Northern Ireland Assembly, 6 July 2021

431 contributions from 48 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I advise the Assembly that the Minister for the Economy, Mr Paul Frew, resigned his office at 9.30 this morning.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Further to that, I advise the Assembly that Jeffrey Donaldson MP, as nominating officer for the DUP, nominated Gordon Lyons MLA as Minister for the Economy. Mr Lyons accepted the nomination and affirmed the Pledge of Office in the presence of the Principal Deputy Speaker and the Clerk/Chief Executive this morning.

Ministerial Statements

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Speaker has received notice from the First Minister and deputy First Minister that they wish to make a statement. Before I call the deputy First Minister, I remind Members in the Chamber that, in light of the social distancing being observed by 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 present in the Chamber can do that by rising in their place or by notifying the Speaker's Table directly.

I remind Members to be concise in asking their question. A statement is not an opportunity for debate, and long introductions will not be allowed. I also remind Members that, in accordance with long-established procedure, points of order are not normally taken during a statement or the period for questions afterwards.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I wish to make the following statement on the thirty-fifth summit meeting of the British-Irish Council (BIC), which took place on Friday 11 June 2021. I hope that the Assembly will understand that recent events regarding the position of the First Minister meant that it was not possible to make this statement as promptly as is customary following a summit.

The summit was hosted by the Executive and attended by the then First Minister, Arlene Foster MLA, and by me as deputy First Minister, as well as by Minister Poots, Minister Swann, Minister Mallon, Minister Long, Minister Murphy, Minister Hargey, junior Minister Kearney and former junior Minister Lyons. They have agreed that I will make this statement on their behalf.

The Scottish Government delegation was led by Nicola Sturgeon. The Welsh Government delegation was led by Mark Drakeford, the First Minister, who attended virtually.

The British Government were led by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Michael Gove. The Government of Guernsey were led by the Chief Minister, Peter Ferbrache, who also attended virtually. The Government of Jersey were led by the Chief Minister, Senator John Le Fondré. The Irish Government were led by an Taoiseach, Micheál Martin. The Isle of Man Government delegation was led by the Chief Minister, Howard Quayle. The full list of delegates who attended the summit is attached to the copy of the statement provided to Members.

This was the first summit to be hosted by the Executive since 2013, and we were delighted to host the meeting in Fermanagh. We welcomed the attendance in person by representatives of other Administrations despite the difficulties imposed by travel restrictions. The focus of the summit was on recovery from COVID. It is important that, as we move through recovery, we do so both informed of and learning from the approaches being taken across member Administrations. Our engagement in the British-Irish Council enables that to happen.

Ministers discussed the impact of COVID-19 across member Administrations and reflected on the need for approaches to recovery that are sustainable and that address the potentially long-lasting impacts. The Council also discussed areas of coherence across member Administrations for recovery, as well as planning for potential future impacts of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented challenges to all the BIC Administrations, as it has done globally. Other Administrations are, like us, operating and planning for recovery in a still-evolving situation, as the vaccination programme progresses but new variants emerge. All recognised the need to remain alert, flexible and responsive as external factors change around us.

A common theme of the members' reports was the way in which the crisis has acted as a driver for change to ways of working, and that has created changes in approach that are irreversible. Societies have had to innovate rapidly, and positive developments have taken place that may not have occurred without the challenge of combating the impact of the pandemic. To cite a few examples, digital transformation has been essential to the delivery of our public services and is becoming the norm; sustainability efforts have been enabled through new ways of working; and a greater and very important focus is being placed on the mental health of the population.

Administrations at the summit also discussed the latest political developments across their jurisdictions and noted the recent elections held in a number of the jurisdictions. Ministers provided an update and engaged on a number of topics of mutual interest, including the EU-UK relationship.

Ministers took the opportunity to reflect on the period since the establishment of the British-Irish Council and on how the Council had evolved to adapt to a changed context. They welcomed the fact that, despite the pandemic, the British-Irish Council had continued to meet by virtual means. Ministers considered a number of potential developments that would further develop the role of the Council in responding to new and emerging trends and challenges and in promoting its objective of positively strengthening links and relationships among the people of these islands. The latest BIC annual report has now been published on the Council's website.

Finally, the Council noted the secretariat's 2020-21 end-of-year report and welcomed the publication of the Council's annual report for 2020-21. The next summit will be hosted by the Welsh Government later this year. I commend the statement to the Assembly.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the joint First Minister for her statement, and I welcome the fact that the British-Irish Council meeting took place, albeit in difficult circumstances. It is really important that everyone working for people and in communities right across these islands be given the opportunity to come together to discuss matters of common interest and to share ideas and practice that will help develop the work that we do. COVID recovery was high on the agenda, but COVID is still very much on people's minds. People are still worried about the virus, and the numbers that we are hearing over the past week are very worrying. There is some comfort to be taken from the fact that hospital admissions and serious illness from the virus are not translating into intensive care admissions yet, but the key word is "yet".

Bonkers Boris announced yesterday that he intends to relax many of the key regulations that are in place in England, and that is being done in the face of many of the scientific facts. Even his most senior advisers suggest that they will continue to wear masks in crowded environments whilst telling everyone else that they do not have to and that it is a choice.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I remind the Member that this is an opportunity to ask questions.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Chairs of Committees are also afforded the opportunity to make a few introductory remarks.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

As I have allowed you to.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

What does that therefore mean? That the Chief Medical Officer and the Chief Scientific Adviser will still wear masks but that everyone else is OK? That type of mixed messaging is ludicrous. Will the Minister tell us in detail what discussions there were, at the summit meeting and since, about the different paces of relaxation to COVID and whether the different pace in GB and the island of Ireland will have any impact upon people here?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for his question. He is right to reflect that people are still worried about the pandemic and about the fact that, with the new delta variant becoming our dominant strain, people are right to be cautious and anxious. However, I always point to the positive, and the positive is that the vaccination programme is rolling out very well, and we need to continue to see uptake. I encourage all Members to use their good office to try to promote the uptake of the vaccine because that is our best defence.

Boris Johnson made announcements yesterday, and, as I noted in the statement, throughout the pandemic, all member Administrations of BIC have, at different times, been in different positions and taken different paths. We have prided ourselves on taking our own path, based on our own information and advised by our own Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Adviser, and that remains the case.

