The 2013 research commissioned by the then Department for Social Development that laid the groundwork for the Fundamental Review included a specific recommendation to retain universal access to social housing. By the time the DFC presented its own consultation paper in 2017, this recommendation was gone. Universal access was instead described as a “principle”, qualified by eligibility criteria around age, “connection to Northern Ireland” and, lastly, not having “engaged in unacceptable behaviour serious enough to make him/ her unsuitable to be a tenant of social housing” (p. 27).

PPR’s response at the time was that this approach was punitive, particularly when taken alongside a number of other proposed measures, and could have harmful consequences: “PPR is concerned that these proposals will leave vulnerable people with less access to social housing” (para. 11).

The DFC’s consultation outcomes report, when it appeared in 2020, “acknowledges the serious impact that exclusion from an allocation of a social home or from Full Duty homelessness status has on both applicants and their wider household”; but recommends continuing anyway, in the interest of “a more efficient allocations system” (p. 26).

PPR’s 2024 and 2025 housing clinics were attended by some people suffering the impacts of anti-social behaviour. Their criticisms were not that the Housing Executive needed more powers, but that it failed to adequately exercise the powers it already has:

“I have received no help or support from the NIHE” (complaint letter, May 2024)

“I have reported incidents of anti-social behaviour and neighbourhood disputes to the Housing Executive… I provided all the information requested, such as police reports and crime reference numbers, but received no responses or follow-ups to my emails or calls (complaint letter” (Mar 2025)

In 2024 the DFC and the Department of Justice consulted on the proposed expansion of Housing Executive powers to exclude on the grounds of anti social behaviour. PPR’s consultation response reiterated,

“while the fundamental review outcomes described above increase the powers of NIHE staff with regard to anti-social behaviour, as stated above too many tenants’ testimony indicates that they feel insufficiently protected from such behaviour, and that too often they are left to deal with it on their own. They question NIHE’s actual commitment and responsiveness to countering what feels to them like racially-motivated threat, intimidation and violence.”

PPR also submitted its concerns about the DFC’s equality screening of the consultation proposals.

Expanding the Housing Executive’s powers to exclude, in the face of substantial evidence from a wide range of impacted people that it is unresponsive and unreliable in exercising the powers it already has, is a mistake.

In spite of objections, the DFC appears to be speeding ahead: in November 2025 media reports indicated that the DFC is planning to present a bill to Stormont in 2026, including “legislative changes regarding injunctions against unacceptable behaviour and possession powers for social landlords”.

Expanding the Housing Executive’s powers to exclude, in the face of substantial evidence from a wide range of impacted people that it is unresponsive and unreliable in exercising the powers it already has, is a mistake. Doing so in the absence of independent oversight like the Independent Scrutiny Panel recommended in the initial 2013 academic research underpinning the Fundamental Review -- and later dropped like a stone by the DFC -- is an even worse one. Before housing authorities seek to accumulate even more influence over people’s lives, they should become more accountable.

PPR’s detailed analysis of the impact of the DFC’s Fundamental Review of Allocations to date is here.