Northern Ireland Assembly, 8 June 2021

479 contributions from 55 members. The official report.

Ministerial Statement

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Members, I have received notice from the Minister of Justice that she wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members in the Chamber that, in light of social distancing being observed by the parties, the Speaker's ruling that Members must be in the Chamber to hear a statement if they wish to ask a question has been relaxed. Members who are participating remotely must make sure that their name is on the speaking list if they wish to be called. Members who are present in the Chamber must do this by rising in their place as well as notifying the Business Office or the Speaker's Table directly. I remind Members to be concise in asking their questions. I also remind Members that, in accordance with long-established procedure, points of order are not normally taken during the statement or the period for questions immediately after.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement regarding the bilateral meeting under the auspices of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) on cooperation on criminal justice matters, which was held virtually on Wednesday 26 May 2021. I represented the Executive at the bilateral meeting with Minister Heather Humphreys, the Minister for Justice from Ireland, who was attending her first meeting under the auspices of the intergovernmental agreement. This was the second formal ministerial meeting that I have attended under the IGA since it was re-established in 2020. As I have previously said, I am committed to keeping the Assembly informed of meetings held under the auspices of the agreement.

The meeting on 26 May provided Minister Humphreys and me with the opportunity to review progress against the IGA’s 2020-21 joint work programme. Five project advisory groups currently provide the mechanism by which work is taken forward. They are focused on the areas of public protection, youth justice, forensic science, support for victims, and criminal justice and social diversity.

In spite of the challenges presented to cross-border working by COVID-19 travel restrictions, the project advisory groups have continued to promote and support cooperation across the broad spectrum of criminal justice agencies in both jurisdictions. The public protection group, for example, has been involved in joint training on the management of high-risk offenders. Staff meet regularly, albeit virtually this year, to review offending behaviour programmes and opportunities for joint work in the area of domestic abuse and sexual offending. The youth justice group has developed a cross-border information-sharing system for children or young persons subject to statutory supervision. The support for victims group and human trafficking teams in Northern Ireland facilitated engagement with health and social care (HSC) trusts. It was a positive and useful meeting, and it helped health and social care colleagues to understand the role that they will be asked to take on as part of the proposed revised National Referral Mechanism.

A memorandum of understanding between Forensic Science Ireland and Forensic Science Northern Ireland was refreshed, and an operating protocol concerning sharing resources in the event of significant loss of capacity or capability was signed in January 2021.

Regarding criminal justice and social diversity, the PSNI is developing an information-sharing agreement with an Garda Síochána to ensure that there is consistency and clarity around information sharing that will support effective cross-border working. That is being taken forward under the auspices of the EU exit working stream.

It was encouraging to note the progress that has been made against the current work programme and the positive engagement that has continued across the project advisory groups. The value of our cross-border relationships is evidenced by the excellent cooperation in sharing experience and practices across a range of areas, including training to deal with high-risk offenders; sharing information in relation to youth offending; ongoing work in relation to support for victims; and tackling issues such as hate crime.

The IGA meeting, amongst other things, provided us with an opportunity to discuss the impact of the COVID pandemic on our criminal justice systems and how, looking forward, we can build on what has been achieved and learned as we face the challenges ahead.

I take the opportunity to update Members on the joint agency task force (JATF), which was instituted under the Fresh Start Agreement. The task force is led by senior PSNI officers, an Garda Síochána, Revenue and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). A number of other organisations, including the National Crime Agency (NCA) and the Irish Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB), are also involved in the joint agency task force’s operational activity. That is overseen by a strategic oversight group and an operations coordination group. The objective of the JATF is to build on existing frameworks and increase the collective effectiveness, within existing operational and financial constraints, in addressing organised crime, which recognises no borders. The most recent report highlights the continued high level of cooperation and operational activity between all the law enforcement agencies involved in tackling the six priority areas, which are rural crime; drugs; financial crime; trafficking in human beings, including children; excise fraud; and organised immigration crime.

The foundation for success in joint policing activity has been and will continue to be the strength and depth of the trust and cooperation between police services and statutory agencies at all levels. During the COVID-19 pandemic, an Garda Síochána and the PSNI have shown their determination to continue in the prevention and detection of crime, with a focus on protecting our communities. I am happy to note that cross-border operations have continued along the whole length of the border during the pandemic.

With the United Kingdom having exited the European Union, rural crime continues to be a priority. In that area, developments are monitored closely and are responded to accordingly. Criminality continues to occur on an island-wide basis, and close cooperation and island-wide responses are critical. In January 2021, a cross-border operation resulted in the arrest of three prolific cross-border burglars — a father and his sons. They were linked to multiple burglaries in both jurisdictions, targeting the elderly and most vulnerable over a two-week period.

During this reporting period, the PSNI and an Garda Síochána conducted a joint operation targeting the importation of heroin from Dublin to Belfast for street supply. As a result of the operation, a quantity of heroin destined for street supply was seized, and a suspect was arrested. In March 2021, following the seizure of 41 kg of cocaine in Donegal, the PSNI pursued a number of investigative enquiries under the auspices of the cross-border JATF, and information was provided to assist the investigation. Seventeen cross-border investigations are being progressed through the JATF. The Garda national economic crime bureau (GNECB) and the Criminal Assets Bureau continue to maintain a good working relationship with the PSNI, the National Crime Agency and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs through ongoing cooperation and the development of mutually beneficial exchanges of information. To date, those strengthened relationships have culminated in increased success in the seizure of assets derived from criminal activity.

Trafficking in human beings, including children, has been the subject of joint work by the PSNI and an Garda Síochána. They detected a 300% increase in sex work advertising during April and May 2020 in both jurisdictions. On 18 February 2021, an Garda Síochána and the PSNI jointly sent out SMS messages to all advertising sex workers, offering help and support if required and providing dedicated phone lines that could be contacted if any assistance was required. In order to establish the workings and structure of the organised crime gangs, the PSNI's modern slavery human trafficking unit and an Garda Síochána's organised prostitution investigation unit continue to gather information and intelligence on massage parlours that operate north and south of the border.

Cooperation between Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs and the Irish Revenue Commissioners plays a key role in targeting the persons and organised crime gangs responsible for cross-border excise fraud. Multi-agency cooperation is crucial to gathering evidence to support investigations, prosecutions and other interventions. In December 2020, as part of a joint day of action between Revenue and HMRC, an oil distillation plant was discovered in County Monaghan. Oil, vehicles, equipment, cash, machinery and associated evidence linked with the illicit operation were seized, and three individuals were arrested. Financial and forensic investigations are continuing.

A number of cross-jurisdictional investigations are also ongoing into organised crime gangs involved in assisting unlawful immigration into the common travel area (CTA) between Ireland and the UK. Effective collaboration between the Home Office immigration bureau and an Garda national immigration bureau in setting up a covert policing operation in February 2021 resulted in a vehicle being intercepted in Northern Ireland and a people-smuggling attempt detected. Three persons were arrested, a number of properties were searched and relevant evidence was seized. There is also continuing collaboration supporting the investigation into the death of 39 Vietnamese nationals who were found deceased in Essex. Since October 2020, two suspects have been surrendered to the UK on foot of European arrest warrants and have been successfully convicted and sentenced accordingly.

In conclusion, the IGA mechanism continues to deliver effective cooperation and collaboration between respective law enforcement agencies. I am committed to maintaining that excellent level of criminal justice cooperation with Ireland, which is in the best interests of our respective communities.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for bringing the statement to the House. Minister Humphreys is someone I have known for a long time and hold in the very highest regard. I welcome the very constructive relationship that the Minister of Justice has with her counterpart.

A wide range of areas was covered in the statement. I will focus on the domestic abuse element. Will the Minister outline whether opportunities for joint working on domestic abuse and sexual offending have been identified? Was stalking behaviour brought up in any of the discussions? Are information and best practice being shared so that both jurisdictions are assisted in tackling those issues?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his questions. As you are aware, Minister Humphreys is covering for Minister McEntee, who is on maternity leave. Minister Humphreys, as somebody who lives in the border community, has taken a very keen interest in issues on cross-border crime and has been very proactive in her engagement on those matters.

We had no specific discussions about domestic abuse or stalking at the most recent meeting. However, it is fair to say that our groups continue to work in collaboration on those issues in order to ensure that we are able to pursue on either side of the border any kind of incident that may occur in either jurisdiction.

For example, we are aware that people who are subject to domestic abuse who live in communities that cross and straddle the border may be subjected to abuse on either side of the border. It is important that all those elements are picked up. That is one of the reasons why the extraterritorial jurisdiction in both Bills was so important: it ensures that those offences can still be prosecuted in the courts in Northern Ireland.

We have been working on issues on, for example, the work that Sir John Gillen did on serious sexual offences, because there are parallels between the work that he undertook and the O'Malley report in the Republic of Ireland. In that space, we are trying to identify and share mutual issues with our Irish counterparts. I am pleased to say that we work closely together to learn from each other. Where we have experience, particularly on the support required for victims and witnesses, we want to share it and build on good practice on both sides of the border.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, the statement mentions a 300% increase in advertising for the sex work industry in April and May 2020. Do you have any idea why there was that increase? SMS messages were subsequently sent out to sex workers the following February. Why was there a delay in sending those messages and any follow-up work?

Could the Minister look at the fact that there are people in the North who were trafficked here for sex and now have criminal records? In the Twenty-six Counties, those criminal offences were expunged. Those who were trafficked here had no choice, but we have not yet put legislation in place to protect them, and we are potentially keeping those women and children in that industry.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for her questions. With particular respect to her final question, she will be aware that, because of immigration policy, there are limitations on what the Department of Justice can do about those offences, as Border Force and its agencies deal with them. However, it is important that we look at ways of encouraging people who may be trafficked or, indeed, may have questionable immigration status that would make them vulnerable to coercive control to access support, safety and immediate healthcare, where necessary. There is a potential risk to the wider population if people are trafficked here for the purposes of sexual exploitation and if those who have come here and whose immigration status is not settled then become vulnerable to organised crime groups that drive them into that line of work.

I would need to refer to our colleagues on the operational side to get the detail on the operations and the reason for the delay in sending the texts. However, the purpose of those text messages was to do exactly what the Member suggested: not to criminalise the women involved but to reach out and offer help and support so that they could access support if they were in danger or under threat.

The reason for the rise is difficult. At this stage, it would be speculation to judge why it occurred. However, we know that the economic circumstances that people found themselves in throughout the pandemic drove them into lines of work that they might not have considered before. The general increase in human trafficking globally is also a factor.

The important thing for us is to get the message out to the public that organised crime in all its forms is a serious threat to our community; it is not a victimless crime. People are being trafficked here in miserable circumstances, and many never make it this far because they die en route. We need to cut off the demand for those services so that people are safe and are not trafficked here for that purpose or for any other kind of abuse or coercion.

Sinéad Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, I note that you referred to the information-sharing agreement being developed under the auspices of the EU exit working stream. How developed or operational is that data sharing? I would like an update on that. It is critical to the justice family across these islands.

Did any conversation allude to the fact that such precious data is now, unfortunately, subject on occasion to cyberattack? Has consideration been given to the safeguarding of that important data?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The latter point was not discussed at the most recent IGA, but our operational partners, who are the owners of that data, will be acutely aware of it. With respect to the former part of the question, the issue of data sharing is obviously a pressing one. We know that a data adequacy agreement is required to be able to freely share data beyond the end of June. A data adequacy agreement has been drafted, but, whilst we were hopeful some months ago that that would be agreed, it looks less likely at this point. That creates certain challenges in the immediate sharing of data in real time. There are workarounds to deal with that, however, through An Garda Síochána and PSNI sharing their data legally under a different mechanism. From our perspective, we want the highest level of agreement within the EU for sharing data, because, whilst we are focused on North/South agreements through the IGA, organised crime is not focused purely on North/South; it is an international operation, and it has an impact way beyond that.

If Members tune into the news later today, they will see the work that has been done on international interventions in, for example, the trafficking of medications and drugs, which the Health Minister and I have been working on with our operational partners. This is international crime; it is not just national. The sharing of data has to be protected, but it also has to be effective and efficient to allow crime agencies to take on organised criminals.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for a positive statement. It is clear that a lot of work streams are going on, and that can only be welcome. I was interested in the update on the JATF and how that is working, particularly in relation to forensic science. Without labouring the point, following on from what Sinéad Bradley said, for a lot of people, low-level crime is what is really important. Those big set pieces are really important, but the burglaries are really important to them. What danger is there that we could lose, for example, cross-border biometric information sharing or cross-border biometric data retention? Do we think that we have protocols to protect that so that we can counter a lot of the low-level crime?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

From previous rulings in the European Court of Justice, we are aware of issues with the holding of biometric data, and each jurisdiction has a responsibility to comply with those rulings. We currently have a derogation on some of that because of the supposed implementation of the Stormont House Agreement. Having a process to deal with legacy cases will be important to secure legacy biometric data in particular, because the retention times have to be proportionate. That will need to be looked at.

As things stand on sharing that information across jurisdictions, operational partners are content that they are able to share data. However, whilst they can share information freely, the sharing of data is more complex, and that is where a data adequacy agreement is required. A data adequacy agreement ought to be agreed, because we are using the same mechanisms and structures as we used in the past, and we hold that data to the same standards as in the past. The stumbling block in all this is having the certainty that that will remain the case. It is important in being able not only to detect and disrupt organised crime but to prosecute those who are behind organised crime. We need to be able to do that joined-up operation and work together.

The Member mentioned forensic science, and that is an important part of what we are doing. There is always a risk in highly specialised areas of work that you fall below capacity or there is a restriction on capability if there is a major event for which there is demand for services. Having a memorandum of understanding that allows us to draw on each other's reserves when we need to is incredibly important. We have been pursuing that, and now, thankfully, we have had some success.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. Some serious crime takes place on a cross-border basis, so tackling cross-border crime requires meaningful cross-border cooperation. Can you outline to the House more about the work of the PSNI and an Garda Síochána joint agency task force? What level of cooperation takes place to deliver safer communities in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his question. Effective collaboration between Governments and between law enforcement agencies is crucial to disrupting and preventing organised criminality successfully. The practical and strategic cooperation that exists between the two police services has been enhanced because of the JATF, and it is clear that it adds value by producing results through cooperation and operational activity.

It is useful to look today at some of the successes that it has had. Members will be aware that the task force was set up specifically under Fresh Start as part of a concerted and enhanced effort to tackle organised and cross-jurisdictional crime. At the moment, the JATF has a strategic oversight group and an operations coordination group, and it works under the auspices of those in order to be able to have an impact on the ground. The cross-border joint agency task force strategic oversight group is jointly chaired by Assistant Commissioner Barry O'Brien from an Garda Síochána and Assistant Chief Constable Mark McEwan from the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and they provide the strategic direction. The operations coordination group is chaired by Assistant Commissioner Finbarr O'Brien from an Garda Síochána and Detective Chief Superintendent John McVeigh from the Police Service of Northern Ireland. The purpose of that group is to provide oversight of front-line operational activity, and it has been operationally functional since 4 April 2016. It is led by senior officers from Northern Ireland and an Garda Síochána and by the Revenue Commissioners and HM Revenue and Customs. A number of other organisations, including the National Crime Agency and the Irish Criminal Assets Bureau, are also involved in the operational activities. The group has been very effective in dealing with crimes such as rural crime, drugs crime, financial crime, the trafficking of human beings, excise fraud, which remains an issue, and organised immigration crime.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her statement. What input has the joint agency task force had into the Department's legislative proposals for additional powers to tackle organised crime? Do you believe that those proposals will provide better opportunities for cross-border cooperation on tackling organised crime such as drugs crime and financial crime?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

As Members will be aware, there are further discussions to happen on those items today when we look at the codes of practice. The proposals will not necessarily enhance our cooperation, but they will certainly enhance the PSNI's toolkit to gather information on organised crime. For example, unexplained wealth orders (UWOs) allow drilling down into the finances of criminal organisations to retrieve information about the structure and organisation of some of the organised crime gangs that operate on a cross-border basis. We will also have operational tools for the seizure of assets and for account forfeiture, as well as a series of other opportunities, to ensure that they can no longer profit from the criminal enterprises in which they are involved. That will be of benefit across the island, because the enhanced operational capability in Northern Ireland will give us the opportunity to be more robust in our responses to organised crime, and that will have a knock-on effect on the JATF's operations across the island.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire. I welcome the Minister's statement. I go back to the section on forensic science. Has Forensic Science's capacity or capability been disrupted by the post-Brexit justice and security arrangements? Has the operating protocol had to be used because of loss of capacity since it was signed this year?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The memorandum of understanding for mutual support with Forensic Science Ireland was signed by Ministers in June 2011. To date, a small amount of reciprocal work has been undertaken under the agreement. At the start of the COVID pandemic, both laboratories were keen to strengthen the existing agreement as a precautionary measure to provide for urgent support in the event of a significant loss of capacity or capability.

An operational protocol was then developed that considered the scope and practicalities of providing mutual assistance and set out how that work would be authorised and handled, should the need arise. Forensic Science Northern Ireland has also engaged with Forensic Services Scottish Police Authority (SPA) to develop a similar protocol, and a memorandum of understanding is in place with the UK Defence, Science and Technology Laboratory based in Porton Down.

During the COVID pandemic, there has not been a loss of capability and operational capacity in Forensic Science Northern Ireland, but, as Members will be conscious, we are not yet out of the pandemic. Irrespective of what happens next, it is important that we have as much as possible by way of robust back-up mechanisms to ensure that, whatever we face in forensic science, we have the capability to be able to do the job well, because it is absolutely critical to law enforcement. The work that we are doing on an all-island basis is hugely important in contributing to that task.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for her statement and her answers so far. Minister, on criminal justice and social diversity, what work have the project groups done on social diversity? Can you outline any learning gained from that?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

As the Member will be aware, the PSNI already has quite a significant information-sharing agreement to ensure that there is consistency and clarity around information sharing that will support effective cross-border working, as part of the criminal justice and social diversity theme. That is being taken forward under the auspices of the EU-exit working stream. Both police services are developing measures around hate crime, in particular. The PSNI is refreshing its hate crime strategy, which will involve the PSNI working alongside the Youth Justice Agency. It is also working on a victims and witnesses' strategy for the service. As part of the work stream, it is taking advice and guidance, along with its Irish counterparts, and sharing expertise that it has built up over the years in dealing with those crimes.

As you will be aware, during the PSNI's regular recruitment — there will, thankfully, be further recruitment for the PSNI, hopefully, towards the end of the year, in line with our targets in New Decade, New Approach (NDNA) — it always focuses on trying to ensure maximum diversity among the new members that it attracts and recruits. Again, it will be in discussion with an Garda Síochána about that. As you will be aware, there is also a considerable amount of cross-transfer of officers who have trained with one service and end up working for the other, which, again, is a positive advancement.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for the statement and for the information on the agreements reached and the advisory groups that have been set up. As my question leans towards the issue of violence against women, I want to refer briefly to the fact that there are further developments today in the Sarah Everard case in GB. I want to put on record that I am thinking of Sarah's family and friends.

In respect of cooperation on issues on this island, can the Minister give us any further information on the cooperation taking place between agencies that might assist in dispelling rape myths and addressing, through greater public awareness, the issue of consent?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his question. There is clearly much work to be done to dispel rape myths around consent. Some initial work has been done in both our jurisdictions to try to identify opportunities that we might have for shared learning. The O'Malley report, to which I referred earlier, commented on the need for public awareness raising centred on consent. I recognise the similarities between that and the Gillen review, particularly on how we should combat rape myths. I understand that the Irish Government have commissioned the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre (DRCC) to develop messaging and provide advice on what works for different demographics, and I look forward to hearing the results of that work.

The Member will be aware of the work that we are doing and hope to bring forward as part of the Justice Bill to deal with serious sexual offences and how those cases are handled in court. That includes the ability to provide information to juries around rape myths so that, when they hear those cases, they are fully apprised of the reactions that people may have in a serious sexual assault and do not misread people's actions as a result of those rape myths. It is hugely important that we make progress in that area, because it is somewhere where people are particularly vulnerable, but there is a lot of work still to do. On education, we need to start young, and we need to repeat the message frequently. We also need to change societal attitudes, not just the criminal justice system. That is why the work that is happening in Ireland and Northern Ireland is hugely important in delivering societal change.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I welcome the Minister's statement and answers, thus far. The Minister's statement on the work of the intergovernmental collaboration concentrates on tackling organised crime and criminal gangs that operate across these islands. Does it undermine the work of the Minister, and the work of other agencies, when parties in the House are courting the like of the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC), which represents or speaks for criminal and organised gangs? They court them in a political cause, on one day, and, on the next day, the Minister has to come to the House and talk about how other government agencies are tackling their work. Will she comment on that and give a view as to whether her work is being undermined by those who do that?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Society is being undermined by the continued existence of paramilitary and organised crime organisations. Their structures should be dismantled, the organisations should be disbanded, and those who are engaged in criminal activity should desist. The only engagement that elected representatives ought to have with those who are engaged in organised crime and criminality is when they are sending them that message: nothing more and nothing less. Irrespective of what other issues they may have on the agenda, or what concerns they may have, they should not be engaged with, as organisations, while they are engaged in paramilitarism and organised crime. I have been clear about that. It is for all Members to reflect on how they engage with those structures.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

That concludes questions on the statement.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I indicated at the start that I wanted to participate.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I have no record of that, but you can certainly continue if you wish.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Thank you very much. I want to focus on the joint agency task force. The statement is striking by the fact that it makes no mention of paramilitary organisations. They were not mentioned until the Minister's answer to the previous question. Does the Minister wish us to believe that there are no paramilitary links or traces in cross-border crime? Is that too uncomfortable for the process? Will she give us an assessment of the continuing role of paramilitarism within organised crime on a cross-border basis?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I can assure the Member that the only discomfort that I have is a slight twinge in my back from standing for so long during questions on the statement. There is no discomfort from me in calling out paramilitarism or organised crime, from whatever source. I assure him that there is no mention of paramilitarism in this report because the focus is on organised crime, which is much wider than paramilitarism. There are those in paramilitary organisations who continue to be involved in organised crime, including on a cross-border basis — there is no question about that — and when I make statements to the House about paramilitarism and the tackling paramilitarism programme, I regularly refer to that. However, there are many other organised crime organisations that have no paramilitary connections. Organised crime is what we are talking about today. Frankly, it is not for me to make assessments on whether the crimes are conducted by those who badge themselves as paramilitaries. Ultimately, they are all organised criminals, and it is for our operational partners and the courts to decide whether the crimes are carried out by badged organisations. Irrespective of what badge they wear, they should, as I said, desist and disband, and they should dismantle their organisational structures.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

That concludes that item of business.