With regard to the announcement yesterday, personally, my view is that it is far too much far too soon, albeit we want to keep making progress, and we want to keep lifting the restrictions where we can. Our Executive will met this Thursday, and our Executive will decide collectively on our next step.

With regard to the issue of masks that the Member referred to, the Health Minister and the Chief Medical Officer have been very clear in saying that we are not there yet. That will be up for discussion on Thursday, but I will be supportive of that view.

We want to keep making progress, but the best way that we can do that is by going steadily, continually making progress and getting the maximum number of people vaccinated. I will keep repeating this message: please encourage people to come forward and take up the vaccination.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister provide an update on the ongoing work of the Council?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was useful that we were able to meet in person at this time. We were able to have a very frank conversation around where we all are with the COVID crisis, but we are very much looking towards the future and other ways that we can work together.

There have been four virtual ministerial meetings, including a joint housing and collaborative spatial planning meeting held recently. The housing and collaborative spatial planning work sectors are chaired by our Executive colleagues, so there is a lot of work going on there. There is also a lot of work going on around the misuse of substances. That work sector will be renamed drugs and alcohol, and there is a lot of work going on there.

There is a lot of conversation and work being done around a review of how we work. It will take a very different approach like a task-and-finish approach, so it should allow us to be able to look at areas where we can collectively work and be able to find ways to do things better and more speedily.

We have 11 live work sectors across a whole range of things. Those are: creative industries; digital inclusion; drugs and alcohol; early years; energy; environment; housing; social inclusion; indigenous, minority and lesser-used languages; and transport. There is a lot of work being done around the future of the Council and how we can work more collaboratively and share information. That is advantageous to us all.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a ráitis ar maidin. I thank the joint First Minister for her statement this morning. Does she have any concerns about the delivery arrangements for the Levelling Up Fund and the Shared Prosperity Fund?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do indeed. The delivery arrangements for the Levelling Up Fund and the Shared Prosperity Fund pilot programme cut across the responsibilities of a number of Executive Departments. The Executive continue to consider the impact of the loss of EU funding and the approach to replacements in Whitehall Departments.

It is very clear that the British Government intend to use the financial assistance powers in the Internal Market Act to deliver those funds intended as EU replacements and funding streams where we would have expected to receive Barnett allocations. That approach directly bypasses the devolved structures, so it is a matter of concern that the Westminster Government approach clearly does not build on existing and well-established structures that we have in line with the Executive's agreed position, nor does it give the Executive or our Ministers the normal role that they would have had in devolved functions.

The way that they are to be financed is a matter of concern. The Levelling Up Fund, which you referred to, is to be financed using spending power that was promised to us in the spending review, and the Shared Prosperity Fund is to be a replacement for our income from EU programmes. Urgent clarification is required to ensure the effective delivery of this funding locally. It is essential that the Executive's reviews and spending priorities are taken into consideration in the delivery of these funds to ensure that there is maximum benefit and delivery from the support that is provided.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her statement and answers. You referred to attendees' difficulties with travel. Was there any discussion about when we will see an end to the inconsistencies and inequality within the common travel area, particularly from GB to the Republic of Ireland? Does she agree that the current travel rules are surprising and potentially outdated given that, over the past six months, the Republic of Ireland has consistently had a much higher infection rate than Northern Ireland?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The issue of travel was touched upon and continues to be touched upon because we are at different places in the virus spread. That has been the case the whole way through the pandemic. The Member should not get too excited if the South of Ireland's cases are higher than ours at the moment or vice versa because, at times, we were the best in Europe and there were times when we were the worst. It is important that we work together and finally see a resolution to the travel issue, particularly the travel locator forms, which has been ongoing for some time. We have encouraged a resolution to that, and progress has been made.

As travel starts to open up — and that seems to be the direction of travel across the board; excuse the pun — it is important that we are as aligned as we can be across these islands. I have always advocated that two-island approach. That is the best way. It is simpler for people to understand if there is no conflict in messaging, for example. I would like us to be as aligned as we can on travel, whether that is within the common travel area or as we start to see international travel open up.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you, deputy First Minister. Given the Member of Parliament for East Antrim's, quite frankly, offensive and unnecessary remark about our Health Minister yesterday, what work was done in your Council meeting on harmonising restrictions across all the jurisdictions? What actions are you taking to expand the green list for travellers?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, travel was discussed. Each Administration is coming at this with their own data and information, and taking decisions based on what they think is in the best interests of their people at that time. The better aligned that we can be, the easier that it will be for all of us, and the public at large, to understand.

On the comments about the Health Minister, the Health Minister has a very difficult job at a very difficult time. He deserves the support of the Executive and other MLAs. Quite frankly, unless you have been in his shoes, you will not understand the level of the decisions that have had to be taken. People should be very focused on recovery, which is what the public want. We should focus on taking decisions to remove the restrictions as quickly as we can and getting people back to some sense of normality as quickly as we can. So many people have lost their jobs. The economic consequences of the pandemic are dire. We have a big job of work to do. We should be focused on working together to do that as opposed to taking pop shots at the Health Minister, or anybody else for that matter.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I am looking at the list of ministerial delegates at this event. It includes the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, his deputy, Mr Leo Varadkar, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Simon Coveney. The event was held in Fermanagh, and presumably they were able to cross our border to attend it. If the Minister was listening to Radio Ulster this morning, she will have heard the story of a Northern Ireland family that has been effectively placed under house arrest in the Republic of Ireland. Has the issue of the Irish Government providing the necessary information to those arriving in Dublin and travelling on to Northern Ireland been satisfactorily resolved? It is ridiculous that Irish Government Ministers are able to cross our border but Northern Ireland citizens are not.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That family's situation was brought to my attention just before I came into the Chamber; I did not hear about it on the radio. Obviously, we will work to try to get a resolution for that family, which, I believe, has issues with young children at home, and perhaps sickness in the case of one of the individuals. I hope that there is a speedy resolution to that.

