freedom of Information, here).

The social housing waiting list has grown by a fifth since the 2013 report, while the number of social homes allocated per year has halved (from 12,000 in January 2013 to just over 6,000 in March 2025, according to NIHE figures) – a delayed slowing of allocations predicted by housing experts looking ahead to the outworkings of the ‘right to buy’ scheme which has seen over 124,000 social homes across Northern Ireland sold to tenants while building of new ones has stalled.

Why do any of the changes to social housing rules matter?

Because since September 2024, some people trying to remain in their family home following the death of a loved one are no longer being permitted to do so.

Because since April 2025 families who have been forced out of their homes by targeted violence or its threat no longer have the hope of being quickly placed in a permanent home somewhere safer; instead they join the growing ranks of the homeless cycling through short-term temporary accommodation, often far from their schools and jobs.

(And because that change was announced despite previous contrary announcements from the Department, under the shadow of impending judicial review of its intimidation points policy, without any preparation of a new mechanism equipped to recognise and prioritise people who have recently suffered this trauma.)

Because in the near future, families in temporary accommodation for longer than six months – and there are growing numbers of them – will not get any recognition of their long wait for a permanent home.

Because in the near future, homeless families will lose points allocated in recognition of difficulties they faced in the past.

Because – despite the fact that housing standards in the private sector remain to all intents and purposes unregulated – in the near future housing authorities will reportedly announce plans to increasingly fulfil their duty to homeless people by placing them in private rentals.

Because – when the 2013 academic research that the DFC cites as the source of these changes made a detailed recommendation for oversight of housing authorities’ allocation processes through a new Independent Scrutiny Panel, that recommendation was rejected rather than progressed – meaning that social housing tenants and would-be tenants are left with a drip-feed of official announcements and vague reassurances, without the confidence in effective, transparent accountability and recourse that a neutral monitoring body would have provided.

Because – the absence of that independent oversight will be felt more than ever as the Department rolls out ‘banding’ of the waiting list on top of the current points-based system. The official documents say that this will help recognise people’s length of time on the waiting list; yet the 2013 research recommended also promoting down-sizing couples and others up the bands, to encourage turnover.

…many of the proposals weaken the commitment to providing social housing on the basis of objective need; that some reduce the appearance of housing need, without impacting its substance; and that this would result in harm, including to section 75 groups already suffering from inequality.

PPR was clear in its concerns, in 2013 and again in 2017 – that many of the proposals weaken the commitment to providing social housing on the basis of objective need; that some reduce the appearance of housing need, without impacting its substance; and that this would result in harm, including to section 75 groups already suffering from inequality. Those concerns are as strong today as ever, as documented in PPR’s 2024 and 2025 housing clinics with affected families.

What are homeless families left with? A Minister, Department and housing body which, rather than fighting tooth and nail for the provision of homes to those who need them most, are concentrated on gatekeeping a finite resource by creating ever more constraints on those with the greatest housing need, without any clear or effective oversight. This is the opposite of the vision set out in the right to housing, which calls for public bodies to take steps to the maximum of their available resources to ensure that adequate housing is available and accessible to all.

The evolution of the Housing Selection Scheme review, and PPR’s responses to it, are detailed in a new policy brief. Upcoming blogs will look at the above issues in more detail.