Executive Committee Business

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I beg to move

That the draft Police Act 1997 (Criminal Record Certificates: Relevant Matters) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit in this debate.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The draft rule stems from a ruling that was made by the UK Supreme Court in 2019. At that time, the court ruled that the Department's filtering scheme, which allows for the non-disclosure, on standard and enhanced criminal record certificates issued by Access NI, of old and minor offences held on an individual's criminal record, was lawful. The Supreme Court also ruled, however, that two categories in the scheme could not be regarded as a necessary and proportionate way of disclosing to potential employers criminal records indicating a propensity to offend. One of those categories is the requirement that, where an individual has more than one offence on their criminal record, all offences should be disclosed, which is known as the multiple conviction rule. To comply with the Supreme Court's ruling, the draft legislation makes amendments to section 113A(6) of Part V of the Police Act 1997. The amendment means that, where an individual has more than one conviction, Access NI will no longer be required to automatically include all convictions held on an individual's criminal record on a standard or enhanced certificate. Instead, Access NI will assess each conviction on a criminal record individually and will only disclose a conviction where less than 11 years has elapsed since that conviction was awarded. If the applicant was under 18 at the time of the conviction, that period will be reduced to five and a half years.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Beggs] in the Chair)

There are two exceptions to that. The first is when a person has been convicted of an offence that is specified under section 113A(6D) of Part V of the Police Act 1997. These are regarded as more serious offences for which the maximum penalty is a sentence of imprisonment. That includes, for example, offences involving violence, sexual misconduct or the misuse or supply of drugs. To maintain the safeguarding of vulnerable groups, such offences will always be disclosed. The second exception is where any offence was punished by a period of imprisonment, including a suspended sentence. Those offences will also always be disclosed.

Although two exceptions remain, and information about such offences will be disclosed, in any cases where an offence is spent, an individual retains the right of appeal to the independent reviewer of criminal record certificates to have that information removed from their certificate. I acknowledge that that means that less information will be disclosed on Access NI certificates than was previously the case. I am content, however, that the change does not diminish the safeguarding of vulnerable groups in Northern Ireland. Relevant information for the purposes of employment vetting will continue to be disclosed by Access NI. Given the Supreme Court ruling, I agreed in March 2020 that, pending the introduction of this legislation, Access NI should, on an administrative basis, no longer apply the multiple offence rule. This has increased the proportion of certificates that have criminal record information removed before issue, but, from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021, Access NI still disclosed information in 579 standard certificates, which is 14·5% of all such certificates issued, and in 4,981 enhanced certificates, which is 5·9% of all such certificates issued. I am therefore confident that the amended legislation continues to ensure that the correct balance is struck between safeguarding vulnerable groups and affording the right to privacy of individual applicants for Access NI certificates, as set out in article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

This rule is subject to the draft affirmative procedure because, as specified in Part V of the Police Act, amendments to section 113A(6) can only be made in that manner. I thank the Justice Committee for its careful consideration of the draft rule, and I bring the rule before you today with the Committee's support. I commend the rule to the House.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will speak briefly, as the Minister has outlined in detail the purpose of the rule. It will remove the requirement for Access NI to automatically disclose all convictions in cases where an applicant for a standard or enhanced check has more than a single conviction on their criminal record. That brings the Access NI filtering scheme into line with the judgement that was made by the Supreme Court in January 2019.

The Minister first wrote to the Committee to advise of changes to the scheme in March 2020. Given that over a year had elapsed since the Supreme Court decision, the Minister advised that, to prevent any further challenges, the changes should initially be made on an administrative basis and that the necessary legislative changes would be made as quickly as possible thereafter.

The Committee subsequently considered the proposal to make the rule at its meeting on 1 October 2020, along with receiving an update on the operation of the administrative changes made to the scheme in March. The Department advised that the impact of the administrative changes had been significant, with around 55% to 57% of applications having information filtered, compared with 27% to 30% of applications before the changes were made. Many of those related to multiple motoring offences that, until then, had to be disclosed on the basis that more than one offence was adjudicated at court. The Department advised that there was no evidence that the increased rate of filtering caused any safeguarding concerns and no adverse feedback had been received from employers.

Having considered the information provided, the Committee agreed that it was content with the proposal for the statutory rule. The Committee also agreed to request clarification on the offences that would be retained on the system permanently, and the Department provided that information on 20 October. The Department laid the rule on 6 May, and, at our meeting on 13 May, the Committee noted correspondence from the Department advising that the delay in the rule being laid, following the Committee's consideration of the proposal in October, was due to drafting issues, which had been resolved.

The statutory rule was subsequently considered at our meeting on 27 May, when the Committee noted that the Examiner of Statutory Rules had no comment to make by way of technical scrutiny and agreed to recommend that the statutory rule be approved by the Assembly. On behalf of the Committee for Justice, I support the statutory rule.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not propose to repeat what the Minister and the Chair have said, but it is important to note that the rule will bring Access NI into line with the Supreme Court judgement from January 2019, which found that the disclosure of all convictions, where an individual had more than a single offence, was disproportionate and would not comply with article 8 of the ECHR. The case involved four people who were convicted, cautioned or reprimanded for relatively minor offences, such as driving without a seat belt in 1996 and the theft of a sandwich from a shop in 1999 while the offender was homeless and suffering from undiagnosed schizophrenia. Disclosure of their criminal records to potential employers made it more difficult to obtain jobs.

The Access NI scheme is an important safeguarding scheme to ensure that people do not end up in inappropriate jobs where they might present a danger to the public or to individuals, and, as was outlined, that safeguard is still in place. It was never intended to prevent people turning their lives around or getting another chance after previous misdemeanours, regardless of how minor they were. It is important that Access NI is proportionate, fair and human rights-compliant, and I welcome the legislative change, which will achieve exactly that.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Chair and the Deputy Chair for their points. I thank all Members in the Chamber for their consideration of the draft rule. It is essential to ensure that we can comply with the ruling made by the Supreme Court in January 2019 in relation to the disclosure of old and minor offences on Access NI certificates. I again put on record my thanks to the Committee for its scrutiny of the rule, and I hope that the Assembly will join me in supporting the regulations. I commend the draft rule to the Assembly for its approval.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Police Act 1997 (Criminal Record Certificates: Relevant Matters) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The next items of business are motions to approve four draft statutory rules, all of which relate to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. There will be a single debate on all four motions. I will call the Minister to move the first motion. The Minister will then commence the debate on all four motions listed in the Order Paper. When all those who wish to speak have done so, I will put the Question on the first motion. I will then call the Minister to move the second motion, and the Question will then be put on that motion. The process will be repeated for the remaining statutory rules. If that is clear, we will proceed.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I beg to move

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Search, Seizure and Detention of Property: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

The following motions stood in the Order Paper:

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cash Searches: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved. — [Mrs Long (The Minister of Justice).]

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved. — [Mrs Long (The Minister of Justice).]

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Recovery of Listed Assets: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved. — [Mrs Long (The Minister of Justice).]

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The purpose of the orders is to bring into operation four codes of practice for the use of powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 as amended by the Criminal Finances Act 2017.

By way of background, the Proceeds of Crime Act, otherwise known as "POCA", is a UK-wide Act designed to provide law enforcement with tools to recover the proceeds of crime and to deny criminals the opportunity to accumulate assets secured by illegal means. POCA contains a wide range of provisions that deal with, amongst other things, cash seizure and forfeiture; asset freezing; the disclosure of information by financial institutions during investigations; and requirements on professionals in regulated industries to submit suspicious activity reports. Since its inception, POCA has proven to be an integral part of the response to organised criminality, which, as Members will know, is driven by sheer greed and a disregard for the harmful impact that crime has on our society.

The POCA regime was further enhanced by the Criminal Finances Act 2017. That Act added to the list of tools that operational agencies could use when investigating the proceeds of crime. They included the introduction of the new account-freezing and forfeiture powers; new listed asset forfeiture powers; new unexplained wealth order provisions; and the ability to revisit confiscation orders. Unfortunately, those powers did not commence in Northern Ireland as planned in 2017. Whilst the provisions were in the original Bill, the Assembly's dissolution in January 2017 meant that it was not possible to secure a legislative consent motion (LCM). However, it was decided that the devolved provisions should remain in the Bill but they would not be commenced without appropriate consents having been secured from Northern Ireland. Since the return of the Assembly, I have engaged with the Executive, the Justice Committee and Members in order to secure a way forward for commencing the outstanding provisions, as retrospective consent for the provisions of an Act is not possible. Members may recall that I advised the Home Secretary that the powers should be commenced last year. While it has taken longer than I had hoped, given the pressures of EU exit and COVID, all parties are working towards a commencement date of 28 June.

I turn to the business before the Assembly. Members are invited to approve four codes of practice that give guidance to officers in Northern Ireland who are exercising POCA functions following commencement of the relevant provisions. Those officers are primarily PSNI officers and accredited financial investigators in the PSNI, the Department for Communities and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA). The designation of powers is subject to training and accreditation on an ongoing basis. The codes of practice should coincide with the commencement of the relevant Criminal Finances Act provisions. Taking into account appropriate jurisdictional differences, the codes are closely aligned to those prepared by the Home Office for officers exercising POCA powers in reserved agencies or on behalf of other bodies in England and Wales.

Three of the orders relate to existing codes that have been subject to minor updates to reflect how the new powers should be exercised. One order is for a new code that advises officers how to exercise powers in respect of the recovery of listed assets. It is anticipated, subject, of course, to the Assembly's approval today, that the three revised codes and one new code will take effect on 28 June to coincide with the planned commencement of the Criminal Finances Act provisions.

Whilst I do not propose to go into the full technical detail of each code, Members may find a brief summary helpful. First, the 'Search, Seizure and Detention of Property (Northern Ireland)' code of practice is issued under section 195T of the 2002 Act and provides guidance to constables and accredited financial investigators on the exercise of powers to search, seize and detain property that may be needed to satisfy a future confiscation order following conviction. Secondly, the 'Recovery of Cash: Search Powers (Northern Ireland)' code of practice issued under section 293A of the 2002 Act provides guidance to constables and accredited financial investigators on the operation of powers to search for cash where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the property has been obtained through unlawful conduct or is intended for use in unlawful conduct. Thirdly, the 'Investigations (Northern Ireland)' code of practice issued under section 377ZA of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 provides guidance to constables and accredited financial investigators on the exercise of the investigation powers in POCA. Finally, the 'Recovery of Listed Assets: Search Powers (Northern Ireland)' code of practice is issued under section 303I of POCA. It is a new code that provides guidance to constables and accredited financial investigators on the exercise of powers to search for listed assets such as precious metals and stones, artistic works and face value vouchers that have been acquired by the proceeds of crime or will be used to support further criminal activity. It also provides guidance on applications by officers to judicial officers or senior officers for prior approval to exercise the powers.

POCA stipulates that the Department of Justice must prepare and publish a draft of any new or revised code of practice. My Department ran a nine-week public consultation on the four codes from 1 December 2020 to 1 February 2021. As no adverse impacts and amendments were suggested, there were no changes to the codes as a result of the consultation. Officials subsequently made some amendments to the investigations code of practice to fix minor errors and for stylistic purposes, but no material changes were required.

Setting aside the technical detail, it is important to reflect on what the codes help to deliver. We know that criminals are motivated by greed and personal gain. Removing the profits from criminal activity, therefore, reduces incentives and has a disruptive effect on the cycle that sustains serious and organised crime. In turn, that reduces the harm to individuals, families and businesses across our communities. It is important to recognise that the POCA regime is an integral part of the overall response to tackling organised criminality in all its forms. Enhancing the POCA framework is also consistent with what my Department and our partners on the organised crime task force seek to achieve under the organised crime strategy for Northern Ireland, particularly the pursuit of offenders through investigation, disruption and prosecution. As recognised by the Independent Reporting Commission, the introduction of the measures will broaden the range of tools available to deal with paramilitarism and organised crime, where there is often significant crossover.

The codes are important safeguards that underpin the POCA regime. Collectively, we must ensure that organised criminality is socially unacceptable and economically unviable. Therefore, I ask the Assembly to support the strengthening of the POCA legislation in Northern Ireland and to approve the four orders today. We need to send a clear, consistent and collective message that crime does not pay and that we will do everything in our power to ensure that law enforcement agencies here have all the powers that they need to deny criminals the use of their assets, to recover the proceeds of crime and to disrupt and deter criminality.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am pleased to speak in my role as Chair of the Justice Committee on these issues, albeit briefly, as the Minister has already outlined the purpose of the four statutory rules in detail. The rules will bring one new and three revised codes of practice issued under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 into operation. The codes apply principally to financial investigators designated with powers under the law in the PSNI, the Department for Communities fraud investigation service and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency.

Equivalent codes that apply to reserved bodies operating in Northern Ireland are issued by the Home Office, the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Northern Ireland. The codes have been updated or drafted to reflect changes to POCA arising from the Criminal Finances Act 2017. Members will be aware that that Act is a UK-wide Act that includes a mix of reserved and devolved provisions to provide law enforcement agencies and partners with new capabilities and powers to recover the proceeds of crime and to tackle money laundering, corruption and terrorist finance. Though fully commenced in England, Wales and Scotland, the devolved provisions for Northern Ireland have not been commenced, as consent was not secured before the Assembly was dissolved in January 2017. The Minister of Justice wrote to the Committee on 22 May last year, indicating her intention to notify the Home Secretary of her agreement to commence the provisions of the Criminal Finance Act 2017 in Northern Ireland.

Subsequently, departmental officials attended the Committee's meeting on 28 May to provide an overview of the provisions relating to Northern Ireland that it was proposed should be commenced. The Committee was advised that a public consultation would be undertaken on nine codes of practice. The Department of Justice and Home Office would each consult on four codes of practice, while the Attorney General and Advocate General for Northern Ireland would consult on one. Written information provided as follow-up to the evidence session gave further detailed information on the consultation.

On15 November, the Department wrote to the Committee advising of its intention to launch a nine-week consultation on its four codes of practice on 23 November. The Committee agreed that it was content for the consultation to proceed and that it would consider the matter further upon the results being available. The consultation was subsequently launched on 1 December, and the summary of the consultation was considered at our meeting on 11 March. Although no amendments to the codes were deemed necessary following the Department's consultation, one code was updated as a result of changes made to an equivalent Home Office code in response to that consultation. The Department advised that the changes provided clarity where it was believed to be beneficial but were not considered to be material to the operation of the codes. The Committee noted the Department's intention to bring the draft affirmative statutory rules and finalised codes of practice for consideration after the Easter recess. The Department also indicated that the codes of practice would come into operation on the same date as the commencement of the outstanding provisions of the Criminal Finances Act.

The Committee, at its meeting on 22 April, agreed that it was content with the proposals for the statutory rules to bring the four codes of practice into operation. The draft statutory rules were subsequently considered at our meeting on 3 June. The Committee noted that the Examiner of Statutory Rules had no issues to raise with regard to technical aspects of the four rules, and it agreed to recommend that they be approved by the Assembly. Therefore, on behalf of the Committee, I support all four motions that are before the House.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not intend to repeat what the Chair has already outlined, except to say that the motions will amend a number of statutory codes of practice under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to take account of the commencement of the provisions of the Criminal Finances Act 2017. The Criminal Finances Act includes a number of important provisions that will assist the police and others in tackling organised crime and criminal gangs. It is important legislation.

This matter first came to my attention when I was on the Policing Board. We went to a presentation in Grosvenor Road at which the police outlined why they needed these codes and this legislation to be put in place. It is necessary to ensure that we equip the police with the proper tools that will enable them to tackle such crime. Armed criminal gangs are involved in serious crime, such as murder, extortion and drug dealing. They threaten, bully, intimidate and coerce communities. They have no place in society. The main motivation of those criminal gangs is financial. They want to make as much money as possible, mainly off the backs of communities and those who cannot afford it. It is important that the police and other law enforcement agencies have the power to target those gangs where it will hurt: their assets and their pockets. The Criminal Finances Act introduces two new forfeiture powers that will allow the police to do just that in cases where property, assets or money is derived from or intended for use in unlawful conduct.

I would like to see the PSNI tackle organised crime in my constituency of Mid Ulster. I am sure that many Members across the House will share the frustration of those who live in my constituency. They see drug dealers, who destroy communities by dealing drugs to children and young people, living lavish lifestyles while families and communities are left to pick up the pieces. I commend the motions to the House. I thank the Minister.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for bringing these regulations to the House. She used one of my lines when she said that it is, indeed, an old cliché to suggest that crime does not pay. It is true, because the Justice Minister is working hard to ensure for us all that that is the situation.

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 has been amended by the Criminal Finances Act 2017, which contains provisions that relate to asset recovery. Those are due to be commenced later this month. However, it is worth noting that those powers have been available in England, Wales and Scotland since early 2018. Despite the efforts of the Department of Justice to bring forward a legislative consent motion, the Assembly dissolved before the motion could be debated in January 2017, so the powers were not commenced in Northern Ireland at that time.

Sadly, another example of lost time is the three years in which this Chamber lay empty and necessary legislation to make Northern Ireland a better and safer place could not be progressed. That is something that we must all pledge not to repeat. Time for criminal gangs to continue in business is never a good thing.

Although new provisions to the Proceeds of Crime Act have already been commenced, a number of elements are still to come into operation later this month. Those include considerable powers to tackle crime and cut funds for ill-gotten gains. Perhaps the most well-known element will be unexplained wealth orders, meaning that police agencies can make applications to the High Court for orders. I understand that, although those will not cover the police, the PSNI will ultimately be able to refer them to an agency to enable the work to be done. In our constituencies, we often wonder how some people lead a life of luxury with no visible means of support. Hopefully, those days are coming to an end for many of those people.

Unexplained wealth orders will provide a tool to investigating agencies to require people to explain how assets in excess of £50,000 were obtained and how they can be explained by their known income. Hopefully, their lifestyles, with the fancy cars and houses, will be coming to an end. Provisions also include account freezing and forfeiture orders. Those have been particularly valuable in England and Wales, where over £200 million was frozen in 2019-2020.

Other provisions cover forfeiture of listed assets if all or part of the asset is recoverable property intended for use in unlawful conduct. If you have not gained it illegally, you should have no difficulty explaining why you have it. Other serious and useful provisions that will be introduced include disclosure orders in money-laundering investigations. Those will require anyone to answer questions and provide information on money-laundering investigations.

Finally, amendments provide for an extension of the moratorium period, which will allow investigators to take evidence to determine whether further action should be taken following suspicious reports by a bank or other companies. It is important that financial institutions that are trusted by the public also play their part in helping to expose criminal activity. The order extends the current period of 31 days to 186 via a court order, allowing for considerably more time for investigation by financial institutions.

Those are really meaningful provisions to tackle organised crime in Northern Ireland, and I believe that they will make a major difference. I understand, however, that, owing to the amendment to the Proceeds of Crime Act, we now must update the codes of practice — that is what is happening today — to ensure a standardised approach across the United Kingdom.

As the Minister stated, the codes of practice are technical in nature, but they fall into four key areas: search and seizure and detention of property; search and seizure of cash; search and seizure of certain listed assets; and general asset recovery investigation powers. They may be technical, but everybody in the street will understand what those headings mean.

Some of the specific changes that are included in this revision of what is meaningful cash cover a wider range of items, such as gaming vouchers and betting receipts. Those are welcome changes being progressed today. They will go some way to ensuring that no one profits from crime. I commend the work that the Minister has done to bring forward the orders today. From today on, paramilitary crime gangs and others will have to fear further the knock at the door.

Sinéad Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

On behalf of the SDLP, I, too, welcome the revised codes and the new code, albeit, through no fault of the Minister, they are late. They standardise the approach that we will take going forward in disrupting and seizing any proceeds of crime. I will not reiterate what has been said, but it is worth noting at this stage that the purpose of the statutory rule as presented includes taking a proportionate, consistent approach in a focused manner. It is worth noting that doing that is also in the interests of the person who may be subject to those powers, because it brings a standardised proportionality to the discussion. Any person who, for whatever reason, may have been subject to these at the outset because there was a perception, and can prove that they have legitimate access to these means, will then have very clear regard to these proposals and how they can defend themselves. It is important that that proportionate piece is built in.