Again, it is back to what I have said previously: it is important that we share information and data so that people are very clear about the travel limitations or otherwise, the testing policy and the information. It falls to the two Health Ministers and the two Chief Medical Officers to make that as simple as possible. I welcome the fact that there was a meeting last week, I believe, between the two Chief Medical Officers. I hope to continue to see progress around the sharing of data and making sure that we are as joined up as we can be in this period. That is in the interests of all the people who live on this island and the people who travel right across the common travel area.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the joint First Minister for her statement. The BIC was COVID-focused, which created opportunities for discussion about its impact and the recovery, and a good platform for sharing information. Given the scale of the challenges facing our health and social care services, including the crisis with waiting lists, the problems facing families when they try to access packages of domiciliary care and the ongoing fight against COVID-19, does the joint First Minister agree that those issues transcend party politics and that a health summit involving all Executive parties should now be called to agree an urgent and joint response?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thanks. I absolutely agree. As a former Health Minister, I am very aware of the challenges facing the health and social care system, which was already stretched due to Tory austerity over many years. The pandemic has very much heightened those challenges. Addressing all that in ordinary times would be difficult enough. We have faced the growing waiting list situation in a pandemic. It is clear that we need an urgent and unified approach to tackle waiting lists and to make sure that people get access to healthcare as and when they need it. I welcome the recent initiative by the Health Minister, who has brought forward mechanisms to deal with the waiting list situation, including using all-island healthcare. That is practical and makes sense. It is evidence that positive outcomes can be achieved when you work together. Hosting our own Executive health summit would certainly be a very positive step forward. I certainly look forward to that discussion. It will take heavy lifting from all of us to turn that situation around. The waiting list situation at the moment is atrocious. We have to fix it collectively.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for her statement. During the BIC meeting, the Foreign Minister of the Irish Republic took the opportunity to state his views on the protocol. Will the Minister, who, quite rightfully, did not respond to him in that forum, indicate whether she thinks that that was an appropriate use of that forum? He would be better keeping his views to himself in places where they are not appropriate.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member is right: Minister Simon Coveney, and maybe the Taoiseach as well, raised the issue of the protocol, and rightly so; they were speaking about current political developments. It would have been to ignore the elephant in the room for it not to be mentioned at a summit of that nature, given the implications that Brexit has on our people, our economy and wider society. It was appropriate that it was discussed there. The Member may shake her head, but we would not have a protocol today if we did not have Brexit, which you and your party ably championed.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a ráitis. I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, even Minister Michael Gove has said that the challenges that are in front of us because of the protocol can be resolved. Do you agree that the focus now needs to shift to maximise the opportunities and minimise the challenges for our businesses so that they can enjoy the access that we now have to numerous markets, such as the British market, the EU market and the rest of the world, and that having such access really enables us to mitigate some of the worst impacts and effects of Brexit?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Again, that question goes beyond the statement, but the Minister may wish to respond.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was referred to, insofar as it came up under current political issues. I will address it, given that I answered Mrs Dodds's question.

It will come as no surprise to the Member who asked the question that the disruption and difficulty that we are experiencing is a direct result of Brexit — the hardest possible Brexit and one that was rejected by the majority of people in the Assembly.

To go back to my previous answer, those who championed Brexit need to own some of the economic consequences and uncertainty that have flowed from it. However, our collective effort and focus now needs to be on protecting jobs and livelihoods. As the Member knows, the protocol is our only protection against the hardest possible Brexit and its worst excesses. Businesses want the protocol to work, and they want solutions to the challenges that we face. In my view, there are solutions to be found via the Joint Committee. The CBI recently acknowledged that the protocol is already working for many businesses and presents many exciting opportunities.

All of our collective effort, as the Member said, needs to be to minimise the challenges and maximise the opportunities. Let us make the protocol work smoothly and give our manufacturing and agri-food industries, our food processors and all other businesses the certainty and stability that they require to take advantage of the dual market access now available to them.

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

Brexit has damaged relationships on this island and between Britain and the island of Ireland. Given that many in the Chamber have focused on what they see as the damage done to east-west relationships, is it not the case that, given that the British-Irish Council is literally the first item in strand 3 of the Good Friday Agreement, it is precisely the forum for these issues to be raised and discussed? Was a specific work stream agreed to mitigate some of the outworkings of Brexit and, yes, maximising the opportunities for all the people of these islands?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member. The summit focused on COVID, so that was the main topic of conversation, but, of course, it is the natural forum in which to have those conversations. When we talk about the Good Friday Agreement, we talk about the totality of relationships. It is about relationships and about having honest conversations, and the British-Irish Council, the North/South Ministerial Council and this Chamber are the places where we should have those discussions. It should come as no surprise to anybody that the summit took the time to have a conversation, albeit a brief one, on that issue. I have no doubt that we will have to come back to a lot more conversation in the next format later this year in Wales. There will be an opportunity again for us to speak about the current political situation, and I am sure that Brexit will still be on the agenda.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on many sectors of our society that were already disadvantaged, including children, young people, women and those on low incomes or with disabilities. Will the joint First Minister confirm that building a better and fairer society will be core to recovery?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I welcome Áine, the new MLA for Fermanagh and South Tyrone, to our team on her second day in the role and wish her the very best. I have no doubt that she will be a champion for the people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone. I stand to be corrected, but I believe that she may be our youngest MLA. It is important that the interests of young people are reflected in the Chamber, so congratulations and good luck.

I agree with you about the need to tackle the high levels of poverty, inequality and disadvantage that exist across our communities; that has to be at the core of our approach to recovery. I am also particularly aware that the social and economic impact of the pandemic has fallen hard on women, and we have talked about that on a number of occasions in the Chamber. Many of those women are in low-paid, precarious employment while many others have lost their jobs. As we step out of the restrictions, we must develop more sustainable and strategic responses that, at their core, break those endless cycles of poverty, exclusion and inequality. Looking after the most vulnerable, the lonely, those in housing need, those in poverty, families with disabled members, those with a disability and workers on low incomes must be core to the recovery strategy. That will mean doing things differently and, often, doing things more effectively.

Work has been ongoing to develop the draft integrated recovery plan, which is focused on delivery over the next 24 months.

The four main areas are economic growth; tackling inequalities; the health of the population; and green growth and sustainability. That will be a longer-term, strategic approach, and it will be incorporated in the Programme for Government and the work that we are doing there. There is a lot to be done, but the recovery plan will identify ambitious opportunities to break, as I say, those longer-term cycles of poverty and exclusion.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

It turns out that the protocol was discussed and raised by the Dublin Government. Why was that concealed from the House in the statement, given that there is a statutory duty to report the goings-on at the Councils to the House? If it was raised, did no unionist Minister raise the economic dislocation that is being caused by the protocol? If they did, why have we not heard about that? If they did not —.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

There are a number of questions there.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Well, Mr Deputy Speaker, we are in a strange circumstance —.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. I have allowed the Member to ask a number of questions.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Towards the end of the statement, it says:

"The Summit also discussed the latest political developments across their jurisdictions".

Obviously, that includes political developments around Brexit and the protocol.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Obviously.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Absolutely —.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Why are we not told?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Absolutely, it is "obviously", because it is a recent political development.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Why did you not tell us?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Allow the Minister to speak, please.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I encourage the Member to read the statement.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

It does not mention the protocol.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

That is the end of questions —.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Section 52C of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is clear that, following meetings such as this, there shall be a report to the House on the goings-on at those meetings. We had a circumstance this morning where a statement was produced that concealed the fact that the protocol was even discussed. The word "protocol" is not mentioned. Is it in order and is it compliant with section 52C for a Minister to come to the House and conceal from it a relevant aspect of the proceedings on which she is allegedly reporting? Is that in order?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

It is clear from the answers that there was discussion on the issue. I will pass the matter to the Speaker's Office to make a declaration on it and to determine whether anything needs to go forward. The Member has rightly raised the matter and put it on the record.

I ask Members to take their ease for a few moments until the next item of business.

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

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I have received notice from the Minister of Education, Miss Michelle McIlveen, that she wishes to make a statement.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I will make the following statement, on behalf of former Minister Weir and Minister Hargey, on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in education sector format that was held on Wednesday 9 June 2021.

The meeting was conducted via videoconference owing to current COVID restrictions. Minister Foley TD, the Minister for Education in the Republic of Ireland, Minister Hargey as accompanying Minister and the then Minister of Education, Peter Weir MLA, attended the meeting. The meeting was cordial and productive, and progress was made on a number of key issues, including the education implications of the UK's withdrawal from the EU; the response to COVID-19; a review of the work programme; an update on EU funding; educational underachievement; special educational needs (SEN) and cooperation between the inspectorates.

The NSMC noted the current assessment of the education implications of the UK's withdrawal from the EU, and welcomed the ongoing engagement and implementation of all measures necessary to ensure that the agreed common travel area (CTA) rights and privileges are protected. Ministers also welcomed the commitments made on future funding for education programmes and the work that is under way to develop them.

Ministers noted the Irish Government's decision to facilitate continued access for Northern Ireland higher education students wishing to avail themselves of ERASMUS mobilities in another participating country in Europe and reaffirmed their commitment to continued cooperation on education in the new relationship between the EU and the UK. Ministers also noted the UK's proposed funding of the Turing scheme.

Ministers noted the successful implementation of measures to facilitate the safe reopening of all schools, following the school closures in January and February 2021, and the continued support provided by teachers to their pupils through the delivery of online provision. The Council noted the role played by education agencies in supporting pupils' well-being, particularly those vulnerable from interruptions to direct contact with teachers and the wider education community. The Council was also advised of the response by those delivering programmes in youth and other non-formal education provision.

Ministers also noted that both Education Departments continue to liaise and share learnings on the development and delivery of response and supports to schools. The Council commended the efforts of all educators and support staff to deliver as normal an education experience as possible to the 1·3 million pupils across both jurisdictions during the past 18 months, typifying the unspoken vocation associated with education.

The NSMC noted the commitment to reviewing the work programme and the plan to convene a meeting of senior officials from relevant Departments, co-chaired by the secretary general and the permanent secretary of the respective Education Departments, to make recommendations for the future work programme.

Ministers noted the continuing impact of COVID-19 on Peace IV-funded shared education projects and the enhanced use of online technologies to overcome the challenges posed by the pandemic. The developments made on Peace IV shared education programme delivery, including proposed extensions, and the positive findings of the recent Peace IV shared education impact evaluation, published in April 2021, were noted by the Council.

The NSMC noted that the expert panel, appointed by the Northern Ireland Minister of Education under the New Decade, New Approach (NDNA) agreement to examine the links between persistent educational underachievement and socio-economic background, delivered its final report in June 2021.

Ministers also noted that research on the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools (DEIS) programme has been provided as part of the evidence base to the panel. The Council also noted that evidence gathered as part of 'A Fair Start' and the DEIS programme can be used as a basis for developing joint actions under the PEACE PLUS programme.

Ministers received an update from Gary Cooper, CEO of the Middletown Centre for Autism (MCA), and welcomed the progress made by the two Education Departments and the Middletown Centre for Autism to facilitate and maintain the delivery of the centre's range of services since the previous meeting in 2016.

The Council welcomed the efforts of the MCA management and staff to remain operational and the continued delivery of elements of their service throughout the period of COVID-19 restrictions. The proposed delivery plan for the centre and the fact that the new board has been in place since April 2021 were noted. The NSMC noted that the MCA's day-to-day operations have been largely unaffected by the UK withdrawal from the EU, but matters of data transfer and recognition of professional qualifications remain under consideration. The Council also noted recent developments in the delivery of special educational needs programmes in both jurisdictions.

Ministers welcomed the continuing collaborative work of the education inspectorates, albeit online due to public health advice.

My officials and I look forward to working with Minister Foley and her Department as we continue to meet the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I think that the Education Minister was replaced the last time I spoke in the Chamber on education. I hope that the current Minister does not meet with the same fate. I am grateful for the early engagement that the Minister has given to me and the Education Committee in her role.