However, I have no hesitation in saying that this is about disrupting those who try to benefit from and live off the proceeds of crime. Therefore, the SDLP, like any law-abiding citizens, will have no hesitation in welcoming these codes.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I shall be brief. This is a good day for justice. This is a good day for tackling crime and those who make a living from criminal activities. The Ulster Unionist Party has always been strong on justice. We have always been strong on supporting victims. We have always been strong on tackling crime, and we have always been strong on tackling the causes of crime. We will stand with our Justice Minister to rigorously force this through to make sure that we can engage these criminals where it hits them hardest, which is in their pockets, in their bank accounts, and in the fancy cars that they drive around our streets in and the fancy watches that they have on their wrists while the victims of that crime sit at home in fear because of what is happening to them.

The Proceeds of Crime Act is a tool in dealing with crime, be that through paramilitaries, criminals or organised crime gangs. It is just another tool. However, it is simply untenable that we would not support this to be able to tackle those individuals. Accredited financial investigators are key to this because this crime gets more complex each day. Every time that they try to show that what they have has been gained legally and as they try to launder money or sell on goods, it is important that those accredited financial investigators, along with the PSNI, have the tools to hold them to account. We cannot have criminals in our society, not working, standing there in their Armani suits with their gold watches and BMWs.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member take an intervention?

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Of course I will. Yes, absolutely.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Would the Member agree that it is not acceptable to have people in balaclavas marching through the streets of Portadown either?

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Of course. I am sure that the Member will have heard me say on multiple occasions that it is not tenable to have people walking through the streets in balaclavas. It is not tenable to have people in the gutters in balaclavas murdering citizens of this country. There is no point trading insults across the Chamber when you know full well that I am not standing supporting anybody who wears a balaclava. You know full well that I do not support paramilitaries in any shape or form, you know full well that I have received threats from loyalist paramilitaries, and you know full well that there are also republican organised crime gangs out there. So, play your games if you want, when I am making a positive point about what our Minister is doing to tackle criminals.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Can I bring —.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I was not anywhere near that parade when it happened and did not see anybody with a balaclava

[Inaudible]

—.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order, order. I ask the Member to return to the motion, despite the distraction. We are here to debate a piece of legislation, and I ask you to return to it.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I apologise for getting a little bit carried away but when you stand up against these criminals and somebody tries to belittle you for doing that, you may just get a little bit passionate.

I will finish by saying quite simply that this is good legislation to deal with criminals, paramilitaries and criminal gangs on our streets. I will be supporting the Minister in this, and in rigorously ensuring that it is applied through her offices.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I support the Minister of Justice in her endeavours to bring these changes to the codes of practice, which we most definitely need. If you speak to the Police Service, it will tell you the same thing. There is absolutely no doubt that a modern police force needs modern legislation, because one thing is for sure: criminality moves on at a pace. Criminals adapt and overcome the troubles and barriers that are presented to them. It is only right that our Police Service, which is dedicated to protecting people, has powers to combat criminality.

Of course, organised crime comes in many guises, all of which have an incredible impact on society — on people, on family units and on businesses. I am probably one of the few here who grew up in a working-class estate

[Interruption]

— I said one of the few — and saw at first hand some of the impacts that organised crime has on young people who become trapped in it. They are cajoled and coerced into organised crime. Sometimes, that happens through pressure, but sometimes it happens because they are lured. People with big, flashy cars and houses who buy up badly needed homes to use for their criminal enterprises add to the spectre of the kingpin who strikes fear into the kitchens and living rooms of every working-class home in this country. Families' freedoms — the freedoms of husbands, wives and children — are restricted and people have to abide by other laws and other rules when a kingpin takes hold.

It is good that we can now proceed with these changes to the codes of practice. I agree with my colleague in the Alliance Party when he says that it is a shame that it has taken so long for us to get these changes through. It is a shame that this place was down for so long. Over that period of three years, how many people could have been protected? How many assets and how much cash could have been confiscated during that time? Those are things that we must consider when people, and particularly journalists, ask us about the worth of this place as an instrument of change in people's lives. This is just one example of the benefits of having a devolved Assembly. It is vital that that is not misused or abused or taken for granted. That is why we should value this place.

Organised crime comes in many guises. It could be drug-dealing, racketeering, smuggling or paramilitarism. It is not acceptable that anyone or any political party that sits in this devolved Assembly would have or would be controlled by an army council that looks not only over the political party but on all arms of activity, which could well include organised crime, criminality and terrorism.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Yes, I will.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member may be appointed as an Executive Minister later today. In doing so, he will have to sign a Pledge of Office, which makes it quite clear that he will have to tackle criminality and paramilitarism. If the Member is going to stand by his word, will he, therefore, not meet the Loyalist Communities Council until the gangs that it is associated with disband?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Interesting though it is, I suggest that that is a debate for another day. Again, I ask Members to discuss the legislation that is in front of us today.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will abide by your ruling, despite the diversion from across the Chamber. We should be tackling the issue of organised crime, paramilitaries and shadowy outfits in whatever guise they come, one being the army council. It is important that we tackle all aspects of criminality. There is no justification for criminality or organised crime — any of it — and it all should stop forthwith. I support the Justice Minister in her endeavours today and support the changing of these codes of practice.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Proceeds of Crime Act is a UK-wide Act that is designed to provide law enforcement with the tools to recover the proceeds of crime and deny criminals the opportunity to accumulate assets that have been secured by illegal means. It is an integral part of our response to tackling organised criminality. I am a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, where those matters were recently discussed.

Organised crime, as Members have pointed out, causes harm, misery and fear in our communities. Tackling that has remained a key priority throughout the Minister's tenure, and I commend her for the progress that she has made on protecting individuals, communities and businesses in Northern Ireland from organised crime. Although good progress has been made, we are still well aware that countering the lingering illegal persuasive nature of paramilitarism requires a long-term and genuinely collaborative approach across government, working closely with community partners. As a Policing Board member, I put it on record that I am committed to doing all that I can to disrupt and prevent organised criminality. It is completely unacceptable for this coercive and controlling influence and these structures to try to prevail or operate in our society.

Details of significant interventions and successes against organised crime by the NCA, Border Force and the PSNI have all been well publicised in recent weeks, and we welcome the measures that have been taken in the interests of public safety. It is not only appropriate but absolutely necessary that suitable legislation and codes of practice are in place to enable and enhance future success.

From a law enforcement perspective, I support the strengthening of the Proceeds of Crime Act in Northern Ireland through the four orders that are before the Assembly. In addition, the support from across the House for the Minister and the motions that she has brought before us is very welcome. I support the motions.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

This has mainly been a positive debate, and I very much welcome the contributions that Members have made to it. This is an opportunity for us, as an Assembly, to make it clear that organised crime is not victimless and is not conducted in a vacuum. Its detrimental impact can be seen and felt in our communities, where it causes real harm and wrecks lives and livelihoods. It diverts money away from public services that we need and use every day and undermines the legitimate economy. It puts lives at risk by peddling substandard goods, often dangerously, to a public who think that they are getting a bargain and that the deal that they have got is too good to be true. Indeed, it is too good to be true.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will the Minister give way?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I will.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will she send out a public message that as well as some of the items being dangerous, the cigarettes and alcohol can quite often be poisonous in nature?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Member is, of course, right. Only today, we were, with the Health Minister and the PSNI, looking at the haul of goods that were seized during Operation Pangea — significant numbers of medical devices and pills that were taken off our streets. People order them online and do not know what they are going to receive from the organised crime gangs: it may be what it says on the packet or it may not. However, even if that medication is the real deal, if you take it in combination with other medication and without the supervision of a medical professional, it can kill you. There is no question about that. What you are doing is putting people's lives at risk. People may think that those things are a bargain and that they are getting a great deal, but somewhere somebody is paying the price, whether it is people who are enslaved in order to produce the goods or the end consumers who find that their lives have been destroyed. We need to take a stand against organised crime. We have to recognise that it is completely unacceptable, and we need to do all that we can, in the Assembly but also more widely in society, to stop it.

Working with partners in the organised crime task force, I am committed to tackling organised criminality in all of its forms. We have had a considerable debate about paramilitaries and organised criminals, and it was raised during the previous debate as well. I do not care how those organised criminals brand themselves, whether they brand themselves as paramilitaries or as simple organised criminals. Either way, they are parasites who are feeding off our communities, causing misery and destruction. They need to desist from their activity, and they need to disband. They need to let the rest of us get on with our lives in peace and free of the coercive control and intimidation that they exert on our streets every day not just in parades and shows of strength, although those are significant, but every day in the housing estates to which the Member referred, where people are afraid to speak to the police for fear that a neighbour might see them doing so and where people are afraid to report suspicious activity because they are worried that it will lead to a brick through their window the next day or worse. We need to be real about the impact that those organisations have in our communities, and we need to stand united in our opposition to their continued existence.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way again. On that note, Minister, we are meeting tomorrow at the political reference group on ending paramilitarism and criminality. Does you agree that it is now time for more stick and less carrot? People are fed up.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Member will see from what I brought forward today that I believe that there has to be stick. I think that there has been sufficient carrot in giving people time. There certainly has been plenty of time to consume the carrot because we are 23 years past the Good Friday Agreement, yet we still wrestle with these issues and with getting clarity on them.

One of the key issues in dealing with organised crime is to build confidence in communities that these are not the people who control the neighbourhood and who are in charge. It is the forces of law and order, the real people in those neighbourhoods and the local legitimate communities who are in charge, not paramilitaries, not organised criminals and not their cohorts. We need to get that message out clearly, and I hope that these tools will help the PSNI and our other partner agencies to deal with those people.

Let us be clear. Whatever badge of convenience those people wish to fly under, the only thing that motivates them is their pocket. They do not care about local communities. They do not care about local people. They do not care about people who cannot make ends meet. They do not care that families are broken over drugs and illicit materials being trafficked through their estate. They do not care. They care about their money, they care about their own luxurious lifestyles and they peddle the material that they bring into our communities in order to sustain those lifestyles, often at the expense of some of the poorest and most vulnerable people.

So, absolutely there should be stick, and I trust that, with these measures in place, we will be in a position to start seeing increased seizures. Some incredible work has been done in this space on seizures of drugs, criminal assets and cash and on arrests and prosecutions. Instead of quibbling about whether there is a balance in how they are labelled and what they are called, let us just collectively celebrate the fact that those drugs, that money and those individuals are off our streets.

Removing the proceeds of crime is, therefore, crucial to our combined efforts. Investigating and removing criminal assets has a powerful disruptive effect on organised criminals. It can impact on their so-called status in communities, and, of course, the Member is right when he talks about people swanning around in their luxury cars and their luxury clothes while they feed off the poorest. By removing that status, hopefully we can disengage another generation of young people from following in their footsteps. It can also cause problems between criminal group when we remove their resources, and that restricts their ability to fund further criminality.

The orders ensure that Northern Ireland officers, with functions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, can exercise their powers underpinned by up-to-date and effective guidance. The orders also ensure that safeguards are in place for those who may be the subject of a POCA-related investigation. I am, therefore, pleased to be in a position to say that we are moving forward on the Criminal Finances Act and to ask that the orders be accepted and the motions approved. It is a step forward for Northern Ireland and, I hope, a step backwards for criminal enterprises.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Search, Seizure and Detention of Property: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

We now move on to the other motions on the draft Proceeds of Crime Act regulations, which have already been debated.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I now call on the Minister to move the motion.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I beg to move

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cash Searches: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cash Searches: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I call on the Minister to move the motion.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I beg to move

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I call on the Minister to move the motion.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I beg to move

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Recovery of Listed Assets: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Recovery of Listed Assets: Code of Practice) Order (Northern Ireland) 2021 be approved.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I ask the House to take its ease.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill [NIA Bill 24/17-22] be agreed.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

In accordance with convention, the Business Committee has not allocated a time limit to the debate.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Second Stage debate follows the Assembly's approval yesterday of the Supply resolution for the Main Estimates for 2021-22. Accelerated passage of the Bill is necessary in order to ensure Royal Assent before any Departments reach the cash limits for 2021-22 that were set in the Vote on Account. I am very grateful to the Finance Committee for confirming that, in line with Standing Order 42, the Bill can proceed under accelerated passage, and I thank the Committee for agreeing to that.

The Assembly's agreement of the Executive's final Budget for 2021-22 on 25 May allows me to bring the Budget (No. 2) Bill to the Assembly to seek the legislative authority for the expenditure of Departments and other bodies for the remainder of the financial year.

The Assembly's Standing Order 32 directs that the Second Stage debate:

"shall be confined to the general principles of the Bill."

I shall endeavour to keep to that direction.

The Bill will authorise the cash and use of resources on services to allow Departments and other bodies to operate for the remainder of the financial year and to carry out the functions and deliver the services that are set out in schedules1 and 2 to the Bill. The detail of how the cash and resources will be used is set out in the Main Estimates. That document was laid in the Assembly on 27 May.

The Bill will authorise the issue of the sum of £10,342,800,000 from the Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund and the use of resources totalling £11,843,690,000 by Departments and certain other bodies listed in schedules 1 and 2 to the Bill in the year ending 31 March 2022, which is this financial year. The cash and resources are to be spent and used on services listed in column 1 of each schedule. Those amounts are in addition to the amounts that were previously authorised by the Assembly through the Budget Act (NI) 2021 in March, represent the Executive's up-to-date expenditure plans and include the in-year allocations that the Executive have agreed as part of the final Budget process. In addition, as I explained to the Assembly yesterday, they include some items that are not in the Budget, namely New Decade, New Approach and confidence-and-supply funding, which has now been confirmed by Treasury, and funding for the extension of business support schemes that are delivered by my Department and the Department for the Economy. The Bill will ensure that all Departments have the statutory authority to spend the cash and use the resources that they will require to deliver services for the remainder of the financial year.

Clause 2 of the Bill provides for the temporary borrowing by my Department of £5,171,400,000. That is approximately half the sum authorised for issue out of the Consolidated Fund in clause 1. I must stress that clause 2 does not provide for the issue of any additional cash out of the Consolidated Fund or convey any additional spending power. It simply enables my Department to run an effective and efficient cash-management regime.

The Bill also repeals a number of Budget Acts from 2018 and 2019. That is a normal process to remove legislation from the statute book once it is spent.

The legislation is required to ensure that all public services can continue to be delivered for the remainder of this financial year. It gives legal effect to the Budget that was agreed by all Executive Ministers. To be clear, no Minister objected to the Budget and no Minister proposed an alternative allocation.

On that note, I will conclude my opening remarks. I am happy to deal with any points of principle or detail on the Budget (No. 2) Bill that Members may wish to raise.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his opening comments. My remarks on behalf of the Committee for Finance will address the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill. With your indulgence, however, Mr Speaker, I would like to comment briefly on the question of accelerated passage.

(Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Stalford] in the Chair)

As the House will know, the Committee for Finance is in a unique position, given its requirement to confirm the level of consultation on the public expenditure proposals that are covered by the Budget (No. 2) Bill. In that regard, the Committee has received oral and written briefings from the Department, participated in plenary debates, sought clarity from the Assembly's Research and Information Service (RaISe) — I thank RaISe for the work that it has done — and commissioned feedback from other Statutory Committees on the 2021-22 public expenditure proposals. Despite all of that, it is still a struggle to understand the complex data, to appreciate the assumptions that underpin the Budget process and to get to grips with the methodology by which public expenditure decisions are made. It is a complexity with which officials and academics, not just MLAs and Committees, struggle.

I will confess that, despite this being the Committee's second go at a Budget, members are still often surprised by what we learn from officials about all this.

The Committee understands from the Department that delays to the passage of the Bill would lead to an interruption to the funding of public services. Given that we are still emerging from a public health emergency, it is not surprising that members are unwilling to risk that. Consequently, the Committee agreed, I must say with considerable reluctance, to again grant accelerated passage to the Budget (No. 2) Bill. Mr Allister raised another matter, the funding of the Northern Ireland centenary, which, I have no doubt, he will raise and further expound on during the debate.

As you can imagine, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, the accelerated passage situation is a highly unsatisfactory outcome that, to some degree, replicates the experience of nearly every other year. I again anticipate, therefore, that some Members may seek to remedy the situation through a suitable legislative vehicle.

The Bill provides legal cover for the balance of the expenditure of 2020-21 that was not covered by the previous Vote on Account. I understand that the Bill refers to cash and resources and, indeed, accruing resources, which is income that Departments receive from outside the Northern Ireland block grant. However, the Bill, if I have understood it correctly, does not cover capital, even though that is referenced in the Main Estimates. Perhaps the Minister might clarify in his response where the legal authority for capital expenditure comes from, given that it does not come from this Bill, despite all the Budget and Supply motions that we have been debating. Perhaps the Minister could also explain where legal authority comes from for accruing resources that are in excess of that which is set out in the relevant schedules to the Bill. That is another area that we need clarity on.

Turning to the substance of the Bill and the associated public expenditure proposals, the Committee gratefully received feedback from those Statutory Committees that, despite the considerable pressure of other work, have done their best, in quite difficult circumstances, to interrogate departmental submissions. The Chairpersons of those Committees — I see many of them here — will, undoubtedly, eloquently make reference to the pressures that their Departments face. I will, therefore, merely give the House a few key points.

The Committee for Communities noted bids that were unmet, such as around half of those relating to support for the vulnerable, including additional welfare mitigations and support for the reform of the Housing Executive. However, the Committee warmly welcomed confirmation that additional universal credit staff will be provided for and recruited. We are also looking forward to seeing the detail of the plans for much-needed social housing. The sooner the Minister for Communities can bring that in front of the Assembly, the better; it will be much appreciated.

The Committee for Infrastructure welcomed the allocations to Northern Ireland Water, which were mentioned in previous debates, but highlighted pressures on the Department to make the capital work actually happen with a challenging resource settlement. We look forward to finding out how we are going to get Northern Ireland Water on to a sustainable basis, because the challenges that we have with waste water in Northern Ireland are acting as a real drag on our economy and on our ability to get ourselves out of COVID-19 and to reboot Northern Ireland.

The Committee for Justice now sounds a little more hopeful about the trajectory of PSNI numbers but has important medium-term concerns about the Prison Service and support for rehabilitation services. There may be other issues on the Civil Service Injury Benefit Scheme that both Justice and Finance will have an interest in; time-limited proposals and issues to do with mental health in particular were put to us. Anybody who is aware of the challenge of PTSD knows that that issue should not be looked at lightly, and, indeed, I think that Justice and Finance will have a close interest in that area.

The Committee for Education welcomed the commitment to a childcare strategy but urged the Department to seek additional funding to address children's mental health waiting lists. The Committee for the Executive Office again sought clarity on the victims' pension scheme.

Much of the feedback from Committees is generally positive and refers to some of the concerns that surfaced at previous debates and are now being addressed, at least in part. That has been helped, as we have seen from comments in the press today, by the more than £6·2 billion that came from our Exchequer to Northern Ireland to help us through the COVID crisis.

All that having been said, the absence of clarity on some of the New Decade, New Approach and confidence-and-supply issues is regrettable. I am thinking particularly of the victims' pension scheme, which, like some of the above, appears as headroom in the Estimates. The Committee noted the departmental assurances, and the Minister's assurances yesterday, that at least £19 million of allocations will certainly follow for those many important expenditure items that have such significant community impacts.

2020-21 was a very unusual year, with a global pandemic challenging many aspects of the governance of Northern Ireland, including the Budget process. There is much that is commendable about the Executive's response, including their support for the professionalism of our vital health service, education and other front-line workers. It is also correct to welcome the additional measures for hard-pressed businesses and families, which, it is hoped, will support the jurisdiction's post-pandemic recovery. However, as I said before, the Budget process, with its debates, Estimates and delays, quite frankly, is not satisfactory, Minister.

The Committee recently received evidence from the Republic of Ireland and Scotland that showed that there is a better way of doing this process. Maybe, on the next occasion when we debate these matters, some of those better ways will already have started to happen. In the meantime, I thank the Committee members for all their hard work so far and, indeed, the Committee Clerk and staff who have helped the Committee. I commend the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill (Northern Ireland) 2021 to the House. I hope that, next time, we will begin to get it right.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I rise again to speak in a Budget debate, as always. Yesterday, I spoke about the direction that the Executive and the Assembly — that today will support, or otherwise, this Budget — can give to our people at this time. It is a time of great trauma, worry and concern for the population's health during a very dangerous and novel pandemic. The restrictions that have been imposed on businesses have had an impact and effect on well-being, enterprise, business and jobs. I fear that we have not yet seen the horror and damage of that fully displayed because of the support mechanisms that the Government have been able to implement, not least the rates holiday that was essential to keep businesses alive and the furlough scheme that has kept jobs alive.

There is a sense, however, that businesses are still tied to a life support mechanism. I fear for the future of some businesses when those life support mechanisms are removed. I believe that there is a duty on all of us, not least the Finance Minister, to keep pressurising and talking to the Government in Westminster about future support mechanisms. It will be needed not for all businesses but for some that are still directly impacted by the restrictions that we placed on them and for those that have been indirectly impacted by restrictions — maybe their markets have fallen through and their customer base is non-existent. There are businesses out there that need support and will continue to need support in the weeks and months ahead. It is very important that we do not rely on the Government's help, coming down from above in Barnett consequentials, to push that money out.

There will come a time when we as an Assembly and an Executive will have to be creative in how we pursue the objectives and goals that will help and enhance business and create jobs — not save them, but create jobs in the future — as we adapt to any new changing environments in the future. There will be changes; I have no doubt about that.