Equal educational opportunity is key, and we hear increasingly that, to achieve that, equal digital educational opportunity is key. Other jurisdictions are working towards one appropriate digital device and internet connectivity per pupil. What is the Minister's assessment of the extent of the digital inequality in Northern Ireland that is faced by pupils? Will she work towards that aim of one appropriate device and internet connectivity per pupil in Northern Ireland?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for his comments, particularly those in relation to digital devices and the ongoing issues relating to internet access. They create a problem and, obviously, relate to inequality among pupils. He will be aware that, up until 21 June, 24,824 new devices had been provided through the Education Authority (EA) to schools to lend to pupils. Schools have been informed that devices will remain with them into the next year for ongoing support for learning for disadvantaged and vulnerable pupils. A small contingency of devices has been kept in case of further lockdown or to replace damaged devices. It is an issue that is ongoing in the Department, particularly in discussions with EA, and anything that we can do to address it is on our radar.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her statement. She made a brief reference to cooperation between the inspectorates. Obviously, that is an important area of work. Will the Minister expand or elaborate on what that area of work has entailed?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I welcome the cooperation that has taken place between both inspectorates. I am pleased that the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) has been able to share its knowledge, skills and insight with other inspectors and learn from its counterparts. Over the past year, for example, the ETI has shared practice on its approach towards inspecting how schools in Northern Ireland address bullying. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the senior management of both inspectorates have continued to engage regularly and have shared information and practice with the heads and deputy heads of inspectorates across the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. That has enabled important learning to be shared in relation to remote learning, support for schools, Education Restart, public examinations, recovery and transition through to a resumption of inspection. As the Member will appreciate, this has been a particularly challenging time across education, and it is good to know that inspectors have been continuing on work and learning of best practice from others.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a ráitis ar maidin. I thank the Minister for her statement this morning. Educational underachievement and the shared challenges that it presents across the island were discussed at an NSMC meeting last year.

Since then, we have had the 'A Fair Start' report. How will cooperation in this area be enhanced?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. As he will understand, I was not present at the meeting to get the full report of the engagement on educational underachievement. The work that we have done in Northern Ireland will be useful as a reference point to those in the Irish Republic as well. As you know, the work recommended by the panel through 'A Fair Start' has a substantial budget attached to it. We will be working towards it as an Executive. Sharing best practice is useful, and I am confident that that will continue in the discussions.

Justin McNulty (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for her statement. It is good to see such positive references to the Middletown Centre for Autism. I welcome its incoming board and wish all the members well in their very important roles.

There is one line that concerns me, and it is about Brexit. It states that the UK withdrawal from the EU means:

"data transfer and recognition of professional qualifications remain under consideration."

I am not really worried about the transfer of sausages west-east, but I am really worried that Brexit has the potential to have an adverse impact on children's education. Can you give some more information on that, please, Minister?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. That issue was primarily about data sharing and data adequacy. Since that meeting, the issue has essentially been resolved. Alongside the recognition of professional qualifications, data issues fell in with other implications for the EA, CCEA and the Middletown Centre for Autism in providing services in, and employing staff from, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Sharing information was a concern at that meeting. However, since then and after more than a year of discussions, the European Union has formally recognised the UK's high data protection standards. That will allow the seamless flow of personal data from the EU to the UK, which will address the concerns that were raised at the meeting.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I welcome the Minister to her first box. She is no stranger to the box and giving information.

I have been contacted by many groups that will fall through the cracks in the transition period between Peace IV and Peace V funding. There does not seem to be anything to catch them. Will the Minister update the House on any of the shared education projects that may fall foul of lack of funding between Peace IV and Peace V, and any steps that she has taken to address that?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I understand that there have been some concerns about that. The are two main shared education Peace IV projects for which the Department of Education was identified as the accountable Department: Collaboration and Sharing in Education, which takes place in primary, post-primary and special schools; and Sharing from the Start, which takes place in early years settings. Both projects have been impacted by COVID and the associated periods of school closure, as you would imagine.

I understand that there have been requests for a temporary variation arrangement. That has provided some flexibility and ensured that schools and early years settings have not been penalised for an interruption to delivery. Principals and leaders have been working hard to try to fulfil the needs associated with shared education programmes. Obviously, face-to-face contact was missing during that period and has been replaced, to a certain degree, by online technology.

Work to deliver on those projects has continued. Both projects have sought an extension for a further year. The Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) has approved the extension for the Sharing from the Start project. The extension for Collaboration and Sharing in Education is under consideration and will require approval from SEUPB. Work to reach a solution is continuing.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I was interested in the question that the Chair of the Education Committee asked about digital poverty, and there is no doubt that children and young people's experience of COVID has exacerbated that and made life incredibly difficult. The Department has made enormous strides towards helping young people with that issue, but I am keen that our education system also develops a digital spine for Northern Ireland so that young people are taught the technologies that will help them to gain employment in the future. Does the Minister agree that it is appropriate and desirable to increase young people's knowledge of the digital sector earlier in life and that we can work together to do that so that young people are ready to take their place in the economy of the future?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question. She brings her own experience from the Department for the Economy and, no doubt, from her grandchildren. My nieces and nephews were digitally aware from the age of about three. They can probably work my phone better than I can. I absolutely agree with the Member's sentiment. We need to be much more cognisant of that and to focus our funding on it. That very much ties into the commentary from the Chair of the Committee.

Nicola Brogan (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire fosta. I thank the Minister for her statement. In relation to ongoing and future cooperation, what is the Minister's assessment of the impact of COVID on cross-border shared education projects?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question and will refer back to my response to Mr Butler. It has had quite a significant impact, in that they have not been able to have face-to-face engagement, which is critical, particularly to the shared education experience. Although online technologies are beneficial, they have not been able to replace that face-to-face engagement. I am glad that we are in a situation where we are able to seek an extension of that funding so that that invaluable work can continue.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. Yesterday, the Autism (Amendment) Bill had its First Stage in the House. We are all aware of the outstanding Middletown Centre for Autism and the support that it provides for parents. Can the Minister provide details of the level of funding that the centre receives and of the work that it carries out?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. The Middletown Centre for Autism is absolutely known for its outstanding work. If the Committee gets the opportunity, and if visits are permitted post September, I recommend that it takes the opportunity to go to the centre to see the work that it has been doing. I had the opportunity to do that when I was on the Committee.

The Middletown Centre for Autism received a total annual resource budget of £2·5 million for 2021-22. The Department provided £1·25 million of that. The allocated capital budget for that period is £0·2 million, of which the Department provided £100,000.