Before I move off the issue of restrictions, let me say this: we as politicians should never be comfortable with restrictions on our daily lives and business. They should never be classed as the default position. We should always strive to remove them, where and when we can, in order to allow people to live their lives and get on with their business. It is clear in my mind that, sometimes, businesses can obstruct or —.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for kindly giving way. I totally agree with what he said about restrictions: when they can be removed, they should be removed, and any barrier to business should be removed to support businesses. They have had a very tough year, as the Member will agree. Does the Member also agree that the Executive's flip-flopping, poor decision-making and uncertainty have led to further difficulties for those businesses and, ultimately, the restrictions being in place for longer?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I welcome the fact that he agrees with me. Yes, there have been times when the Executive have not displayed the logic in some of the decisions that they have taken. It was very harsh on people and business owners when they were restricted but yet could not see the logic or even the fairness in some of the decisions. Moving forward, the Executive will have to consider how to become more transparent and get information out to people in order that they are able to understand the Executive's decisions. With that, there might be more compliance. It is very important going forward that any measures and decisions taken be open, transparent and accountable to the people whom we serve.

It is disheartening that, in this massive document and the blue pages of the Budget Bill, the Finance Minister missed the opportunity — and it is a missed opportunity — to reach out the hand of friendship to everyone in society by celebrating everyone in the country in this centenary year. When I think about Northern Ireland, I think first and foremost about its people, and that is who we should all be celebrating. No matter what your background or political philosophy or what experiences you have had in your life, we should celebrate all our people. I believe that the Finance Minister missed an opportunity to reach out the hand of friendship. He may add in his submission that no Departments made bids. Money was produced from other means to help and assist Departments. Other Departments have put into their own budget streams funds, money and capabilities to celebrate, in some guise or another, the centenary of Northern Ireland, and I welcome all that. The Finance Minister, however, could have reached out a hand to us all by doing something in his Department and making it clear to other Departments that funding would be coming forward to celebrate the diversity of this place, all its people and all Northern Ireland's achievements over the last 100 years. That would have been a lovely gesture to make, but yet we are in a place where we cannot even lay a stone or plant a rose.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

No, I will not give way again to the Member, because he will get time later.

He could not even —.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I ask the Member to resume his seat. I appreciate that, in a Budget debate, there will be a very wide-ranging discussion. The advice that has been provided to me by the Bill Clerks is that, while Members may wish to consider provision and funding allocations for topical issues that have come up for discussion — for example, language provision, confidence and supply, victims' pensions and the allocation of funding for marking the Northern Ireland centenary — prolonged debate on specific projects is likely to be beyond the scope of the Bill. I therefore encourage the Member back towards the scope of the Bill.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Principal Deputy Speaker for that ruling. Of course, I could never be accused of prolonging debate in this place.

[Laughter.]

There are major issues that should concern us all, because they affect us all, including our people and our families. One of those issues is the waste water problem, which the Chair of the Finance Committee alluded to. Just because we cannot see the pipes underneath the ground and what flows there, that does not mean that there are not issues. There are massive issues. They are massive because they affect not only our water treatment plants but development. If we cannot have development in this country, we will not have growth, new homes for our people or new business facilities for our companies, and we will not be able to create jobs from those. That is a massive issue for us. We also need better housing, as I alluded to. When I look through some of the estates and homes that people live in, I despair. When I knock doors, as I go round helping people and doing visits, I sometimes despair at what people have to live in through no fault of their own. We need to be very cognisant of that.

We need to ensure that we can bring in, attract and create opportunities for foreign direct investment in the weeks and months ahead. It will be very challenging and difficult, even to travel and to bring people over. However, we need to strive to do that as soon and as safely as we can, because that is where we will be able to create jobs and assist businesses in providing jobs here. It will also assist the businesses that are here already. That worries me when I look at the Budget Bill. I talked about it yesterday. I do not see direction; I do not see the better place the Minister is directing and leading everyone in Northern Ireland to, including businesses. We need to get to that better placer sooner rather than later, because lives depend on it.

The other big issue that we cannot ignore is our health service. A massive number of people are on waiting lists waiting for operations, which, in some cases, could impact their life greatly but which should not be that big an issue for our health service. That leads to further health problems and complications, which only add to the health bill that we all have to pay for. It is vital that we get moving on with the reforms that are needed for our health service so that we have a health service that all our people, not just the rich, who can afford to go private, can avail themselves of. We do not want a two-tier system, and we do not need a two-tier service. We need a health service that is free at the point of delivery and that will help every person in our communities, no matter what age they are, where on the spectrum they reside or their experience. Those are the massive issues that will affect us all in the days and weeks ahead. We will all have to put our shoulder to the wheel and our hand to the plough. We should not and cannot look back. We need to make sure that we, as an Assembly, and the Executive deliver for the people we are here to represent. That starts with a Programme for Government that is populated and funded by a Budget that will support it.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Ba mhaith liom fosta buíochas a ghabháil leis an Aire as an ráiteas. I, too, thank the Minister for the statement. I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Budget Bill. I will comment on some of the key allocations in the Budget. In the last year, over £3 billion has been spent on COVID support. Thousands of businesses have benefited from schemes such as the localised restrictions support scheme (LRSS), the COVID restrictions business support scheme, the newly self-employed support scheme and grants to businesses in order to support their reopening. That was in addition to a two-year rates holiday for many and an 18% reduction for others, which has been extended for another year.

Huge levels of funding were directed towards hospitals and other front-line services to ensure that they had the resources that they needed to provide care, to tackle the pandemic and to administer the vaccine — an administration that has been so successful. The pandemic has shown us just how vulnerable our healthcare system is, following a decade of budget cuts. There were waiting lists before the pandemic, and we are now at breaking point as those waiting lists extend further and further. There are other long-term structural challenges to our economy in addition to that, including significant regional imbalances. There has been a decline in our productivity and competitiveness, as well as growing levels of income inequality and deprivation. Tory underinvestment has been devastating to all communities in the North of Ireland. A greater spending envelope is required to finance an ambitious programme that will kick-start our economy, encourage investment in the North and lead to recovery.

Despite the limited funding available, there is much to be positive about in this Budget, which I believe provides steps towards recovery. The Minister allocated £300 million towards an economic recovery package, and that is to be welcomed. It is hoped that the voucher scheme will be the stimulus needed not only to encourage shoppers but to allow local high-street businesses to compete with the many multinationals offering goods for sale online.

I am delighted to see £20 million allocated to the Department for Communities for the Job Start scheme, which will assist our young people back into work. None have suffered so much during the pandemic as our young people, whether that is by being restricted from socialising or, in particular, by being restricted by lack of job opportunities that they would have depended on to support them while in college, for example.

I note that £722·5 million of capital DEL — the biggest allocation in years — has gone to the Department for Infrastructure, along with £170 million of reinvestment and reform initiative (RRI) borrowing, which will provide a major boost to our construction industry and will, hopefully, provide many jobs. We need to see delivery of key flagship infrastructure projects, such as the A5 in my constituency, Casement Park in west Belfast, more social housing units and major repair works on rural roads.

Sinn Féin welcomes the £42·8 million allocated to the Department for Communities, which will allow for the continuation of existing welfare mitigations to protect the most vulnerable in our society. Parents in receipt of support for special educational needs (SEN) will welcome the £10 million allocated to the Department of Education to assist with special educational needs provision. The draft Budget also contains a £30·6 million allocation of COVID-19 money to Education to deal specifically with holiday hunger. Children from low-income families who rely on free school meals will greatly appreciate that allocation, which will go a long way to ensuring that parents have the means to feed their children when schools are closed.

The final Budget contains limited opportunity for revenue-raising measures. The regional rate set by the Executive is the only significant revenue-raising power that the Executive hold and represents about 5% of the total draft Budget settlement, which is equal to about £500 million. The lack of any devolved tax power leaves the Executive almost entirely dependent on the Westminster Government to provide the funding needed to pay for our public services. As we have seen over the past 10 years, that leaves us vulnerable to Tory austerity measures, as is particularly evidenced in our health service. The Executive need to look at the further devolution of tax-varying powers as a means to better set out our own priorities for public spending, and I welcome the Minister's confirmation that the fiscal commission will produce a report on that before the end of this mandate.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member, my constituency colleague, for generously giving way. I note that he mentions the importance of revenue raising and the consideration of such in order to provide greater support to and funding for our public services. However, the Member may remember that, under the Ministry of Chris Hazzard, water meters were placed right across the North, more so under his Ministry than under any other. Does the Member believe that that is the route for revenue raising? Is that his party's position?

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Water meters only monitor the amount of water that has been consumed one way or the other. They are not necessarily an imposition of another tax on people.

Given the limited resources at the Minister's disposal, there are some good news items, including the extra allocations for Health and Education. The regional rates freeze and the continued rates holiday will be a vital boost for businesses as we transition into a post-COVID-19 position. Without an improved block grant allocation or the devolution of tax-varying powers, the current Budget represents the best option available to the Executive. Short of constitutional change under the Good Friday Agreement, we are not likely to see any other change in that respect.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Yesterday, we debated the Supply resolution and the Main Estimates. Today, we are debating the Budget Bill. Although I have been an Assembly Member for not quite 18 months, this is the fifth Budget Bill that I have debated, and there were associated Estimates documents with all of those. It seems that we never stop debating financial matters and fiscal matters, but, as I said yesterday, it sometimes seems like the volume of debate is in inverse proportion to the quality of the scrutiny.

Before I go any further, I want to put something on the record. We had a robust debate yesterday, and the Finance Minister took strong exception to my party's scrutinising and challenging. The Finance Minister is entitled to do that. He is entitled to be robust in his response, and I would not expect anything less from him, but no MLA should be prevented from doing their job of scrutiny, in part because, as I will come on to, these are vital subjects and are completely critical to how we do government here. However, they are also pretty dense and difficult, and we have to do a job in unpicking and explaining how our financial reporting and budgeting works to a public who do not always understand these arcane matters. That scrutiny may not always be comfortable for Ministers, but that is how it is supposed to be, I am afraid. Indeed, the soon-to-be new Minister left the Chamber recently, and we have all enjoyed listening to him over the months as the DUP finance spokesperson. It looks like we could be hearing from him as Economy Minister, and I look forward to challenging him robustly on his plans for getting us through COVID and into long-term economic recovery.

As the Chair of the Finance Committee said, the Committee granted accelerated passage to the Budget Bill despite having concerns about the level of scrutiny that it was able to complete. There has been speculation in the past year, during the consideration of nearly all of the five Budget Bills that I mentioned, about whether to grant accelerated passage, including to the three that were required for the financial year 2020-21, which was a year that, I am sure we all agree, was unique and unprecedented. However, I must admit that I had greater reservation about granting accelerated passage to this Budget Bill than I had previously.

There are, as my colleagues and I have laid out during previous debates, genuine concerns about budgeting this year and about the robustness of the scrutiny that we have been able to apply. We have talked at length about the lack of a visible strategy and, in particular, about the absence of a vision for addressing our waiting list crisis.

I will say it again: one in four of our citizens is on a waiting list. I was glad to hear my Finance Committee colleague Mr McHugh acknowledge and recognise the need for us to have a long-term financial plan that addresses our waiting list crisis. As well as that, we need a strategy that is matched to our long-term economic recovery from COVID and to improvement in our public services, because we have a waiting list crisis not just in our health service but in special educational needs and housing.

12.45 pm

I will move on from the questions of strategy that I have talked about in recent debates, because there are also questions of clarity. As I said, this Budget Bill is the fifth Budget Bill that I have debated in less than 18 months as an MLA. We are averaging a Budget Bill a little more than once every two months. That is in addition to the formal Budget statements, monitoring updates and Supply motions that we have debated. It should be acknowledged that most of those Budget Bills have happened in the unique and unprecedented circumstances of the COVID crisis. Others have talked, sometimes with more than a little political or constitutional topspin, shall we say, about the allocations that were required. There were particular circumstances in the financial year 2020-21, but, truth be told, everyone in the Chamber will acknowledge that we slightly lost the run of ourselves in scrutinising spending over the past year. The sheer volume of fiscal events and financial reporting has, I am afraid, made it difficult for MLAs to offer the public a robust service when scrutinising how money is spent. I have concerns about the Budget statement and the lack of strategy that were presented a month or two back and that we debated a couple of weeks back. The truth is that I do not lay all the blame at the Finance Minister's door. We need to look at this structurally, and I will talk later about the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill that the Assembly will debate in the weeks to come.

Why is scrutiny by MLAs so important? As I have said repeatedly, it is because, in the absence of an agreed and fully rolled-out Programme for Government that is being delivered on across the Executive, our Budget process is the Executive's de facto strategic decision-making tool. Yes, COVID, the end of the Brexit transition period and the beginning of our new arrangements have meant that we have had a unique year. At every point this year, however — by "this year", I mean the financial year 2021-22 more than the exceptional and unique 2020-21 — it has been next to impossible to point to a single, consolidated statement of financial priorities and allocations and scrutinise it.

The initial draft Executive Budget published in January has long been superseded by events and further allocations. The final Budget that we scrutinised a couple of weeks back was not really the final Budget, because there were further allocations made on, I believe, 1 April and 27 April that were not incorporated into the tables in the final Budget document but are incorporated into the Budget (No. 2) Bill that we will vote on today. I am sure that the Minister will say, and I accept, that that is a result of commitments not being confirmed by the Treasury or the Northern Ireland Office and of late allocations or allocations coming through at irregular times: I get that. All of us, however, from the Minister down have the job of communicating better our priorities and how we are budgeting for them. Additional headroom designed to accommodate further allocations or reprioritisations is included in the Estimates that we debated yesterday and in the Budget (No. 2) Bill that we will vote on today.

The issue that we should consider — it is a perennial subject, but it has become particularly sharp and acute over the past year — is that the constantly moving target of our Budget position presents a real challenge when we endeavour to scrutinise how we spend money and to give clarity to the public that we are delivering on their priorities. What of the Financial Reporting Bill that we are due to debate in the coming weeks? It is a modest first step in seeking to align how moneys are reported. I am afraid that it will not go anywhere near what we need in order to offer clarity, consistency and information to the public about how budgeting is done. I am happy to be corrected, but it in fact relates to a relatively technical piece of accountancy clarification.

We need the two new fiscal structures that have been announced by the Minister to mark a proper step change in how we do budgeting. Many of us have engaged already with the fiscal council, which, I am glad to say, has serious people appointed to it. Robert Chote, formerly of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), is the chair. The fiscal commission has also been announced. It would be good to hear more about the fiscal commission. I am aware that it is beginning the process of engagement, but I am keen to see its terms of reference and to understand what it will look at —.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. I am sorry, but I ask the Member to resume his seat. This is the debate on the Budget (No. 2) Bill. There will be other occasions on which to discuss fiscal responsibility legislation and the work of the fiscal commission. I know that there is generally a wide remit in Budget debates, but I ask Members to get back to the content of the Budget (No. 2) Bill.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. Who could blame me for trying to vary things a bit? It was simply an act of courtesy and humanity to the Minister, who, I am sure, is fed up hearing me say the same things over and over again. I decided to offer a little commentary on the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill and the Fiscal Council.

Anyway, I have made my point: we need to see a step change in how we report. It is critical to the Budget (No. 2) Bill. I agree with the previous contributor — indeed, I am pleased to hear Sinn Féin talk more and more about this — on the need for us to have a proper look at how we raise revenue. That is completely related to the Budget (No. 2) Bill, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker.

There are always allocations and individual bits of expenditure that we welcome, but we should not kid ourselves that we have landed anything like a properly thought-out, strategic Budget since we returned. We also critically need to see much more in the weeks ahead — I hope that we do — on a better joined-up approach to how we not only scrutinise budgets but present them to the public and explain what our priorities are. I very much hope that the new institutions that are being created can help us to do that.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Before I call Mr Chris Lyttle, the Chair of the Education Committee, I remind Members that the sitting will be suspended at 1.00 pm for the Business Committee to meet. I am not suggesting to Mr Lyttle that he has to finish before 1.00 pm, but he should anticipate being interrupted during his remarks.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

This is one of the rare occasions that I have quite a lengthy speech, unfortunately, but I will do my best.

I welcome the opportunity to speak at the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill as Chairperson of the Committee for Education. I take the opportunity to continue to pay tribute to the teaching and non-teaching staff and students across Northern Ireland for the innovative and courageous way in which they are responding to the COVID pandemic and to ask that the Executive ensure that they are supported by this and future Budget Bills.

The COVID pandemic, the financial crisis in public services and the unreformed Budget process have made the monitoring of in-year allocations in 2020-21 extremely challenging. The timings to which the Assembly is being asked to work represent a budgetary process that is inadequate for proper transparency and scrutiny in any circumstances, but particularly so when the education and well-being of our young people has been placed under exceptional strain.

A draft Budget and final Budget had issued by the time that the Education Committee was briefed by the Department of Education this year. Those budgets were, however, subject to pending authorisations and approvals of a myriad of additional funding lines. The Finance Department had not yet issued guidance and a timetable to govern the in-year monitoring process. In those circumstances, the Education Minister overcommitted on the opening Education budget by £81.2 million. I understand that £64.7 million of that funding has now been received and that the remaining £16.5 million relates to confidence-and-supply funding, which is anticipated to be funded at the June monitoring. Despite the Minister's decision to overcommit on his opening budget, pressures of approximately £146 million, excluding COVID-19 pressures, have been assessed as remaining across the education sector in 2021-22: £146 million. The Education Department has increasingly relied on in-year allocations secured via in-year monitoring rounds and will again engage closely with the Department of Finance throughout the year to continue to assess those pressures and to bid for additional funding as required.

In line with previous years, the Department is relying on further in-year allocations to fund children's education. In April, the Education Committee raised concerns about how it could carry out effective scrutiny in those circumstances. The Committee has also consistently expressed its concern about the consequences of the one-year, as opposed to five-year, Budget framework.

On 19 May, the Finance Department issued its in-year monitoring guidance. I do not doubt that Education officials have worked and communicated as best they could with the Department of Finance in the in-year process, but the passage of a Budget Bill is supposed to be predicated on meaningful, full and timely consultation to allow Assembly insight and influence. In fact, the Vote on Account that has taken place allows the Executive to get on with their spending proposals, while Committees attempt to mine the granular detail from bundled spending programmes. That model of Budget scrutiny makes us one of the few legislative bodies in the OECD countries that fail to authorise spending plans prior to the start of the Budget year. I hope that, in the next mandate, the Executive will bring the Assembly in from the sidelines of public spending decisions. The new Fiscal Council must play an important role. I will not dwell on that point, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, but perhaps the Minister will reference that matter in his remarks later, within the warning that you have given. I know that he also recognises the need for reform.

In March, I referenced the Committee's priorities with regard to special educational needs; recovery initiatives and mental health support for pupils coming out of lockdown; and issues of digital equity that have been raised by the pandemic context of blended and remote learning. The Education Committee was seriously concerned about governance and value for money in the provision of special educational needs support by the Education Authority (EA). Although the Education Authority's budget has not been finalised, the Department assisted with providing some greater detail. Hopefully, when the full reform plan and budget have been agreed, we will have greater insight and security on the arrangements to ensure that there is compliance with commitments in the Special Educational Needs and Disability (Northern Ireland) Order 2005.

The Education Committee welcomes the £28·3 million that has been made available to the Department of Education to meet pressures that relate to recovery, support and re-engagement for children and young people but will monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of that investment. Education Committee members have expressed serious concern about the extent of controlled assessments and, effectively, examination of so many pupils on their return to school and the lack of monitoring of the impact of that approach on the mental health recovery of children and young people.

Twenty million pounds of confidence-and-supply resource funding for deprivation and £10 million for mental health were anticipated but not confirmed at the time of the Committee's briefing. However, I understand that the Minister has accessed £5 million of that for mental health and counselling initiatives. The Education Committee has urged the Education Minister to seek further funding of that provision, given the waiting list for child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS), which is already at 400 pupils.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

That is quite a good point at which to stop.

The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The first item of business when we return will be questions to the Minister of Finance. The debate on the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill will resume at 2.45 pm. The sitting is, by leave, suspended.

The debate stood suspended. The sitting was suspended at 12.59 pm.

On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McGlone] in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Finance

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

1. Mr McCrossan asked the Minister of Finance to outline his plans to create more jobs for young people in the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS). (AQO 2175/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

My Department is committed to creating more jobs for young people in the Civil Service. To enable younger people and other under-represented groups to apply for posts, NICS HR in my Department has led high-volume open recruitment exercises, rather than internal promotion exercises that confined applications to existing civil servants in the grade below the vacancy, which were previously the norm. I recently launched a number of external recruitment campaigns, including one for more than 500 executive officer posts. These campaigns specifically targeted young people, using social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat and advertising on digital platforms such as Spotify and Dax and on radio stations known to appeal to younger markets.

Later this month, I will be launching a student placement scheme which will give over 100 students the opportunity to work across a range of areas in the Civil Service. As well as giving students an opportunity to develop their skills and experience, it will encourage them to consider the Civil Service as a potential career path in the future. In addition, work to expand the number of Civil Service apprenticeships is ongoing, with two apprentice recruitment exercises for procurement and civil engineering now live. Further Civil Service apprenticeships are under development. We are also developing a new management trainee scheme aimed at graduates.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his answer. People in my constituency of West Tyrone want to know about the Connect2 regional hub in Omagh. Can you confirm if it will be open in 2022? Can you guarantee that there will be high-value jobs for people in the area? Has any consideration been given to such a hub for the Strabane area?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

There is scheduled engagement, and, as the Member correctly identified, Omagh was directed as one of the 10 areas being looked at first. That was based on a number of factors, including an assessment of where people travel from to work in headquarters in Belfast. Those are all moving at different speeds. I suspect that Downpatrick will be the first one on board. After that, they will roll out. I will be very happy to get him the estimated time frame for Omagh.