As you know, the Middletown Centre for Autism was established in 2007. It supports the delivery of services for learning support and assessment as well as training and research. The learning support and assessment service is a second-level service that delivers intensive assessment and learning support — it has been adapted to meet COVID-19 regulations — to around 60 children and young people with autism through a transdisciplinary approach. It also has three whole-school referrals, facilitating school staff to create an autism-friendly environment on an annual basis in Northern Ireland. There were also 12 referrals to the learning support and assessment service in the Republic of Ireland, where overall delivery is much more focused on training. In 2021-22, the centre aims to provide 3,300 training opportunities to professionals, as well as to 1,000 parents in Northern Ireland. It also aims to provide 7,000 professional training opportunities alongside 7,000 parental training opportunities in the Irish Republic.

Rosemary Barton (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, what sharing is taking place on both sides of the border to deal with the challenges of persistent educational underachievement and its links with children's socio-economic background?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question. I refer to my previous response to Mr Sheehan. I was not present at the meeting, so, at this stage, I am unaware of the ongoing work on underachievement. I know that an update was given on 'A Fair Start', which is the document that was published on educational underachievement in Northern Ireland. I would like to think that lessons will be learned on both sides of the border from that ongoing work.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I ask for some clarity on the issue of mutual recognition of qualifications. Was it a data transfer issue, or was that a separate issue? It was discussed last year at the North/South Ministerial Council. There have been recent developments in both jurisdictions on special educational needs programmes. Will the Minister provide an update on what is taking place there?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I understand that the issue related to data sharing. There may be a bit of an issue with how the regulators continue their work in developing responses. I am mindful that there is cross-border mobility for teachers, and the General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland and the Teaching Council have engaged with each other and, I understand, with other UK teaching regulators to mitigate any immediate issues. Moreover, policies have been put in place to ensure that suitably qualified teachers continue to be able to register and work in either jurisdiction. That facilitates mobility while ensuring that all necessary safeguards are put in place and observed. That may have been discussed at a previous meeting. However, I understand that the issues about which there were concerns at the meeting were of data adequacy and data sharing.

Peter Weir (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for her statement. As someone who has visited the Middletown Centre for Autism, I encourage anyone, and particularly the Education Committee, to visit it. It is very worthwhile to do so.

The Minister said that the UK-wide Turing scheme was raised at the meeting and that she received information on it from the Republic of Ireland. Will she give more background information on the Turing scheme and on what encouragement will be given to schools in Northern Ireland to participate in it?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I could put the question back to him, as he was at the meeting. Gavin Williamson, the Education Secretary, announced last December that a pot of around £100 million would be provided to enable over 35,000 students to go on placements and exchanges overseas. That was to start in September 2021. The Member will know that the Irish Government have also put a scheme in place that will allow higher-education students from Northern Ireland to have continued access to and to avail themselves of Erasmus mobilities in Europe.

The majority of the Turing scheme funding is focused on higher education and really falls within the remit of the Department for the Economy. To apply for schools projects, schools must provide general vocational or technical education at any level from primary to upper secondary or be a national schools consortium such as the Education Authority and be applying on behalf of a number of schools. Unfortunately, to date, no schools from Northern Ireland have applied to the Turing scheme. I understand that the Minister for the Economy will meet the Minister of State for universities at the Department of Education in England to discuss how to raise awareness of the scheme to schools and colleges.

That meeting was scheduled to take place in May, and I understand that it will now take place in September. I do not have further details on that.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Mr Weir may have just set a pub quiz question: which former Minister asked a question on a statement on a matter for which he was responsible?

[Laughter.]

My question to the Minister —.

Peter Weir (DUP, Strangford)

It takes one to know one

[Laughter.]

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yesterday's significant announcement of €40 million from the Shared Island Fund for universities was welcome. Did Minister Foley give any indication that the Dublin Government are also interested in using funding from the Shared Island Fund for education, particularly along the border? Will the Minister lobby Minister Foley for such an investment in shared education along the border from that fund?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. As I said a number of times in the statement, I was not present at the meeting, so I am not sure whether anything further was discussed about any sort of prospective fund. I am happy to follow that up.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Peter can tell you afterwards.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

First, I welcome the Minister to her role. We miss her as the Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure.

At the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in education sector format, the expert panel’s report on educational underachievement was discussed. The report refers to the post-primary transfer process in Northern Ireland as a "systemic inequality". Will the Minister provide an update on the context of that? How many children are unplaced in the post-primary transfer process this year? That issue has come across my desk and, I am sure, many other Members' desks.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. As of today, 85 children are unplaced. As he will know, there has been work over the last number of weeks to rectify that. A number of challenges have been presented, and we have made some temporary variations to schools to alleviate some of the pressures. There are some areas in which it is more difficult to achieve extra places, because schools physically may not be able to take a larger school population. We have been working closely with the EA, schools and parents to find suitable places. I appeal to parents to identify a school for their child. If they do that, we can see where the true pressures are, and we can try to alleviate them. As of today, the number has decreased, but it is still a little too high for my liking.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

What do affirmations about the protocol's adverse impact on North/South meetings by the Minister's new leader mean, if such meetings continue in a routine fashion? If the Minister and her party are serious in opposing the protocol, when will we see an impact on "North/Southery", given that east-west relations continue to be seriously trashed?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. He will understand that we have ministerial duties and that there is a ministerial code that we need to abide by. However, all strands need to work together, and, clearly, if there are serious east-west issues, those will reflect on our North/South relationships. Those relationships will be impacted, and that will be demonstrated, as the Member knows.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

No other Member has indicated to me that they wish to ask the Minister a question. I ask Members to take their ease for a few moments before we move on to the next item of business.

Executive Committee Business

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I beg to introduce the Private Tenancies Bill [NIA 32/17-22], which is a Bill to amend the law relating to private tenancies.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I beg to move

That the Local Government (Meetings and Performance) Bill [NIA 26/17-22] do now pass.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

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

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I welcome the opportunity to explain the progression of the legislation. The Bill's intention was always to support councils through the difficulties imposed by the pandemic and onwards through the recovery period. The changes set out in the Bill will provide much-needed support to councils, giving them again the ability to hold remote meetings. That will provide a valuable tool that will enable meetings to be held remotely or in hybrid form, allowing councillors to participate in democratic local government while social distancing and self-isolation remain. The Bill will also regularise the decision that I took at the height of the pandemic to set aside certain local government performance improvement duties for 2020-21 to ensure that no unnecessary burdens were placed on councils in that area, allowing them to concentrate on providing vital services to the community. The enabling powers in clauses 2 and 4 will provide the necessary flexibility to support the sector further as we move forward. They also provide the necessary powers should there be any future upsurge in cases of coronavirus.