Relating it to the first question, traditionally, people who live in border areas in constituencies such as mine or the Member's did not apply for such jobs as the prospect of driving five days a week into Belfast was off-putting. This gives people the opportunity to work for a number of days in a regional hub, and therefore makes the prospect of that type of career more attractive. They will be at whatever value people who get the jobs in the area —. What we are providing is the base to allow them to have a more flexible working approach. In time, that will change the make-up of the Civil Service, particularly for women, who would struggle with that amount of time travelling in and out, given that the burden of responsibility in the home often falls to them, unfortunately, but also for younger people and people from more peripheral areas who traditionally would not have been seen in the Civil Service.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

One thing that the previous permanent secretary of the Department of Finance said before she left was that there was a lack of a fast stream for bringing high-quality graduates into the Northern Ireland Civil Service to change it. In fact, I do not think that we have had a fast stream programme for nearly a decade. Is the Minister considering introducing a fast stream and, if not, why not?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member will know, there is an Audit Office report on capability and capacity in the Civil Service, and one of the suggested responses to that is the idea of a fast stream to make sure that you get the right people in the right place at the right time. There is clearly a need for our Civil Service to be much more agile, flexible and representative of the community that we all collectively represent and that it works for. I am open to any of those ideas. I know that it is something that the previous permanent secretary was keen on.

We are developing a reform process for the Civil Service acting on the back of a number of reports, including that Audit Office report. Those objectives are ones that we will want to have to the fore when we are developing new ideas and new ways of dealing with the Civil Service in the time ahead.

Nicola Brogan (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his answers. I welcome the information about the regional hub in Omagh. That will be very welcome to people in Omagh and across West Tyrone. Will the Minister outline what steps he is taking to ensure that there are job opportunities for those furthest from the labour market?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Civil Service, as an employer, is supporting the Job Start scheme that the Department for Communities recently launched. That is open to all employers and provides paid work placement opportunities lasting from six to nine months for young people aged 16 to 24 who are at risk of long-term unemployment. The NICS HR in my Department is supporting the Department for Communities as it pilots the scheme, with a specific focus on people aged 16 to 24 with disabilities, in preparation for rolling it out across the Civil Service in due course.

As well as offering opportunities across Departments to young people with disabilities, it is proposed to broaden the scheme to include other young people at risk of long-term unemployment, such as those leaving the care system. The expansion of a number of apprenticeship schemes in the Civil Service will also be important in supporting those furthest from the job market and will provide an entry route into the Civil Service. My Department is committed to expanding the number of apprenticeship schemes in the Civil Service in order to provide an alternative career entry route into the Civil Service to help to ensure that it is reflective of the society it serves.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Minister referred to the Northern Ireland Audit Office's report 'Capacity and Capability in the Northern Ireland Civil Service', which was recently considered by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). It highlights the fact that we have an older workforce in the Northern Ireland Civil Service. Is the Minister satisfied that all actions are being taken for succession planning and recruitment for those vacancies so that we have a Civil Service that has the right skills and capacity to go forward?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The report highlighted a number of areas, and that could well be considered to be one of them. There is a retirement policy in the Civil Service that allows people to partially retire but to stay in work for potentially an open-ended number of years in that post. I have asked people to look at how that is being implemented. There are legal rights when people are availing themselves of early retirement. Whether that fits in with the work scheme in Departments is something that line managers and permanent secretaries need to look at again, and I have asked for some advice on that.

There is a big improvement exercise there. Let us not forget that the Civil Service has done remarkable work, particularly over the last year, across a whole range of Departments. However, a need has been identified, as you say, to get the right skills, balance and age profile into the Civil Service. That is a significant undertaking but is one that we are prepared and, indeed, keen to embrace. As the Department with overall responsibility for the Civil Service, we will want other Departments to come along that route with us.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Civil Service has been without a permanent head for almost a year, and now we have a proposition of a twin-headed approach. Does the Minister think that the absence of a head of the Civil Service has diminished the strategic direction of and leadership in the Civil Service, and will the twin-headed approach worsen or improve that?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I do not think so, to be quite honest. Regardless of what strategic direction and approach was being developed in the Executive or, indeed, across the Civil Service, we were all in response mode this year. The priority was responding to the pandemic getting support to people who needed it and to the health service. The priority was very much focused on the day-to-day needs over the last year or 15 months.

A twin-headed role is not being developed. The aim is to have someone to head up the Executive Office as a distinct Department so that the head of the Civil Service can have that more strategic approach across all Departments, all civil servants in the public sector and the arm's-length bodies. In many ways, it allows for that more strategic approach rather than for the day-to-day management of the Executive Office. That is being passed down to a newly created permanent secretary post.

My perspective on it is that it will be helpful for what he suggests is required. I will go back to the point in the debate this morning, and I am sure we will continue with it this afternoon, about getting into a strategic approach with a multi-annual Budget and Programme for Government outcome. That is the type of work I would want the head of the Civil Service to focus on rather than the day-to-day management of the Executive Office.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

2. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister of Finance what work his Department is undertaking to develop multi-year Budgets to assist longer-term health transformation. (AQO 2176/17-22)

Cara Hunter (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

12. Ms Hunter asked the Minister of Finance when he will bring forward multi-year Budget proposals in draft, including in relation to health transformation. (AQO 2186/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

A LeasCheann Comhairle, with your permission, I will answer question 2 and question 12 together.

Multi-year Budgets are essential to help to plan services not just in health but right across the public sector.

The Health Minister and I have both called on the British Government to provide the Executive with a multi-year budget. I raised that with the Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, when I was in London last month, and he indicated his intention to announce a multi-year spending review later this year. On that basis, the Executive will shortly begin preparations for their multi-year draft Budget. Budgets are agreed by all Ministers, not just the Finance Minister. However, I will argue for priority to continue to be given to health to assist with the immediate waiting crisis and to fund longer-term transformation.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his response. Does he agree that health will need to be a high priority for budgetary allocations in future to properly address the horrendous waiting lists and to deliver the health transformation that is so badly needed, which may mean a tightening of the purse strings for less important political projects?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

For some time now, going right back to previous Executives and the adoption of the Bengoa report, we have agreed that we would try to take the politics out of health and that we would have a collective approach across the Executive. In that sense, it did not matter who the Health Minister was; it was a collective Executive approach. We have endeavoured to continue that through very challenging times. You will see that Health has received over half the available revenue budget. Of course, in a standstill rollover Budget situation, that is not what Health needs; it needs quite a lot more just to stand still. However, we have been able to supplement that with COVID spending, and the Executive will have a discussion in the not too distant future about waiting lists to see whether there is further in-year work that we can do to bring focus to and support for what is needed.

I have given the Health Minister an additional £250 million of COVID money this year for rebuilding the health service coming out of the pandemic, £40 million of which, I think, has been allocated by the Health Department to waiting lists, and I am hopeful that that will help. However, we know that, in the longer-term transformation process, Health will need recurrent funding that is guaranteed into the future in a multi-year Budget scenario. That is the place that we all want to get to.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Does this year's Budget provide the Health Department with funding that will allow it to progress a much needed transformation?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Executive have prioritised the Department of Health. As I said, it receives almost 50% of the Budget. We met all the COVID-19 bids and set aside funding in the Budget, pending a Health assessment. We subsequently allocated further funding in the recent exercise in May. The allocation has provided some £6·4 billion to the Department of Health, including £380 million for COVID. Broken down, that includes £25 million for COVID-19 vaccine deployment, £105 million for ongoing operational response and £250 million for rebuilding. As I said, the Department has decided to use £40 million of that for waiting lists.

We are all in agreement about what Health needs; I think that that was the point of the question. We need the ability to plan over a number of years, certainty about resources and recurrent funding to employ the people needed to see the transformation of the health system through. The Executive are committed to that. We can only hope that the arguments that we made to the Prime Minister in the recent meeting that the deputy First Minister attended and to the Chancellor about the British Government resourcing the rebuilding of the health service coming out of the pandemic will bear fruit for us.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Minister, we might not get the Treasury's multi-year spending review until close to the end of the year. If we are then waiting for a process for a multi-annual Budget in the spring, that will, with the best will in the world, be caught up in our political cycle here and there will be an election. Would it be better for all the parties here, led by you as Finance Minister along with the Health Minister, to agree on what is needed before the spending review and then bring it back to the Assembly immediately afterwards? Other Departments can be filled in afterwards.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I spoke to my Department's Budget team just this week to kick-start the discussion about how we plan and prepare for a multi-year Budget. We have to begin that preparation, and I am hopeful that the Executive can do that over the summer, beginning in early summer, to start to look at the priorities in the time ahead. As the Member correctly says, we will not know what the funding envelope is. We hope that that will come early in the autumn, but, last year, it did not come until 25 November.

Nonetheless, the Executive have to prioritise, and that is probably a more useful exercise in the scenario where we are coming to the end of the mandate and no party or Minister knows whether they will be back or what party will hold which portfolio in the Executive. It is much more of a blank-sheet approach to agreeing priorities across the five parties that make up the Executive and trying to set a course ahead. Hopefully, we will then get the Budget as part of the comprehensive spending review announcement to match our ambition in that regard.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Minister, bearing in mind what you have said, including about multi-year Budgets and the rest of it, can we say that the threat of top-slicing the Department of Health's budget is no longer on the table?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member knows, I said that, if we were to end up paying the entirety of the victims' payments — we are still in discussion and dispute with Treasury on that — one scenario would be to take the money from all Departments. We have created the headroom for sufficient funds for this year to cover that cost from the Executive, but the Member will understand that the Executive are in agreement that it is not our responsibility to cover that cost.

In recent times, a discussion has been prompted on immediate action on waiting lists. One Minister had offered to reduce her budget to meet any challenges with the waiting lists. The Executive could decide to take that approach, although that would be putting money into Health, rather than taking money from it. However, Health needs recurrent funding. It needs money not just in this year's Budget but going forward so that it can recruit to tackle the waiting lists and for broader transformation.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

One of the reasons that we have such horrendous waiting lists in Northern Ireland is the number of vacancies. I do not think that, if we were paying our Health and Social Care (HSC) staff better, we would have such a big problem. You will be aware of Unison's campaign for all Health and Social Care staff to receive an immediate £2,000 a year pay increase. Obviously, the money for that would need to come from the UK Treasury, so what conversations have you had with it on that?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We have had broad conversations about providing the necessary support to rebuild the health service. The Prime Minister has been hosting discussions across the devolved areas on what needs to be done in the time ahead, and the deputy First Minister firmly put rebuilding the health service on the agenda with him. Some of us complained about the ongoing cuts at the time, which saw people leaving their jobs and being asked to work longer hours for less pay. Inevitably, that led to some leaving the service, others not wishing to join and a difficulty in recruiting. We need to get sufficient resource into rebuilding, and that will include the issue of wages and fair working hours for health staff.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

3. Mr Chambers asked the Minister of Finance what progress has been made to align financial monitoring and reporting across Executive Departments. (AQO 2177/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

In December 2016, the Executive agreed to the commencement of a review of the financial process to simplify financial reporting and better align budgets, Estimates and accounts. Since that time, a project team in my Department has been working with colleagues across all other Departments to implement that review. While it was initially planned that the changes would be implemented in 2020-21, that was, unfortunately, delayed, first, by the lack of a working Assembly and the inability to progress legislation and, subsequently, by the coronavirus pandemic. Implementation is now planned for 2022-23. Legislation is in progress to enable that implementation, and the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill was introduced in the Assembly on 1 June.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. In his conversations with the independent fiscal council, what recommendations did it make on reporting standards? Will he commit to following OECD standards?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The fiscal council is not long in place. It is engaged in consultation and discussion with various interested parties and should be with the Finance Committee this week. It has not yet made recommendations to me on the outcome of that. I expect it to consider enhancing its terms of reference. Essentially, we gave the council start-up terms of reference and allowed it, as an independent body, to examine the scope of what it wanted to deal with. I expect that it will turn its attention to reporting and a range of other matters relating to the sustainability of our finances and the analysis of all of that. However, I am not being prescriptive.

If it has its independence and if it has engaged in a consultation exercise, I will expect it to come back to us to tell us what it intends to do and what recommendations it intends to make in the longer term.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, staying with the fiscal council, an issue that I mentioned in the debate prior to lunchtime, I ask you in what way do you think that the fiscal council will improve financial reporting.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I said, the council is yet to fully confirm its own terms of reference as to how it will work. Our intent in establishing it has been for it to assist in scrutinising the processes and decisions involved in the Executive's management of the Budget. That would mean that it will be interested in the review of the financial process, how that will work and how that will assist in changing the reporting to the Assembly and to the wider public. That is a discussion that we have had not just today but many times in Budget debates here. As you know, the fiscal council is an independent body, so it is not for me to say how it may approach that task or how involved it may be in the oversight of that work, but I welcome anything that brings transparency to the financial processes.

Pat Catney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Lagan Valley)

Minister, there is £500 million of COVID funding allocated for 2021-22. What guarantees do you have that the money can be reallocated and will be?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

With the COVID money, we made an initial allocation to the Department of Health. We waited on Health to bring forward its assessment for the year before we allocated some of the rest of it, because it had first shout on need. Once we got that, we were then able to meet the bids from other Departments. Departments make bids for that money on the basis that they can spend it, and we will monitor that as the year goes on. If it is not being spent on what it was intended for, it will have to be surrendered and then redistributed at a later stage in the year. We proved last year, with a much more significant amount of COVID funding, that our Department and all the other Departments were able to spend out that money before the end of the financial year. There had been quite a degree of scepticism around the Chamber in January and February that that would be achieved, but, nonetheless, it was. I therefore do not anticipate the money not being spent in some useful fashion to assist us in our COVID response.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

4. Ms Bradshaw asked the Minister of Finance how civil servants who have been working from home during the pandemic will be recompensed for costs incurred. (AQO 2178/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

A Civil Service-wide survey has indicated that respondents in most Departments have made financial savings as a result of working from home: for example, from a reduction in travel costs. Nevertheless, employees who incur additional costs may be reimbursed by the Civil Service for costs incurred in the making of business calls on a personal mobile phone or home landline; additional home broadband costs, whether those be installation costs or increased data charges required solely for work purposes; and desk costs of up to £100. IT equipment and chairs are already provided by the Civil Service. Staff who have incurred additional costs can also claim tax relief in line with HMRC rules. HMRC publishes guidance on how to claim tax relief on any homeworking expenses incurred that are not reimbursed by the employer. In October 2020, HMRC set up a new dedicated working-from-home microservice, recognising that the tax years 2020-21 and 2021-22 are different and thereby making claiming tax relief quick and easy.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister, for your response. I have been contacted about this, so I am conscious that the communication around it may not be as clear as you in the Department would like. To echo what you said earlier, many of the staff have been working so hard during the pandemic. Are you going to introduce any special recognition scheme for civil servants?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Executive agreed to support a recognition scheme by way of a £500 payment for healthcare staff, and we have endeavoured in our pay awards for civil servants not to follow the model that was adopted in London, where they went for a 1% pay increase for healthcare staff and a freeze for all other public servants. We have introduced an increase over two years for the Civil Service. Of course, we are on a very fixed budget, and that is very challenging across all Departments. We had to balance what pay increase we could give against what was affordable across the Departments and other demands on public services. We are keen to support our public servants where we can, and we do recognise the efforts that have been made, particularly over the past year. We have provided an enormous amount of IT support to people. The general feedback on that blend of working from home and coming in has been very positive. Sickness levels have dropped and productivity has gone up. We want to ensure that people have a good working experience and feel well supported, financially and through what other measures we can provide. If there is a communication issue with that, I am happy to raise that with the Department and make sure that it is looked at.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, will you clarify where employees who have incurred extra costs can find out more about what support is available to them?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I said to the Member who asked the previous question, if that is an issue, I am happy to clarify it. The guidance in relation to homeworking expenses for Civil Service staff is available on the COVID-19 hub on the Department of Finance's website. I suggest that people go there in the first instance. If we find that there is some breakdown in that communication, I am happy to have it looked at to ensure that people understand what they are entitled to.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

We know that blended and flexible working is particularly welcome for those who have young families or caring responsibilities. What is the Minister doing to close the gender gap among civil servants?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I appreciate that the Member may not have been in the Chamber earlier but, on the first question, we had a fairly lengthy discussion about reform of the Civil Service, attracting new people and enhancing the working experience. Through the Connect2 hubs that we talked about, we can employ people living in peripheral areas such as Derry or the other border areas who, otherwise, would not have been attracted to working five days a week in a headquarters in Belfast. Travelling is particularly a disincentive for women who bear the burden, unfortunately, of managing family life. Civil Service employment can become more attractive if we present those different options.

While the Civil Service has performed heroically over the last year, a number of steps tell us that there is a need for substantial change and greater diversity in gender, age profile, disability and ethnic minorities. There is certainly much room for improvement, and we have a range of measures that we hope to bring forward to try to achieve that.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

5. Mr Muir asked the Minister of Finance for his assessment of the cost of division on public finances. (AQO 2179/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

A report by Deloitte, in 2007, estimated the cost of division at £1·5 billion. In 2016, the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre estimated the cost of division at a lower figure, between £403 million and £833 million. The report outlined the significant complexity in the cost of delivering services in the North, costs that cannot be solely attributed to the context of a divided society. For example, delivering services in such a small region means that we do not benefit from economies of scale. The report also found that while, on average, the cost of public service provision tends to be higher than in Britain, across most areas, the costs here typically fall within the range of costs identified in other regions. The one exception to that is the cost of policing.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his response. As the Minister is aware, during the multitude of Budget debates, it is often mentioned that we need to provide much more finance to deal with our waiting list crisis and for other services, and that we need to consider revenue raising. Does the Minister not agree that none of those arguments will carry any weight or credibility until we are prepared to look at our own finances and tackle the cost of division in Northern Ireland?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I have said, it is not a straightforward issue. There is a complexity in determining what can actually be attributed to the cost of division. Of course, one of the ways that we can deal with that is to deal with the division itself: to try to reduce the divisions in society and the policing costs that are associated with it, which are significantly higher here than in other areas, and encourage the reconciliation process that is necessary.

We have an ambition to try to reduce that, but it is an ambition for society not just for the public purse, albeit it has that knock-on effect on the public purse. Obviously, we strive to do that as best we can. The Executive Office leads on some of these reconciliation measures. We have been challenged, this year, in providing the level of support that it wanted to go into those programmes and projects. Nonetheless, it is incumbent on all of us to try to heal the divisions in society, promote reconciliation and, thereby, reduce the costs of sustaining division.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

That ends the period for listed questions. We now move to 15 minutes of topical questions.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

T1. Mr Carroll asked the Minister of Finance for an update on plans to review, change or amend procurement legislation to include human rights clauses. (AQT 1401/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We are looking at a range of measures. As the Member will probably know from listening to me previously in the Chamber, we reconstituted the Procurement Board and brought on practitioners, including people from the social enterprise sector. We have been engaging with the community and voluntary sector. There is a sector in my Department that looks at ethical procurement from which we will seek advice. One of the early objectives that we have set ourselves — the Procurement Board will meet tomorrow to consider a paper on this — is around social value, which is about not just job creation but environmental impact, ethical procurement and human rights in the supply chain. The further you get from where we are, the more difficult some of those things are to measure, with companies that supply companies that supply companies before they eventually end up with us. Nonetheless, there is an attempt to improve what we do in terms of not just value for money, which is important, but our responsibility, as an organisation that spends £3 billion a year, to make sure that we procure in a way that supports human rights, ethical procurement and environmental and social value objectives.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he agree that it is immoral for the Executive and Departments to take contracts or services from states with terrible human rights records and breaches? Will he work to end that practice by changing legislation? Is that area included in the social value method that he talked about?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We will look to legislation to underpin social value. We are trying to get procurement policy right in the first instance. Part of the change that we made with the Procurement Board was to make the adoption of policy an Executive adoption, which gives it an imprimatur across all Departments. My Department's objective is to advise other Departments on ethical procurement. As I said, the further down the supply chain you get across the world, the more difficult it sometimes is to get accurate information, but that should not stop us trying. Where we have a sense that either companies or countries are involved in anti-human rights or unethical behaviour, we should consider very strongly our willingness to spend money on their products.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

T2. Mr Beggs asked the Minister of Finance, in light of the fact that, during the past year, new working practices have emerged, with people working from home, what assessment there has been of the effectiveness of civil servants when working from home and the corresponding potential for savings given the reduction in office requirements. (AQT 1402/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Member hits on something that was a developing question but, as with a lot of other things, has now been accelerated somewhat by the pandemic. What was a growing practice became a necessity for a time, which, obviously, has given us an opportunity.

As I referred to in a previous answer, there has been an assessment of the Civil Service survey that was carried out of people's experience of working from home and the costs associated with it. The response has been very positive; people have enjoyed the ability to work from home. I cannot speak for all Departments, but there is a broad sense that sickness levels have gone down and productivity has certainly gone up in certain areas. We are looking to a more blended model, which is a mixture of working from home and the availability of the Connect2 regional hubs around the North that I have talked about previously. That will reduce travel time and the carbon footprint. We have to consider the knock-on effect of that on the Civil Service estate. That does not mean the wholesale shutting up of offices in Belfast, but it allows us to consider how to rationalise the estate. The cost of the estate for each Department is a significant one. I hope that there will be savings in the longer term in that regard. It is an exercise that we are well into now. We need to assess the impact on the estate and what the office requirements will be, and we need to try to minimise the costs so that that money can be used for public services instead.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

With that change in working practice, there has been a reduction in commuting levels and pressure on our roads.

Will there be a review of all new roads development in order to ensure that it is justified by the developing traffic levels and to enable additional moneys to be directed towards green infrastructure in our towns and cities so that people can walk and cycle to their work more often?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

That is a question for the Minister for Infrastructure. As I am sure that the Member knows, the business case for any significant road-building exercise is based on the volume of traffic and whether that reduces in the same pattern. While traffic is not back up to anywhere near the levels that it was pre pandemic, people like me who commute daily have noticed a significant increase in traffic over the past number of months.