I will take the opportunity to address a couple of issues that were raised during yesterday's Further Consideration Stage debate. Concern was raised about the lack of consultation with the sector on the Bill. Given the urgency of the provisions, it was not possible to consult in the normal manner. I can, however, assure the House that there has been engagement with the local government sector. As I said yesterday, I spoke to NILGA about the issues, and my officials discussed the proposed meetings and performance clauses with Society of Local Authority Chief Executive (SOLACE) members and individual officers. My officials also wrote to all council chief executives before the Bill was introduced to the Assembly to update them on my intention to bring it forward.

Much has been made of the enabling power to extend remote meetings, with it being seen as a power grab because it also regularises the making of provisions on speaking, voting and participating in remote meetings and on public access to meetings and documents. To be clear, the intention is to ensure that the legislation that governs council meetings — Parts 7 and 8 of and schedule 5 to the Local Government Act 2014 — should apply whether a meeting is to be held in person, remotely or by hybrid means. Councillors should have the same voting, speaking or participation rights no matter what form the meeting takes. Provisions on public access to meetings and documents in the 2014 Act should also apply whether a meeting is held in person, remotely or by hybrid means.

The intention of the enabling power in clause 2 is to allow us to facilitate remote working. It will also enable my Department to make suitable adjustments to local government legislation to ensure that references to meetings, participation in those meetings and public access to those meetings include meetings that are held by remote or hybrid means; in fact, it will be something along the lines of the 2020 meetings regulations, which set out what references to "remote meetings" and "remote access" mean.

I am confident that the enabling power to extend or make permanent regulations in relation to remote meetings will provide the opportunity to put in place fully scrutinised legislation that will provide councils with a more flexible framework for meetings as they move forward post pandemic. I am confident that they will not restrict councils' autonomy but will facilitate them to ensure that decision-making can remain fully inclusive. In any case, any regulations to be made under clause 2 will be subject to the draft affirmative procedure. The Communities Committee will be able to thoroughly scrutinise the regulations, and, ultimately, it will be for the Assembly to decide which draft regulations should be made.

My Department will continue to liaise with councils on their statutory performance improvement duties. Having the enabling power in the Bill, we will be in a better position to address any further difficulties that arise as a result of the pandemic during councils' recovery this year. I was asked yesterday when Royal Assent would be granted once the Bill had been passed. We hope to have Royal Assent in a matter of weeks, but that is outside my control.

I acknowledge and thank everyone who has been involved with the Bill for the quick pace at which it has moved. In particular, I thank Members for agreeing to the Bill progressing by accelerated passage and for their consideration throughout the various stages. I also thank the Communities Committee for making time for my officials to brief it at very short notice, as we moved to the Further Consideration Stage. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister and the officials in the Department for the work that has been done so swiftly on the Bill. I also thank the Department for briefing the Committee a couple of weeks ago. We are all in agreement that accelerated passage is most certainly not our chosen way for any legislation, and the number of issues and questions that have been raised by Members about the Bill has shown that.

I am glad that our councils will be able, as soon as the Bill receives Royal Assent, to hold their meetings in whatever form, whether it is in person, fully virtual or a hybrid. None of us knows what lies ahead in the coming weeks or months or next year, so it is good that we will not be in the position that we were in in March of this year — sorry, maybe it was after March; I am totally confused — when councils were having to outlay money to hold their meetings in venues that were big enough to facilitate all their councillors. I am glad that we have got to this position.

Everyone knows my views on clause 2 from yesterday's debate, but I understand that the regulations will be subject to the draft affirmative procedure and that the Committee will have an input to any that may have to be changed.

Again, I thank the Minister and her officials for the work that they have done and for listening to the concerns of Members early on and setting about making changes to the Bill. I support the Bill.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

The rationale behind the Bill, as outlined by the Minister and, once again, by the Chair of the Committee, is to allow councils flexibility in how they conduct their business and meetings in light of the COVID crisis — it is hard to think of any sector that has not had to adapt to new ways of working — and afford them and us the agility, should we find ourselves back in a lockdown situation, to conduct meetings and make decisions in a lawful way.

I have previously stated in the House, and will again for the record, that accelerated passage is a suboptimal way to process and pass legislation. That has become painfully apparent during the accelerated passage of this Bill. We should only use accelerated passage to pass legislation that needs to be passed now. Members made the point quite well at Further Consideration Stage yesterday that some of what the Bill would do might go beyond what is strictly necessary. However, I am content that the safeguards are in place that, should changes be required, those changes will have to come back to us as an Assembly, we will have sight of and input into them, and, ultimately, we can stop them if we fear that they are damaging to democracy.

I thank the Minister for the flexibility that she has demonstrated on the Bill, and the officials who have given us a lot in the little time that we had to consider it. I hope that it works well and that the councils work well with it to continue to deliver vital services and value to our ratepayers. I support the Bill.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

As others have said, accelerated passage is not always the best way to do legislation. However, we all recognise the pressures that our councils have been under. We know that the legislation that allowed them to have remote access to meetings expired early in May and that, since then, as the Committee Chair mentioned, councils have been trying workarounds and hiring large premises to hold their meetings.

I appreciate the concerns raised by others at Further Consideration Stage that changes to the Local Government Act 2014 were being made and that the legislation would supersede standing orders of councils. The new clause 2(5) of the Bill specifies:

"Regulations under this section may not be made unless a draft of them has been laid before and approved by a resolution of the Assembly."

I am content that the Department and the Minister will engage with councillors and council bodies when bringing forward those regulations. We all agree that co-production and co-design are the way forward for all legislation.

I, too, thank Julie Broadway and Anthony Carleton for their work and for engaging with the Committee when they did not have to. Thank you to the mayor — apologies; I have councils on the brain this morning — to the Minister for allowing those officials to meet the Committee at such short notice. It was much appreciated, and it helped to clear up a lot of my concerns.