The objective of changing working arrangements is to reduce travel time and carbon footprint. We should, of course, encourage more people on to public transport, and investment in green infrastructure, as the Member said, points to a better way forward.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

T3. Ms Bunting asked the Minister of Finance what engagement his Department has had with the Department for Communities to ensure that the necessary funding is available to progress the subregional stadia programme for soccer. (AQT 1403/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We discussed the Budget process with the Department for Communities pre Christmas when we were waiting, and after we set the initial draft Budget, when we asked what the Department's requirement were. A standstill Budget scenario, particularly for the Department of Communities, which is a big Department with a lot of staff and costs, means, in effect, a reduction. While we had some increase in our capital budget and we gave some Departments an increase in capital budget, I am sure that not all got everything that they wanted or would like to have had brought forward.

I do not have specific figures for the subregional stadia programme on what was bid for or what was received. That may be a question for the Department for Communities. Certainly, there was an increased capital budget this time, and it is up to Departments, when they receive that, to prioritise it accordingly.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

The Minister will be aware that local football clubs have waited some 10 years to see the benefits of the programme. Given that sport plays a huge role in the general well-being of our whole society, does he agree that it is time to make vital capital investment in sport and, in so doing, benefit the construction sector?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Yes, I am all for it. That is why, overall, there is disappointment with the Budget allocation that we got. There was a ray of hope with the capital allocation, which was an improvement, and I am all for putting that into sport. I am a sports fan. In the couple of years when the Executive were not functioning, I represented some of those clubs that tried to access the subregional fund. There was difficulty in distributing it because permanent secretaries were not prepared to take decisions that they thought that Ministers should take. I would love to see that on the ground. I know the benefits that it brings not only for construction jobs but for the much broader benefit to the community and younger people in particular from access to and involvement in sport. I am a keen supporter of all that, and I hope that the Department has sufficient capital to invest all that it wants in supporting sport in the time ahead.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

Mr Catney is not in his place for the next question. Anois iarraim ar John O'Dowd. I call John O'Dowd.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

T5. Mr O'Dowd asked the Minister of Finance whether there is any way that the Executive or the Department of Finance could offer further support to those businesses that, regardless of the number of premises that they have, are judged to have a single premises, given that the grants that have been provided to businesses over the past 15 months have been a lifeline, not only to the businesses but to their employees, in keeping roofs over heads and paying bills. (AQT 1405/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We have had a number of engagements with what are known as the multiples. It has been very difficult. It has proved difficult in other jurisdictions, and different Administrations have come up with different schemes to provide support for them. It was not possible, with the time frame for rolling out the previous scheme, to include them. At the lower level of premises in particular, it is complex to differentiate them from other schemes. They do not all come under the one banner. They are not all the same business franchise; there are multiples within that. We have asked Land and Property Services (LPS) to look at the possibility of devising a scheme later in the year, once we are clear of all the schemes that LPS is running.

We will talk to representatives from the multiples in the next week or so to advise them of what we intend to do. I am hopeful that we will be able to devise a scheme that will provide some level of support for them, because they are one of the groups that, while they have had support for one business premise, have not had support for the rest due to owning a range. Therefore, they are one of the groups that have been left out in that sense, and we are determined to do something, if we can, to support them.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

That news will be very welcome to those affected. The £10,000 and £25,000 grants that have been announced will hopefully be issued this month to businesses that missed out on some of the grants and will also be very welcome. However, there is another group. Despite the economic downturn, there have still been businesses that opened up in the last year. Those businesses may not have been able to avail themselves of any of those grants. Will there be support coming forward for those businesses?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The businesses currently availing themselves of the £5,000 and £10,000 top-up grants were able to open, but it was a recognition that footfall had been down, for example shops that were dependent on office workers to be in the vicinity to keep them ticking over. Those grants were specifically for businesses that did not get localised restrictions support (LRS) or the Department for the Economy's similar scheme, and the £5,000 and £10,000 top-up grants were made available to them.

Of course, the retail and hospitality sectors, and quite a lot of other sectors, will enjoy another full year of rates holiday as well. We also have the economic package that has been supported for the Department for the Economy, including the high street voucher, which will hopefully have a stimulant effect in terms of people shopping in local retail. There is a range of measures, and we recognise that all of that will not, and never could, replace lost earnings for people over the course of this pandemic. However, it is trying to target the finances we were given — limited as they were — as effectively as we can to try to keep people alive in the time ahead until they can get back to full trading and recover their businesses.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

T6. Mr O'Toole asked the Minister of Finance when he expects to update the House on the terms of reference for the fiscal commission. (AQT 1406/17-22)

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The commission, like the council, is off doing some of its work at the moment. I am sure that the Member, and others in the Finance Committee, will be engaging with it in due course. As he acknowledged in one of his earlier contributions, there are some very experienced and able people involved in both the council and the commission. We wanted to give both bodies the space to engage and establish independence — particularly the council, which has an ongoing remit for reporting — so that they did not just become tools of the Department that do its bidding. From the people involved, the Member will know that that will not be the case. I look forward to them coming back to us with initial findings. The time frame that we have given them for the provision of a report is the end of the year. It will be for an incoming Executive to act on that report, but it will inform a debate that will bring us beyond the annual Budget cycle into the future and the opportunities for raising our own revenue.

Matthew O'Toole (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Can the Minister confirm that, when the fiscal commission formally responds to him, its findings will be published and laid in the Assembly — that is, that it will not be a report that goes to the Executive and has to get on its agenda, but will be publicly laid and debated in the Assembly?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Some people were not hugely warm to the idea of a fiscal commission. It is an exercise that both Scotland and Wales have gone through, and a debate and an informed discussion such as that is beneficial to us all. My intention was to assist in a public debate, a debate inside the Assembly and a debate outside the Assembly. Therefore, I want to make sure that any report that it produces is available to the Assembly and the public so that we can have a proper and informed debate in the time ahead.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

We have time for a brief question from Paula Bradley.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

Minister, what discussions have you had, if any, with the Minister for Infrastructure about rolling support for the taxi, bus and coach industry to counteract the ongoing challenges that the sector is going through while we build up public confidence?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Member will know that there was some financial support offered up specifically for those sectors. There was quite a bit of wrangling between a couple of Departments as to who had responsibility for all of that. When Infrastructure eventually stepped up to take that responsibility, finance was made available. It was not all used, certainly not in relation to coaches. At the end of the financial year, we had additional COVID money and tried to get Departments to come back in for more money where it could be used. That was not the case for the Department for Infrastructure in relation to this.

I am happy to discuss at any time the requirement for additional support. We have allocated most of the COVID money that we have available to us. We are not expecting any more to be made available, unlike last year when we received updated tranches over the year. If any of it is not used and is surrendered or if more is made available to us, I would be very happy to look at any urgent schemes for which a Minister might think it is important to tap into that.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Mid Ulster)

That concludes topical questions. I ask Members to take their ease before the next item of business, which is the Budget Bill.

(Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Stalford] in the Chair)

Executive Committee Business

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I will try to move this along as quickly as I can. I understand that this speech has now potentially spanned two different Education Ministers

[Laughter]

so I will try to keep it moving.

Our children and young people have made a significant sacrifice to protect all of us during the COVID-19 pandemic, so we must make sure that the Budget, particularly the Education budget, invests in their education and future. It is my understanding that £42·3 million of confidence-and-supply capital money is anticipated for ultra-fast broadband. The Education Committee trusts that that will go some way to addressing rural connectivity, which acted as a barrier to digital equality and equal educational opportunity for many families during the period of blended and remote learning.

The Education Committee had an informal meeting with Apple at which it considered the introduction of one digital device and internet connectivity per child, and it heard of projects of that nature that have been rolled out across Scotland in particular local authorities, including Glasgow, to some effect. That would certainly address some of the many issues that we have heard about of children having difficulty accessing education during periods of remote learning and the disruption that that caused to families with variable capacity to provide such equipment. I note that the Department of Education also anticipates a teachers' laptop refresh and has a priority 1 capital bid of £19 million for that. I understand, however, that it is, as yet, an unfunded COVID-19 bid for 2021-22. We are eager to hear more about that.

A need of £64·7 million has been identified, but, as far as I am aware, it has not been included in the final Budget for teachers' pay, the Bright Start scheme, school summer schemes, the Youth Service's summer programme, the Engage II programme and Sure Start. It would be useful to hear more about that.

I move now to capital. The Fresh Start Agreement provided funding for a number of initiatives aimed at building a shared future. I note that the Secretary of State confirmed provision of the additional amount of £28·4 million in 2021-22 in capital DEL for shared education and housing. I look forward to exploring that with Department of Education officials, on 23 June, at our next budget briefing. I note the Secretary of State's comments regarding the integrated transformation of schools referenced in recent media.

The Education Committee also hopes to engage, in the near future, with the Construction Employers Federation to hear its perspective on major and minor works at schools across Northern Ireland. School accommodation must be fit for purpose. It is my understanding that there is a 40% gap between the 2020-21 final budget of £74 million for minor works for schools and the £47 million for minor works in the initial budget for 2021-22. That deficit is a serious concern, considering the impact that it will have on the condition of the school accommodation in which we educate our children and young people — accommodation that is already in a dangerously poor state of repair.

The allocation of so much additional money to address COVID issues may well be masking the underlying financial crisis in education. Education continues to face extensive, unavoidable cost pressures and rising service demands associated with delivering statutory and policy obligations. The Institute for Fiscal Studies annual report on education spending found that real-term cuts in school spending, per pupil, since 2009-2010 have been largest in Northern Ireland, at about 10%, and that the total budget fell in real terms by 5%, meaning that pupil population growth of 6% led to larger cuts in spending per pupil.

The financial crisis affecting the education of our children and young people means that we need an Education Minister capable of decisive action to address the issues and to implement the independent review of education that was agreed in New Decade, New Approach, which will focus on efficiency and movement towards a single education system. According to the 2021-22 budget distribution table for Education provided to the Education Committee on 22 April 2021, the Minister had provisionally set aside £4 million from the Education budget to progress in 2021-22, where possible, the actions arising from the review. Since that is a New Decade, New Approach commitment, the Executive may decide which actions they support and are prepared to fund. The Education Committee welcomes the review and will hear from its panel in due course. I note that the outcome is anticipated to take 18 months. That brings it into the ambit of a new Assembly. I wish the panel well in delivering the education reform that our young people need and deserve.

There are a few other urgent issues in Education, such as investment in a childcare strategy, holiday hunger and period poverty. Initiatives are needed to address those systemic impediments and barriers that people experience, on occasion, according to gender, and which can have long-lasting impacts on their quality of opportunity. The Education Committee welcomed the funding for holiday hunger during COVID-19 and hopes that more sustainable funding can be found for that measure.

There can be no further delay in relation to investment in a childcare strategy. The failure to deliver on that, to date, is an unacceptable record of the Education Minister and his Department. We need to see urgent action in that regard. The Education Committee has also engaged with young people, on various occasions. Dedicated investment in a children's and young persons' recovery plan and budget is needed urgently.

I will speak briefly as an Alliance MLA. There is considerable interest today in the people who hold the Ministries, and I wish Peter Weir all the very best for the future and welcome Michelle McIlveen to her post as Education Minister. The interest of the Alliance Party, however, is very much in the decisive action and fundamental reform that are needed to arrest the financial crisis and address the inequality and separation that exist in our education system. There can be no further delay to the childcare strategy; the funding formula review; the emotional health and well-being framework; or the new SEN framework, including the SEN regulations and code of practice. Alliance's vision of a well-resourced, innovative and integrated education system that will deliver high-quality educational opportunity for all is more relevant now than ever. The people of Northern Ireland demand better, and we in the Assembly and the Executive must work together to deliver that.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Committee for Communities. In the debate on 25 May 2021, I highlighted that, in the first instance:

"the Department is allocating its resources to protect key services." — [Official Report (Hansard), 25 May 2021, p10, col 2].

On that occasion, I did not get the chance to say all that I wanted to say, so this is my opportunity to highlight the issues that I did not cover and to reiterate some key points. I reaffirm the Committee's commitment to work with the Minister and her Department, within its budget allocation. I reiterate the Committee's dissatisfaction with the overall Budget process. It seems somewhat pointless having debates now, rather than earlier in the Budget process. As we know, however, some aspects of timing were outside the Executive's control.

The Committee, at its meeting on 3 June 2021, highlighted its general support for the fiscal council and its hope that it will have positive input into Budget scrutiny. Members noted, however, the need to focus on the scrutiny of cross-cutting expenditure and its effectiveness at improving outcomes. We also discussed the futility of making bids or allocating spend if Departments do not bring forward relevant legislation in a timely manner.

I will move on to the Budget itself. Let us continue to hope that this one-year Budget is the bridge to a multi-year Budget and that we can soon get to the stage of having a Programme for Government with agreed outcomes so that resources can be directed to achieve those outcomes.

I will quickly remind Members of the allocations for the Department for Communities, and I will then move on to the specifics that I did not get to in my previous speech. The Department's 2021-22 allocations total around £876 million resource DEL, which, thankfully, is an increase on the £824 million in the draft Budget; almost £225 million capital DEL, which is an increase of over £10 million on last year's allocation; and £38·8 million in financial transactions capital. The Department submitted resource bids of £301·6 million but was allocated only £109·6 million. That means that, although the final Communities budget represents an increase of over £55 million on the baseline draft budget, it remains a very challenging situation, and there is absolutely no funding to take forward many of the NDNA commitments. The pressure was eased somewhat by the recent confirmation of additional funds of £50·3 million to address a range of COVID pressures.

The Committee, at its meeting on 20 May, expressed concern that the resource bids that had not been met covered a range of key areas. I will highlight more of those areas today. The budget for Supporting People is £73 million for 2021-22. Unfortunately, the almost £6·5 million inflationary bid has not been met, so the funding for that vital programme continues to decrease in real terms. The bid for almost £6 million for COVID pressures has been met as one of the confirmed in-year allocations, however, and the Committee was pleased to note that the bid of £9 million for homelessness has now been met as one of the confirmed in-year allocations.

I am at a loss as to where to begin when it comes to the lack of allocations for New Decade, New Approach. The Department made bids totalling over £139 million for NDNA, including over £57 million for new welfare mitigations.

Only the £42·8 million bid for existing welfare mitigations was met, which effectively means no money for any progress on NDNA commitments.

On many occasions, the Committee has raised the lack of progress on developing new mitigations and closing loopholes. We know that the Minister proposes to bring forward draft regulations to amend the bedroom tax and benefit cap mitigation schemes by closing the loopholes as soon as possible. We have been hearing that for many months, however, and we still have no timeline. The Committee has requested a briefing on those issues before recess.

The Committee was pleased to hear that the Minister is committed to addressing the terminal illness rules and that policy development is under way. Members expressed the hope that Westminster may yet provide for that under annually managed expenditure (AME).

Despite being busy with the Licensing and Registration of Clubs (Amendment) Bill in recent months, the Committee made time to hold an informal stakeholder event on welfare issues in January and one last week on issues for the community and voluntary sector that highlighted the need for community wealth building. Committee members remain concerned about the slow pace of action, the lack of finance to take forward welfare reform issues and the impact on vulnerable people and families.

Other important NDNA bids were also not met. Those include bids to take forward social strategies, language strategies and the sign language framework and legislation commitments. The amount of planning that it took for the Committee to hold an evidence session with members of the deaf community earlier this year clearly shows the need for urgent progress in that area. At our meeting last week, we had an update from the Department on the progress that has been made on developing a regional video relay service. We would like to see action being taken on that as fast as possible.

On Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) reform, I highlight the fact that the bid for £3·4 million for housing transformation was not met in the draft Budget, and, sadly, that remains the case in the final Budget.

On capital allocations, compared with last year, there was a £10 million increase, plus £38·8 million of FTC to support the co-ownership housing scheme. The capital budget is allocated to deliver on priorities such as social housing building targets, as well as to meet statutory and contractual commitments.

The Committee supports the aim of remaining funding being used for prioritised projects in areas such as regeneration, housing, culture, arts, sports and libraries. The Committee knows that there are risks when delivering capital projects, particularly with one-year budgets and is pleased that the Department has projects such as urban regeneration that can be used to backfill any slippage.

The cost of the project for the regional stadium at Casement Park is now estimated at £112 million, so the total committed by the previous Executive, plus GAA partnership funding, falls far short of what we will need. The Committee is concerned that there will be similar increases for the subregional stadia programme.

The Committee looks forward to engaging with the Department on addressing priorities throughout the yea and shortly on the June monitoring round. Although that is a substantial pot, it is expected that much of it will already be spoken for.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will speak on behalf of the Health Committee and then make some brief comments in my role as my party's spokesperson on health.

As the Minister of Finance outlined yesterday, the Department of Health has been allocated almost half of the entire resource budget, with a resource allocation of almost £6,451·9 million. There is no doubt that that is a significant amount of resource funding for the Department. It has indicated, however, that, despite that large allocation, this is a standstill Budget and there is no space or funding available to tackle backlogs and waiting lists.

We have to be honest and admit that our waiting lists are among the worst in developed nations across the world. An example is cataract operations. OECD figures provide data that shows that the longest average wait for cataract surgery in 17 OECD countries is in Poland, at 250 days, with the average wait in England, Scotland and Wales being approximately 60 days. The Committee, however, received correspondence from an individual just this week who had been advised that the waiting time for their father's cataract surgery here is four years.

The length of waiting lists is having a significant impact on our constituents' and families' quality of life and a massive effect on health outcomes for patients. We need to do more. We need to help people, such as the person who is waiting for cataract surgery, to have a better quality of life. That can be done by funding the implementation of the transformation programme and by listening to the experts: the health and social care professionals who are working in the system. A good example is the recent '10 Steps Not 10 Years' action plan from the Royal College of Surgeons. We also need to work with the unions and those who receive the services to come up with the solutions that are so badly needed.

I mentioned yesterday that only 0·7% of the Health budget has been allocated to transformation. That allocation is to keep already implemented programmes resourced. We know that investing money in the system now will provide savings further down the line. We know that investment in waiting lists, early interventions and prevention provides significant savings and better outcomes for patients. That has to be a priority in the coming years.

On scrutiny of spending plans and priorities, it can be difficult first to identify spending priorities and then to track that spending over the financial year, particularly in the complex area of health. The Department has such a large budget that we tend to get the headline figures with no real detail on total spend to tackle waiting lists, total spend to tackle health inequalities or spend in relation to mental health. Further work needs to be done in the Department and at Executive level to provide more information to enable the Committee to fully scrutinise spending plans and priorities and track how effective those plans and programmes are in delivering the outcomes that we are looking for. We need to be able to identify how much is being spent to address waiting lists rather than having to write to the Department to request that information.

Recently, we received a briefing from NISRA on health inequalities in the North. The information provided was hugely concerning. We see an increase in health inequalities in key areas such as mental health and drug misuse and a life expectancy gap in males of over seven years between the most and the least deprived areas. Today, where you live has an impact on your life expectancy. If you live in the most deprived area, you will live, on average, seven years less than someone who might live just a couple of miles from you. I understand that that is not the responsibility solely of the Department of Health and that there needs to be an Executive approach to tackling inequalities, but the Department is paying for the outcomes of those inequalities.

We need to be able to identify and track spending on the key issues. How much is being spent to address waiting lists? How much is being spent to address inequalities? How much is being spent on mental health? Is the spending on waiting lists, inequalities and mental health making a real difference to people's lives? Activity is easy to measure. Outcomes are much more difficult to measure, but outcomes matter most. Transparency should be based on the issues rather than on finance headlines, which can be difficult to understand and track. The Department has been good at identifying and tracking COVID spending and pressures. We need to see the same approach being applied to the other priorities over the coming year.

The Committee will continue to engage constructively with the Department to ensure scrutiny of its spending over the coming year. I thank the Committee Clerk and staff for the huge amount of work that they put into the Committee in general in what has been a hugely busy period and in supporting the Committee's scrutiny of the budgeting procedures.

I will now add some remarks as a Sinn Féin MLA. As an MLA with a busy constituency office, I can safely say that health and social care queries are the number-one issues that we encounter. I am sure that that is the same for every Member. It is about people having difficulty accessing their GPs or a care package to get a loved one home from hospital. It is also about that wide range of waiting lists, with one in every four of our population on some sort of health waiting list. I will not dwell overmuch on the obvious problems; we all know and recognise those.

What is being done to address and fix those problems is key. The Bengoa report and the ministerial action plan, 'Delivering Together', set out not only the need for transformation but some of the areas in which to start delivering it. As I mentioned, only 0·7% of the budget has been allocated to that transformation. The double running and funding of services have not been anywhere near sufficient to support a long-term transformation. We will all have to grasp that fundamental problem.

As has been referenced often today and in yesterday's debate, there also needs to be progress on multi-year budgets. The staggering levels of workforce vacancies remain a huge difficulty for delivery in the health service. The Health and Social Care (HSC) system needs to address workforce pressures and staffing as a matter of emergency. If there are no staff, there is no service. If there is no service or capacity to be seen, you are placed on a waiting list, and, until capacity increases, that waiting list will continue to grow. Even if we had money to throw at the problem, it would not immediately or automatically solve it. We urgently need to put effort and planning into health service staff.

Yesterday, I covered some issues facing carers, but, as it is carers' week, it is worth recapping those issues. Without carers, there is no health and social care system. It is that simple. Unless we address the practical issues facing carers, we are at grave risk of seeing carers stop asking about breaks and starting to talk about care arrangements breaking down. We need to give carers a break. I urge the Minister to look at what he can do now to increase the provision of respite and day-care services, which have been run down for such a long time now as a result of the pandemic.

This week is also infant mental health week. I encourage the Minister and his officials to consider what can be done through the mental health strategy to ensure that early-years mental health needs and, in particular, infant mental health needs are not only considered but included in the final strategy.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I am grateful to the Member for giving way. Does the Member agree with me — I speak as a member of the Education Committee — that this needs a joined-up approach across government, involving not just the Minister who has been referred to in this debate but the Education Minister, the Health Minister, Communities Minister, councils, the Public Health Agency (PHA) and so on, in order to get a multi-agency approach to tackling a huge issue in our community?

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I absolutely agree. In fact, two weeks ago, the Health Committee called for an emergency summit to take place across the Executive to deal with health and social care. I believe and I think that the Committee believes that we need to adopt the same urgency, attention and action to deal with waiting lists and the other problems in health as we did with COVID-19. I absolutely agree.

I acknowledge that it is a one-year Budget, but, when we look at how last year's one-year Budget pivoted to emergency action on COVID-19, we see what can be achieved when everyone works together and when staff are involved, are delivering the service that they can do so well and are given the tools to do so. Although COVID-19 is certainly not gone and we cannot become complacent about that, I pose this question, to which the Department of Health, the wider Executive and, collectively, the House must find an answer: what can be done now and in this year to address the public health emergency that faces the entire Health and Social Care system, that we see daily in our constituency offices and clinics and that our people are suffering as a result of?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I speak as a member of the Education Committee and agree with its Chairman: it is not every day that you start a debate with one Minister in place and end that debate with another Minister in place. Initially, I pay tribute to Peter Weir and the service that he has given since the Assembly was brought back into operation after three years. He has been unstinting in his attendance at Committee and in the Chamber. Whereas other Ministers have perhaps had to be encouraged — I will use that word — to attend Committee and to be questioned by Committee members, he not only attended but gave generously of his time at Committee.

It would be remiss of me not to wish the Minister who is incoming next Monday all the best for her tenure in the position. I welcome Michelle's appointment and, indeed, wish her well as she sets about delivering, perhaps in a different style, on the priorities that we all know.

The Chair, on behalf of the Committee, outlined the serious problems and financial challenges that face Education. I wish Michelle well as she delivers on those in the coming months.

The Minister has indicated that he wants the debate to be on the general principles of the Main Estimates, and that is the direction that he hopes that Members will follow. I will follow that direction. In the Main Estimates document, in the introduction to the Department of Education, it states:

"This Estimate provides the vision of the Department of Education, for 'an education system that is recognised internationally for the quality of its teaching and learning, for the achievements of its young people and for a focus on meeting their needs.'"

As I have stated previously in the Chamber, I believe that, by and large, pupils and young people in Northern Ireland get excellent teaching and educational facilities, not only in primary and secondary education, as we are discussing here, but up to third-level education. Many of our students, having had that good foundation in primary and secondary education, continue to university and are sought by universities in GB to take up their education there.

Given the academic year that we been through — I suppose that we could even call it the "pandemic year" as opposed to the "academic year" — it is only right that we pay tribute. I want to go a bit further than the Committee Chair in paying tribute to every single teacher, all teaching staff and those who support the teaching staff: school assistants, classroom assistants, and the ladies and gentlemen who are the caretakers and the providers of food for the children. We owe a debt of gratitude to every single one of them, and, indeed, for the leadership from principals, because they faced huge challenges this year that have never been experienced previously, whether that was with classroom learning, remote learning or a combination of both, and then to come back into the classroom and conduct examinations or alternatives to direct examinations. Teaching and support staff have risen to those challenges, very much under the guidance of Peter Weir, to whom I have already paid tribute.

The Education Department also rose to challenges, along with the Education Authority. On the Education Committee, we know the challenges that the Education Authority and the Education Department faced, particularly with regard to children with SEN. Pupil assessments in that area were taking twice as long as they should have taken. Every Committee member has been impressed by how that challenge has been taken on board under Sara Long's leadership, how she has risen to the challenges and the progress that she and her team have made.

The Education Committee is made up of the disparate attitudes of each party that is represented on it, but, by and large, it is fair to say that we have carried out the scrutiny role very much in a positive way. We have certainly had differences. We have had differences of emphasis. I support transfer testing and grammar schools in general, and others on the Committee are not supportive of that approach. However, by and large, we have risen to the challenge and have placed the emphasis on really doing what is right for each of our pupils and young people. It is not too strong to say that we have come through what can be described as a crisis, and thankfully — hopefully — we are coming out it with a much stronger education system than when we went into it. There has been a huge amount of learning by the principals and the teaching staff that will undoubtedly be of benefit to them in the longer term.

In what the Minister has put forward, under the subheading on detail and resource to cash allocation, he starts his outline by saying that the purpose of this is to ensure:

"all young people, through participation at school, reach the highest possible standards of educational achievement that will give them a secure foundation for lifelong learning and employment; and develop the values and attitudes appropriate to citizenship in an inclusive society."

Many of us recognise that we work in a difficult society, but we have an opportunity, as the review of education is undertaken, to look at what role primary schools and second-level education can play in addressing those last few words:

"appropriate ... citizenship in an inclusive society."

That should be where we get to after the review of education. Provision should be one of the objectives.

The Minister also outlines where the resource and cash reconciliation should go. Under annually managed expenditure (AME), 10 categories of expenditure are outlined, including the Education Authority; voluntary and grant-maintained integrated schools; the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment; and Middletown Centre for Autism Limited. I remember when we first debated the Middletown autism unit in the Chamber and were supportive of that. One of the big challenges that the Education Committee, the Education Authority and Department have faced is the provision of SEN education. Perhaps there is a case for special educational needs schools to be a new AME category. It is an area that is in need of investment and an area that has faced challenges, and we as a Committee, both formally and informally, met the principals and leadership groups of special educational needs schools. After listening to the principals' group, you could not have come away from those meetings without having an appreciation of the very difficult job that those principals were doing, the fact that they were rising to the challenges, the fact that they needed more support than was being given and a special understanding of the challenges that they were facing. I believe that a special educational needs AME would be helpful as we move into the next budgeting period.

It is right to say that, of all the issues, the one that has united the Committee the most has been the support for school places for children with special educational needs and disabilities and helping families and carers to meet the increasing demands that they face each day. The outgoing Education Minister needed support in that area, and the incoming Education Minister will need additional investment to create more school places in primary and secondary education.

Science continues to make progress, and, a relatively short number of years ago, some children may not have lived after birth.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I am terribly sorry, but I ask the Member to resume his seat briefly. I encourage the Member — I have done this with other Members — to return to the core principles of the Bill rather than to focus on the substance of issues that are not addressed directly in the Bill. As you will know, I am always loath to interrupt Members during a Budget Bill debate because, in many cases, it will be the only chance that Members get to speak on particular issues, but I encourage all Members to return to the core principles of the Bill. I do not want to act as a tyrant in the Chair. I hope that all Members understand that. I do not make the rules; I am simply here to enforce them.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I understand, but the point I am coming to is the recognised need for additional investment from the Minister through the Budget for the provision of SEN resources. I will quickly move on.

There is temporary special educational needs provision in a school building in north Belfast. It is temporary in that it is in a building that is not entirely suitable. There is a site adjacent to mainstream schools in east Belfast where, with appropriate investment, there could be a high-tech, state-of-the-art, new-build special needs school, which is primary to addressing the need. We need the Minister to look at how he can effectively spend money towards that type of provision.

I hope that you will not rule me out here, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, but, in the 2021-22 Budget, the Minister sets out, under the confirmed in-year allocations that are not included in the final Budget departmental outcomes, a number of areas appropriate to DE: teachers' pay; the Bright Start summer scheme; the Youth Service summer programme; the Engage II programme; and the Sure Start programme. Those are all extremely relevant and meaningful areas of expenditure, and my colleague Mr Humphrey raised with the chair of the expert panel the need for a holistic approach to engage with the 2021 summer scheme, which is based on addressing the mental health of many of our pupils who, we believe, will have faced challenges over these days.

In those areas of the Budget, there is a need for the Minister to support the New Decade, New Approach fair start programme. You cannot expend money on those issues or just do one-offs in those areas if you are not prepared to invest in and accept the findings of the expert panel on educational underachievement. Those areas need to be addressed with investment, leading on to the investment as outlined by the expert panel.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for giving way. I endorse his remarks entirely and pay tribute to Dr Purdy and his team for their work. Does the Member agree that it is statistically proven that early intervention is cheaper and much more effective in terms of end product and results and that young people would benefit from early intervention if the Minister can find the money for it?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for that intervention. Absolutely: the case for early intervention is unchallengeable. If we do not invest in early intervention, what we get at the other end is much more costly to put right. It also has negative impacts on society as a whole.

The Member referred to Dr Purdy. I pay tribute to him and, indeed, to every member of his expert panel. They really rose to the challenge and worked within a very tight time frame to deliver what, overall, has been accepted as an excellent approach. Hopefully, this is the last approach that we will have. I can quote from at least four other reports that, in my political life, were to address underachievement, lack of investment, and how we go forward. I hope that this is the last report that will be necessary and that we will implement its recommendations.

The point that Mr Humphrey made is key area 1 in the report:

"Redirecting the focus to Early Years."

The expert panel refers to implementing the actions outlined in the report. There is a page and a half of that, but it is summed up in this way:

"Ensuring all children get a fair start, will lead to more equitable outcomes for all children, families and communities. The benefits of effective early intervention"

— the point that Mr Humphrey was making —

"will be in terms of physical and mental wellbeing, educational attainment and longer term employment prospects."

I do not expect that the Finance Minister's giving a dollop of money will be the only thing required. I do believe that if we are to succeed, we need to move to point 4 of the key areas that Dr Purdy and his team highlighted:

"Promoting a whole community approach to education."

The Chair of the Health Committee accepted that there is a need for a holistic approach. I hope that other Members, particularly from the Communities Committee, and the Communities Minister, would accept that promoting a whole community approach to education is what we want to achieve. There are excellent examples to follow. Key area 4 of the report says:

"A 'whole community approach to education' has a 'place-based' focus that coheres the greatest concentration of effort in those localities with the greatest concentration of educational underachievement."

Dr Purdy and his team gave a number of examples of the approach: the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools programme in the Republic of Ireland; the Flying Start programme in Wales; the Scottish Attainment Challenge; and the children's zones in west London, which is an international approach that came from Harlem, New York. The report says that, if this can be done:

"the interventions will be more targeted than before, encouraging partnership with the voluntary and community sector, particularly in areas which currently lack capacity, as well as between schools."

You can see the connection between what Dr Purdy is saying and what the Minister is laying out in his in-year allocations for summer schemes, Youth Service, the Engage programme and Sure Start. The report feeds back into what the Minister is already intent on funding.

I will very quickly highlight a point that was made by Mr Humphrey and the Chairperson of the Health Committee. In key area 8 of Dr Purdy's report, "Ensuring Interdepartmental Collaboration and Delivery", he asks:

"What do we want to achieve?"

He then stated:

"There was considerable consensus amongst stakeholders about the need for government departments, local government and voluntary and community sectors to be more joined-up in terms of how they approach issues associated with educational underachievement."

There are opportunities for resources to be implemented more effectively than at present and in a way that requires more collaboration between Departments.

I will finish by saying that Dr Purdy outlines the budget that is required. He lays out all of the 47 actions that are required and says that, in the long term — five plus years — £73 million is required. If we do not invest that additional relatively small amount in those areas today, as recommended by the expert panel, we may as well not invest in them. If the budget for those areas is not invested over the time span that Dr Purdy estimates necessary, we may as well not invest in them in a one-year Budget.

Two areas brought the Education Committee together. The first is supporting children and families who face the most difficult challenges of special educational needs. We need to support them, and we need to provide additional facilities and up-to-date, high-tech school premises. It has been agreed by both sides of the House that those young people need that investment to address underachievement and to provide them with the good start in life that will allow us to benefit from their expertise in later life.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I will speak first as the Chair of the Economy Committee before making some brief remarks as the Sinn Féin economy spokesperson. You end up repeating yourself quite a bit in Budget debates, but we continue to live in exceptional times, which impacts very much on the budgeting process. Since I last spoke on the Budget at the end of May, the Economy Committee has received the Department's bids for the June monitoring round. The Committee considered those bids at its meeting last week, and I will comment on them following some more general remarks.

I have put it on record in previous debates that the context in which the Economy Committee and the other Statutory Committees scrutinise departmental budgets is less than ideal. Annual budgeting and a dramatic increase in the use of ministerial directions to implement COVID relief schemes is less than ideal, as is a heavy reliance on in-year allocations to meet essential spending, particularly in the case of the COVID response. Despite that, the Economy Committee has received regular Budget briefings from the Department, and members have engaged robustly with departmental officials and, indeed, the Minister, who briefed the Committee last month on her economic recovery action plan and the first of the 10X Economy papers, which referenced innovation.

The Department for the Economy budget has flatlined in 2021-22, which has resulted in the realignment of budget lines and the Department's beginning the financial year with an overcommitment of £7·3 million. The Department has received £12·2 million from the Treasury to manage protocol issues, which the Committee will scrutinise carefully.

The Executive have agreed to fund the economic recovery action plan at a cost of approximately £290 million of resource funding and £11 million of capital spending. Roughly half of the resource allocation for the economic recovery action plan will go on the high street stimulus scheme. That puts a lot of eggs in one basket, as I have said in previous contributions, and the Committee is not fully convinced that the voucher scheme will deliver to the degree that is necessary. As such, it will continue to engage with officials and the Minister on it.

The Department has secured £23 million from the NIO: £8 million to support the development of Invest NI locations overseas over the next two years and £15 million for skills spread over the next three years. That funding is welcomed by the Committee and should help vital skills development work to be undertaken in the months ahead, as furlough ends and we seek to turn around our economy.

The Department leads on a range of New Decade, New Approach commitments, and the Committee believes that it is important that those be closely aligned with the Programme for Government and a range of other strategies, in both the Department for the Economy and other Departments. A failure to do that will run the risk of duplication or a failure to maximise the impact of spending.

The Department has suggested that the economic recovery action plan, the recently published 10X Economy innovation paper and the trade and investment papers have the potential to be game changers for our economy. The Committee will, however, be looking for clear delivery on what remain very high level statements of intent. There are also issues around the securing of funding.

I will turn to the June monitoring round paper from the Department that the Committee considered at its previous meeting. Committee members welcomed the news that Departments will have greater flexibility to reallocate non-ring-fenced budgets in-year without Executive approval. Committee members hope that that will mean less budget having to be returned and reallocated in haste, which was a theme last year in the Department for the Economy's COVID response.

The Department's bids of just under £12 million are modest in the context of the times in which we live. Committee members are concerned, however, that almost £11 million of that is required as a result of a change in the treatment of depreciation in FE colleges. The view of members is that that surely could have been anticipated. Of the £19·5 million of resource DEL reduced requirements, the Department has managed to reallocate £15·5 million, leaving £4 million to use against inescapable pressures that will arise in-year. Again, that level of movement in-year does not make scrutiny any easier for the Committee. As I indicated, however, the flexibility to reallocate internally is somewhat welcome in that context.

The Department has also flagged up £14·2 million of unallocated capital DEL that it hopes to utilise further into the financial year, thanks to increased flexibility. The Department is still waiting, however, for a capital DEL allocation of £42·3 million for Project Stratum and for capital DEL funding for city and regional growth deals, as well as for the Magee medical school. The Committee urges that the allocation of that very necessary capital DEL proceed without delay.

Another key area of concern for members is the number of vacancies that the Department continues to carry. As a Department at the heart of the COVID response and the recovery and rebuilding of our economy, it is vital that it is properly staffed. Funding is available, so members strongly advocate that recruitment proceed at speed.

As I have outlined, the Committee welcomes the funding of the economic recovery action plan, as we are keen to ensure that the Executive fund the skills-related commitments included in it, in NDNA and in the 10X Economy papers, as well as those flowing from the energy and skills strategies, particularly the job-creating aspects of the green new deal. The Committee believes that the work of the high street task force and any funding that it deploys will need to be aligned with the economic recovery action plan and other strategies. That is why members are joining the Committee for the Executive Office and the Finance Committee on 16 June to receive a briefing on the work of the task force.

The Committee will play its part in the delivery and scrutiny of departmental strategies and legislation to support our recovery and rebuilding from COVID and in moving our economy to a place of greater prosperity for all our people. On behalf of the Economy Committee, I support the motion.

I will now make some brief remarks on behalf of Sinn Féin. I have already outlined many of the issues in respect of the Economy Department's budget. Those have been well rehearsed throughout Budget debates. The British Government's Budget has in no way provided the stimulus that is needed to drive the recovery that we need. Members in the Chamber have made proposals and suggested things that should be included and that need to be included. Concerns also remain about at what point austerity measures will kick in. Those measures are contrary to the recommendations of financial institutions around the world. Some who previously championed austerity think that we need a stimulus-driven recovery to reboot the economy and to give businesses and workers the opportunity to get back on their feet collectively; that is widely accepted.

My party colleague Mr McHugh outlined the significant support in grants and rates holidays that have been made available to businesses here to help them to survive and to protect jobs. It is clear that we need a recovery that is about protecting jobs and creating jobs and opportunities and promotes greater equality and prosperity. That means promotion of greater health and well-being supports as well. It is important that our recovery plans and strategies aim to deliver on those things and align, as I said, with our Programme for Government commitments and New Decade, New Approach commitments. As other Members have referred to, we need to see really strong cross-departmental working and budgeting.

I congratulate the newly announced incoming Economy Minister on his appointment. I look forward to working with him. I hope that, in his new role, he will be honest enough to recognise the potential of the protocol in attracting investment, creating jobs and helping to drive forward the recovery from COVID that we need. We face the loss of EU funding, which, beyond this financial year, remains a huge concern, particularly in the context of the Economy Department's budget beyond 2023, when the ESF runs out. We need to see some longer-term clarity on the Shared Prosperity Fund, including its design and delivery.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Sure, I will.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for her kind words. I give her the commitment now that I will work with her and all of the rest of the Economy Committee. I enjoyed my time on the Economy Committee. I am glad that I will be working alongside you guys in trying to make the economy better.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for that. Hopefully, we will get you in front of the Committee in the not too distant future.

Concerns have been expressed that the British Government's so-called levelling-up agenda bypasses the Assembly and the Executive and there is no guarantee that projects funded through it will align with our Programme for Government commitments or Executive priorities. It is my strong view — I imagine that the Finance Minister agrees — that, if the British Government actually wanted to level up our economy, they would return some of the hundreds of millions that have been stripped away from our block grant over the past decade.

Other Members mentioned health funding. Like many others, I have too many constituents who are concerned about being able to access GP appointments or have been on waiting lists for too long. My party colleague Colm Gildernew referred to a constituent. Last Thursday night, I was contacted by a constituent who has been on a waiting list for surgery for some time. She was taken into hospital because she had been quite sick with her condition. It was thought that she might need emergency surgery, and she was put on IV antibiotics. Fortunately or unfortunately for her — I am not sure which word you would use in her case — the antibiotics brought her condition under control, so she was no longer deemed to be an emergency and was sent home to remain on a waiting list. At the end of her tether, she sought a private consultation and was told that her surgery was urgent. If she paid £6,000, she could have that surgery done before the end of the month, but she does not have that sort of money. As far as I am concerned, it is not OK that those who can afford it get treated and those who cannot stay sick.

I am really glad to see that the Finance Minister has provided additional funding to the Department of Health. All of us recognise that we need to see much-needed system change there as well. We have all talked about taking the politics out of health. When we talk about the system change that is needed, we all recognise that there needs to be additional investment before savings will be realised. One of the issues that we all talk about is that we need multi-year budgeting processes to be able to plan for the change needed in our health system. That is where we really need to see the multi-year budgeting process. Hopefully, the promises that the British Government have made in respect of multi-annual Budgets will be realised this year.

I welcome the establishment of the fiscal commission by the Finance Minister as part of that broader conversation about how we fund our public services and what powers we might need or could have access to. I very much look forward to the work of the commission and to engaging with it.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

When Minister Frew got to his feet, I thought that he was going to state his support for the protocol. I nearly bit my tongue off. I want to congratulate Minister Frew on his appointment and wish him well. There are many challenges in that Department, as in them all.

I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate and make my comments as the SDLP spokesperson on education and an MLA for West Tyrone. I reiterate the concerns raised by my party and others in yesterday's debate on the Supply resolution for the Main Estimates. There is great dissatisfaction with the budgetary process. It is a complex process that is not properly explained, and we essentially debate decisions that have been taken already with little input, at this stage in the overall budgetary allocation. It is short-sighted and lacks aspiration and any prioritisation of the key challenges that our community faces. I will go into more detail as we go forward. As noted by my colleagues in yesterday's debate, we continue to miss out on the importance of multi-year budgeting, which would set a longer-term, joined-up strategy to deliver better in the greater interests of our people across Northern Ireland.

I will focus my remarks on the Education budget, before outlining concerns regarding the impact of this Budget on the wider issues that face my constituency of West Tyrone. Before I do that, I pay tribute to the outgoing Minister, Peter Weir. Many in the House know that Peter and I did not always see eye to eye on matters of education or the challenges that have been faced this year. I appreciate that the Minister had a mammoth task. There was no blueprint or rule book to follow, and we reacted as the situation emerged. I appreciate that that is an extremely difficult situation to be in. I genuinely believe that the Minister was acting in the best interests of children as he believed them to be and that he always did his best. That said, there will always be a record set in the House on Ministers and their performances, and Peter will be remembered as one who was courteous and approachable in office — he always responded to me in my role as SDLP education spokesperson — but I cannot leave out the fact that the House had to be recalled on three occasions to hold the Minister to account over failures to put the interests of young people first. That said, I wish him well for the future. I also wish Michelle McIlveen, the new Minister of Education, well. I look forward to working with her on the many challenges that exist.

Education has been on its knees for a number of years. We often talk about cuts to education when we should be talking about investment in it. Education is not a cost; it is an investment in our children and young people and an investment in this place. It is an investment in our economy because, ultimately, young people and children who have been supported through schools that have had access to adequate facilities and support will be better skilled and educated; it will benefit their outcomes in the long run.

Budgetary cuts and challenges to education predate COVID. We have had the distraction this year of the huge challenge — no one in the House should underestimate it — that COVID has presented to every Minister, the Executive and the House. I know that all of us wanted to act in the best interests of doing all that we could to save lives and livelihoods. The COVID pandemic has absolutely compounded the issue and highlighted how far behind we are in properly funding and resourcing our education system. That has been said many times in the House over the past 14 years of the DUP/Sinn Féin-led Executive. The Institute for Fiscal Studies reported last year that, in real terms, cuts in spending per pupil since 2009 have been largest in Northern Ireland, with a 10% reduction in overall spending. That is a 10% cut to our children's education. No one would say that that is appropriate. It is not appropriate. It is having a direct impact on our children and young people.

Many times, I have heard Members to my right say that a decade of Tory austerity has been disastrous for this place, but we have to take some responsibility for the lack of prioritisation, strategy, focus and planning. Education should never face cuts. We should always strive to improve the educational outcomes of our children. We have to remember that, while the Tories have been no friends to this place — no one knows that better than the DUP in recent times — the Budgets and cuts have been rolled out and administered by a Sinn Féin/DUP-led Executive. It has crippled our education system and affected the educational outcomes of so many young people. While we have witnessed cut after cut, additional funding has been provided in England through the pupil premium policy; Scotland has spent £1,500 more — £7,300 compared with £5,800 in Northern Ireland — per pupil; and the South has the delivering equality of opportunity in schools programme, which aims to address the issues around funding.

I remind the Finance Minister and the incoming Education Minister — I cannot reiterate this strongly enough — that spending on education is not a cost; it is an investment in the future of our young people, this place and our society, and we should do everything that we can to ensure that we fund our schools and provide the necessary resources, which are absolutely vital for the development of our children and young people. It is high time that education was treated as seriously here as it is in other jurisdictions. This place has challenges, but we have to recognise that it is quite small and manageable: it is six counties and 18 constituencies. It is not rocket science. It is about planning and strategy. It is about ensuring that money goes to the right places and that we are not simply throwing money at pet projects or wish lists from parties, particularly in the face of an election. We may see that evolving over the next few weeks and months.

In the context of today's debate, it remains extremely concerning that the education budget faces pressures of £146 million. Again, that is not a new figure; it was discussed in the House prior to the pandemic. It is hoped that that will be made up this year as a result of funds from the monitoring rounds, but it has shed a bright light on the fact that a lack of proper planning and cross-departmental working is damaging the educational outcomes of our children.

That brings me to an important point that other Members have mentioned: special educational needs. There is no deviating from the debate around the subject. It impacts us all. It has come to every one of our offices and desks. Young people and children are being failed by the system. When you look at the figures and the amount of money that has been allocated, you scratch your head and say, "Is this an issue with funding, or is it a case of complete and utter incompetence on the part of those who have been responsible for resolving the issue?".

When you look at the block grant for the Education Authority, you will see the £359 million that has been allocated for special educational needs and the additional £22 million. What is it going to take to resolve this issue? Not enough has been done. There has not been enough planning or prioritisation, and, certainly, the interests of those young people have not been put first. We have heard serious revelations about the Education Authority in recent times. It was revealed by whistle-blowers that, in order to delay the process, statements were not date-stamped because the EA was so inundated and the system was so fractured and broken. It took an immense amount of pressure from the Education Committee when this place was re-established to get to the heart of that problem.

As we in this Chamber all know, special educational needs children are continually, continually, continually being failed by the current system that is not delivering for them. We can talk about reviews. We can talk about reform. We can talk about money. We can talk about how we think it could be fixed. It is necessary now more than ever for this issue to be prioritised. Far too many children are stuck on a waiting list for an assessment. We have hundreds of millions of pounds being rolled in to resolve this issue, yet we still have 5,124 children waiting for an assessment. We have seen that go on for years and years. That is not good enough. We cannot fail our children. The test for this place is about how to prioritise their needs and what we do in a crisis situation. Rest assured that the situation facing special educational needs children is a crisis.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for giving way. Will the Member agree that addressing that issue from a budgetary point of view will require close cooperation between the Department of Education and the Department of Health and that pooled budgeting should perhaps be explored in order to address the completely unacceptable waiting lists for assessment and awarding of statements of special educational needs?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I welcome his remarks. He is absolutely right that there is a desperate need for cross-departmental working and cooperation. A lot of the issues that have been identified point to the fact that Health and Education are not working closely or effectively enough and, indeed, that Finance is absolutely vital. We can talk about all the things that are needed, but without the necessary investment from the Minister of Finance it is impossible to resolve these issues. It is not in isolation. We can fire money at these things — rest assured, there is a desperate need for investment in SEN — but there is also a need for prioritisation and to properly deal with the issues.

I will finish on the SEN point by saying that children have absolutely been failed. We have all seen the tears. We have seen parents in absolute desperation. We have seen parents who literally have never had one minute of respite. We have seen parents throughout the pandemic who have spent seven days a week over the course of the past year without any support and who are literally on their knees, pleading for support and help, but it has not happened. It is unforgivable for this House. We are a small jurisdiction, and it could be dealt with very easily with the proper focus, plan and prioritisation. We need to ensure that those who are in positions of responsibility for this and have failed are held properly to account. If we fail to do that, we will repeat the mistakes of the past.

The childcare strategy was mentioned by another Member. Over the course of the pandemic, the childcare sector was also hit very hard. It is clear that a long-term strategy for the sector that includes additional investment and resources from the Minister is needed. I have heard members of the Minister's party and, indeed, of other parties mention the serious issues that affect the childcare sector. I have seen the fancy graphics that call for action, but when their colleagues who are sitting in positions of power fail to actually deal with the issue, it begs serious questions. Is this just lip service, or are there meaningful intentions to deal with these serious issues? The childcare issue needs to be addressed, can be addressed and should be addressed by cross-departmental working and money from the Minister of Finance.

On that point, it is very disappointing that today's Budget contains insufficient funds to enable the development of a comprehensive childcare strategy. That is the famous childcare strategy that we have talked about and talked about. Again, there is no action, no money and no follow-up; we just talk and talk. People are fed up with it and want that to change. Given the issues and pressures facing the sector, I am sure that Members will agree that the childcare strategy is needed immediately and needs that vital investment. Robin Newton mentioned in great detail the recommendations in the report on educational underachievement. I, too, put on record my sincerest appreciation to Dr Purdy and his team for the immense work that went into that report. The report is a vital piece of work, and it was damming on educational underachievement. That did not shock any of us. We knew, certainly from an Education Committee point of view, how serious the issues are and what the major failings are that exist here in tackling educational underachievement. The vast majority of those failings emanate from a failure to properly fund and resource an already stretched education system. I see no effort to rectify that in today's Budget.

In the House, we have had many reports suggesting all sorts of reforms. We have talked about Bengoa and everything else, but this report is vital to address what is a very serious issue. However, will it be just another report? The only way to address the issues in the report is for the Minister of Finance to put the money in place to ensure that the recommendations can be addressed. Let us be clear about this: whilst there is an issue with underachievement among Protestant boys, there is an issue with underachievement generally across all our communities, and it needs to be addressed. No child should pay the price for political failure. Make no mistake about it: there has been a political failure in this place to address educational underachievement, and that is on the shoulders of us all. It should be addressed, and it must be addressed. The report is very good.

Today's Budget sets aside only £4 million to take forward the panel's plan, which has been costed at £36 million per year. That hardly even scratches the surface. It is like throwing a deckchair off the Titanic and hoping it will work out. It is not going to work; we need meaningful investment. I know that money is tight, but what is more important than addressing the educational underachievement of our children? The £36 million would be money well spent. It would certainly be better spent than the £100 million that is going to be fired into tokens for the high street. This plan is a better-value investment, and it should be prioritised at all costs.

I ask the Finance Minister this: where is the shortfall? Does he believe that educational underachievement merits additional funding? What is his Department going to do about it? This is a political problem; it can be fixed by prioritisation. It is a serious issue, and it is concerning that it is not being taken seriously enough given the work that the expert panel put in. I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed working with the expert panel. I reiterate that the report cannot be left to gather dust. The recommendations are very good; they are critical. We know what the problems are, and it will take money to resolve that. It will take £36 million. We need to see the money put up in order to resolve educational underachievement.

I heard other Members mention holiday hunger. I thank the Minister and the Minister of Education for, at an earlier stage, addressing holiday hunger during the pandemic. Holiday hunger is having a huge impact on many disadvantaged children across the North. I have welcomed the interventions to date. I believe that was a positive intervention and one worth making. It is also concerning that there is no long-term plan to deal with it, and I hope that it is addressed.

I would like to focus my remaining remarks on the issues that are facing everyone in the beautiful constituency of West Tyrone. We face many challenges. There are infrastructure deficits that long predate the —.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Can I ask the Member to resume his seat briefly? Before the Member decides to take us on a rhetorical tour of West Tyrone, can I suggest to him that his remarks, insofar as they relate to his constituency, must also relate to the core of the Bill that the House is considering?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Yes, absolutely. On the Budget, there are key issues and challenges that face constituencies such as West Tyrone. There has been a lack of investment, and the Strule educational campus and our roads infrastructure, through the A5, have not been delivered. Despite the once-famous hokey-cokey politics of the DUP and Sinn Féin dragging down the Assembly, Sinn Féin and the DUP have been in power for 14 years. That arranged marriage has delivered very little, but it is high time that it did, particularly for places west of the Bann such as west Tyrone. Promises are good, aspiration is great, but money and delivery are vital. What we need, now more than ever, is properly funded Departments that can address Ministers in place —.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. What are his proposals for finding the money that he suggests is required? There is no low-hanging fruit in our Budget, given that it has been decimated by Tory austerity, to which you referred, over the past decade. Where do you propose we find the money? From where do you want to take it?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for the intervention. For a start, collapsing the institutions is not an option for resolving the challenges that we face. People need politicians in place to deal with the challenges that our society faces on a daily basis, be they waiting lists, education or housing. To collapse the institutions for three years was unforgivable, and to entertain any debate or discussion about doing that again is entirely unforgivable, particularly when so many are suffering. Yes, I understand that there are budget restraints. I understand that there is not an endless pot of money. What we do have, however, are people in political positions now, whom we did not have for three years, who could prioritise and address the issues of need. There is no better starting point than waiting lists, when we have so many people suffering as a result of what I can only describe as political failure.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for giving way briefly. Does he agree that meaningful action to address the upwards of £100 million cost of division or separation in education would be a good place to start in releasing funds that can be redirected to the front line?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for that very good intervention. I have to say yes. I go back to prioritisation. We have a terrible habit of simply sticking a plaster on something and hoping that that resolves the problem instead of dealing with it. Bengoa did that with Health. What have we done? It is gathering dust. The education underachievement document will do it with Education. Let us hope that it does not gather dust. Sticking plasters no longer work. This political institution has, hopefully, matured over the last number of years and will know that we need to prioritise those issues before they spiral any more out of control.

I remind the Minister that there are many areas dotted across Northern Ireland, the North of Ireland, that have very high levels of deprivation. People are stuck and need investment in infrastructure, education, good-quality social housing and road infrastructure. If we do not get that, people will remain stuck, and there will continue to be high levels of unemployment and economic inactivity. It gives me no pride whatsoever to say that my constituency is exactly reflective of that reality, because people there feel as though there has not been the meaningful investment that has been needed so for long in the area.

That brings me to a positive point. The city deal funding will be transformational. The SDLP has long fought for that money and that intervention in the north-west. It will be transformational. It will be a fantastic launching pad, and I am delighted to see that Strabane will also benefit as a result. That will deal with some of the issues, but areas such as Omagh, Castlederg and west Belfast also need serious intervention and a strategy that will help to take people out of poverty. Minister, you are in a very strong position to do that. We need to start talking about improving people's lives.

The Strule campus in Omagh, which I have mentioned, has the potential to provide first-class facilities to a number of local schools that are currently teaching in inadequate — I put that mildly to cause no offence — accommodation. They have been promised and promised and promised that the project would be delivered. The collapse of the institutions led to delay in the delivery of that vital priority — a priority clearly stated by Martin McGuinness and Peter Robinson when they were deputy First Minister and First Minister. To date, all that I have seen is the site being cleared, but there has been no development. As a consequence, we have seen an entire generation of schoolchildren go from first year to right past their A-level year without any form of delivery in the same schools that have received no investment in their current infrastructure. All the schools in Omagh, which is in my constituency, that will form the Strule education campus are inadequate — some are unsafe.

Unless there is delivery on that now, some prioritisation of funding needs to be given to address the school estate, because this cannot continue. Again, children are paying the price for political failure. It is just not on. Nothing in today's debate or in the Budget has set out anything that suggests the advancement of that scheme. It will continue to slip further and further. As a result of that slippage, the school buildings in which children in my constituency sit are crumbling around them. That is not good enough.

This issue has been raised on many occasions, but it cannot be said enough: health waiting lists are the biggest crisis facing these institutions — the biggest crisis. While parties have their own issues and other issues are going on across Northern Ireland, such as Brexit, the protocol and COVID, people are literally dying on waiting lists. Our health service has saved countless lives this year. It is a health service that has buckled under pressure and underinvestment. It needs reform. It also needs leadership from this place and tough decisions made that will eventually resolve the huge issues that affect our people.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Colm Gildernew rightly said that no office of any Member has not received correspondence, messages or phones calls or requests for meetings from constituents who have been in tears, in pain and suffering. They are desperate. It makes me, as an MLA, feel entirely useless that, because there has not been enough investment in waiting lists, I can do nothing to help those people. There are 335,000 people on waiting lists in Northern Ireland. That is a terrible reflection of how this place has failed. I have heard Members say that we need to take politics out of health: I agree. It is a problem that we need to resolve together, with tough decisions, action and investment. We cannot allow waiting lists to continue spiralling out of control. One in four of our population is on a waiting list: that is absolutely shocking.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I will.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I agree that the stats are very concerning. Does he agree that the strategy of simply throwing money at the private or independent sector to address waiting lists is unsustainable, more costly in the long run and, ultimately, unfair to the people who clapped for the NHS during the pandemic?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I welcome the Member's intervention. He just missed an intervention by Mr Lyttle, who pointed to a similar issue in education. Mr Carroll is right. The time for the mentality of sticking a plaster over a problem is long gone. It is like brushing the dirt under the carpet. At this stage, the carpet is touching the ceiling.

We need to grab this head-on and deal with it. Nobody wants their granny or granda, mum or dad, brother or sister, neighbour or friend to suffer on a waiting list. A few weeks ago, I visited the house of a lady who has been on a waiting list for four years. She had needed one hip operation; she now needs two. All the bedrooms in her house are upstairs, and there are no facilities downstairs. At 77 years of age, that lady is literally crawling up and down the stairs. Is that how we look after the vulnerable in our society? When that lady presents to me, as an MLA, or to another MLA, what are we supposed to say except, "It's a terrible problem. It's desperate"? What are we doing about it? We need this crisis to be prioritised, and we need it to be resolved. Tough decisions need to be made. If we do not do that, more will die on waiting lists, and the figure of one in four will increase.

Anybody looking at this place from the outside will say, "Is that really how they look after the vulnerable in their communities and their society?". We need to deal with that issue, and we need to deal with it now.

The crisis that absolutely exists in GP services is adding to the pressures. That is not a popular thing to say, but there is a crisis in GP services. I said that publicly a few weeks ago and got the sharp end of many GP tongues, but there is a crisis in GP services, and it is the responsibility of this House to deal with that crisis. GP services are people's first point of call when they are in need of medical attention. How many phone calls to a surgery will it take before someone gets an answer? One hundred? One hundred and twenty? There are people who are desperate to speak to a doctor, and the doctor is obviously under immense pressure, when we consider that 5,968 GP out-of-hours shifts were not filled in the past year. That issue will be resolved only by proper planning and investment.

On the opposite side, A&E managers in Altnagelvin and other places say, "Daniel, there must be something that can be done. We have huge numbers of people who can't get a GP appointment now appearing at A&E". There is no siphoning-out process. If I was sick or unwell when I was a student in Liverpool, I literally walked down the street from my student accommodation to a walk-in clinic. The triage nurse in that clinic determined whether I needed to see a GP or go to A&E. If I needed to go to A&E, the clinic got me to A&E.

The system here is broken. GPs have told me, in countless emails, that they are under immense pressure, that the system needs reform and that there is a need for intervention. In A&E, staff tell me that they cannot cope any more. Waiting lists are spiralling out of control. It is a serious crisis that Members elected to this House need to address together. That is my plea to the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Health, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. We can do it. It is not rocket science. This is a very small area. Our population is not massive. In everyone's interests, we need to get this right.

I have mentioned that social housing has been largely underfunded for many years. We talk about vulnerable people, but, when you drill down into it, we are not good at looking after vulnerable people. There is a serious lack of bungalows available for disabled people, elderly people, people in need and people who are blind. There are no suitable houses. How do you put people who cannot see into a two-storey house? They therefore sit on a waiting list. Some will wait for 10 years, because no bungalows are being built. Nine times out of 10, when people go into a bungalow, they remain there until the day and hour that they pass away, so there is no availability of bungalows. That is a serious social housing issue that needs to be addressed and prioritised. Housing is generally a considerable issue, and there needs to be greater investment in housing stock to provide high-quality and good-quality housing for all our people.

I have extreme concern that the budget allocated to the Infrastructure Minister will not deal with the state of our roads network, will not deal with the pressures facing NI Water and will not fix every single pothole that constituency colleagues of mine, particularly those in Sinn Féin, stand and point into every single day of every week. I am just as frustrated about the potholes, but pointing at them will not resolve the issue. Allocating money and spending money to invest in our roads infrastructure is the only way in which we will resolve those problems. The roads affect every single one of us and every single one of our constituents. We need good-quality roads. We need investment in our roads.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I will not at the moment, but I will.

The other point that I will make is this: I remember going to Donegal as a child. They used to say that the state of the roads there was an absolute disgrace. Compared with the roads in the North, it is an absolute pleasure driving in Donegal now. The state of our roads is an absolute disgrace. They need to be dealt with.

As the Minister, Nichola Mallon is doing a very tough job in a very tough Department that is filled with challenges. The Minister of Finance will know that, because he previously held that Ministry, as did his colleague Chris Hazzard. It is not an easy Department. NI Water desperately needs investment and money put into it. Developers cannot build houses and businesses cannot invest because the infrastructure is not there to deal with that.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way during what is a very long and interesting speech. The Member continues to highlight problems rather than solutions. Would he accept that the Infrastructure Minister has had a 29% increase in her capital budget? Whilst that will not deal with all the issues that he outlined, it is a 29% increase. For Northern Ireland Water, a mutualisation model needs to be considered. Otherwise, this speech will be repeated year after year.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I absolutely welcome any extra resources, but there should have been more to date. There is not enough money. Yesterday in the House, the Chair of the Committee agreed when I intervened and said that that Department is underfunded. That Department is underfunded. Anyone who looks at the figures will know that it is desperately underfunded. As a consequence, each and every one of our constituents is being affected.

Nichola Mallon is a great Minister — I may be biased in saying so — but she is no wizard. She cannot create miracles and resolve things without money. She cannot pay staff if she has no money. She cannot fix potholes, street lights or the issue with NI Water if she has no money.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Will the Member give way?

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

The only way to resolve those issues is through a meaningful intervention by the Minister of Finance and for him to listen to Minister Mallon and work with her to try to address those very serious issues.

That brings me to another point. The A5 has often been debated in the House, and there is no greater advocate for that road than me. I want to see it built. There is nothing more important to West Tyrone than the development of that road. It will change people's lives and create necessary connectivity and links. It will also address decades of funding neglect from this place. The delays are frustrating, but I hope that the Minister of Finance will work with Minister Mallon, the Irish Government and whoever else will give us money to ensure that that project is realised. It is an Executive flagship priority, and I and the people whom I represent desperately need it to be delivered. I will give the Member an intervention.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Thank you. I appreciate that.

All that I am hearing from the Member is childish politicking. If the Minister for Infrastructure cannot fix a pothole or our rural roads with the largest allocation and biggest budget that that Department has ever received, what is she doing? What is the point? If she cannot do it with that budget, what is she doing? Maybe the Member will enlighten the House on what she is doing with that money.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Gladly. The money has just been allocated. As I said many times, she is not a wizard or a miracle worker. She is just a North Belfast MLA, a hard-working mother and someone who cares about the people in this place. Nichola Mallon will do everything that she can to address the issues with our roads infrastructure, but she cannot do it without the necessary funding and investment.

(Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Stalford] in the Chair)

On the Member's intervention, let us be clear: Nichola Mallon is addressing a three-year collapse and neglect of our roads network because the Member's colleagues walked out the door and, as a consequence, left our roads network in its current state. In fact, prior to doing that, they did not even allocate a budget to deal with the issues.