I am grateful that the Minister took on board the concerns raised by the Committee and that changes were made. That is how we do legislation in this place; we can work together. I am pleased that the future of council meetings will be considered and that this issue does not relate only to COVID or the pandemic. How our councillors and, indeed, we in this place take our meetings in future will be different. At long last, we will be able to afford councillors access to remote meetings if they are on parental leave or if they have a long-term illness. When that measure is considered and brought forward, it can only be welcomed.

I am absolutely delighted that officials confirmed, when they met us in Committee, that no councillor will be denied a vote, placed on mute or silenced, and that points of order can be raised; that no chief executive, mayor or chairperson can deny our council colleagues the ability to take part in debate and play their role in the democratic process; and that regulations may not be made unless they are approved by the Assembly. Given that protection, I am delighted, on behalf of the Alliance Party, to support the Bill at Final Stage.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

No other Members have indicated that they wish to speak. I call the Minister to conclude the Final Stage.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thanks to all the members of the Committee for their contribution over the past few weeks. Some of the negotiations took place just outside these doors. I thank the Assembly officials and my officials in the Department. We have all worked on amendments and made sure that the Bill was scrutinised in the short time that we had, while moving at pace to legislate before the end of the Assembly term. I commend the Bill to the House.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the Local Government (Meetings and Performance) Bill [NIA 26/17-22] do now pass.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

We are flying through the Order Paper today. Members may take their ease for a moment before we move on to the next item of business. Thank you.

Committee Business

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I beg to move

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 17 December 2021, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

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

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Committee wishes to extend the Committee Stage of the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill because of the considerations that we need to have in Committee. Certain areas of the Bill will require significant work. In particular, we are looking at what are known as black-box procedures, where particular areas of finance have been laid out to look to how we manage those moneys. There are implications for the Bill having the potential to look at moneys of about £1·5 million, which, as the Assembly is fully aware, is about half a million pounds more than what is normally expected in black-box procedures. That is being opened up to potentially two years, and, as we are aware from numerous debates in the Assembly, there have indeed been occasions on which close to £1·5 billion has been hidden away in black boxes. That is not appropriate, so we need to consider the issue further. I ask the Assembly to support the motion.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

No other Members have indicated that they wish to speak. That being the case, it is not necessary for you to make a winding-up speech.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 17 December 2021, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Financial Reporting (Departments and Public Bodies) Bill.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes with concern the falling number of taxi drivers in the industry and the impact this will have on post-COVID-19 economic recovery; recognises the impact that the delay in reviewing fare structures has had in exacerbating this decline; and calls on the Minister for Infrastructure to implement measures to address the fall in driver numbers, to expedite the review of fare structures, to work with her Executive colleagues to identify a suite of measures that can be initiated to make the sector more attractive to new entrants, and to review her decision not to issue sector-specific support to operators.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The Committee's amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I beg to move the following amendment

Leave out all after the first "fare structures" and insert: "and the complexity of taxi driver testing have had in exacerbating this decline; and calls on the Minister for Infrastructure to implement measures to address the fall in driver numbers, to expedite the review of fare structures and to work with her Executive colleagues to identify a suite of measures that can be initiated to make the sector more attractive to new entrants, including a review of sector-specific support to operators."

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

By convention, where the sponsor of a motion seeks to amend their own motion, they are invited to address both the motion and the amendment within the time allocated to them. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes.

I call the Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure, Mr Jonathan Buckley, to open the debate on the motion and the amendment.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I commend the motion and the amendment to the House. I stand as Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure to speak on this issue. The Committee has long been a strong advocate for the taxi industry, for taxi operators and taxi drivers. The Department for Infrastructure has responsibility for the regulation of the taxi industry. To that end, the Committee has had close contact with its various representatives and has taken every opportunity to listen to their concerns and to advocate on their behalf.

During the pandemic, the Committee has doggedly promoted the issues faced by the taxi industry with the Minister for Infrastructure, her officials and her colleagues in the Executive. The Committee for Infrastructure has used every opportunity to champion the need for financial support for the taxi industry and to ensure that it is adequate and fair in its accessibility.

For the past year, the Committee has received briefings from the Minister and her officials and sought to find solutions to the problems faced by the industry during the pandemic and endeavoured to hold the Minister to account. Despite our best efforts, the pandemic has taken a toll on the taxi industry, and it faces a number of challenges in coming out of lockdown.

At its meeting on 23 June, representatives of taxi operators appeared before the Committee to bring to its attention the issues facing the industry and its proposals on what the Executive can do to help.

Due to the pandemic, taxi drivers stopped working. The reasons for that are obvious. During lockdown, there was very little available work, and drivers were trying to avoid infection for the sake of their own health and that of their families. As there was very little work, many drivers were forced to cancel their expensive insurance as they were unable to earn enough pay for it. Some even returned their cars, unable to maintain them.

Now that lockdown is easing and the world is opening up, taxi drivers are once again needed not only for the benefit of our hospitality sector and wider economic recovery but for the health and social care sector to ferry individuals back and forward to appointments. However, at our meeting last week, taxi operators wanted to highlight with the Committee their concern that taxi drivers are simply not returning to work.

The operators said that there were a number of reasons for that. Some drivers have left the industry, and some have yet to make up their mind about whether they will return. Sector representatives quoted figures that showed that driver numbers have dropped by approximately 1,000 each year, from 16,000 in 2013 to around 8,000 now. They believe that there has been a further 30% decline because of the pandemic.

The operators told the Committee that they estimate that they are trying to deliver services to Northern Ireland with around 5,000 active drivers. One said:

"In any average week, between 1,250 and 1,300 of them were working ... Post-pandemic, we have an active fleet each week of between 850 and 900 drivers."

Another operator said that 425 of his 800 drivers were back at work. He said that he knew of 100 who would not be back and another 150 who were unsure.

The operators' request is for a stimulus for their sector to bring more drivers into the industry. They see a need to incentivise drivers to come into the sector and to work the unsociable hours during which taxis are most essential. Drivers are self-employed for a reason. They choose their hours and do not have a fixed work schedule. Operators point out that many have chosen to work Monday to Friday during the day so that they can spend more time with their families and friends in the evenings and at weekends. That, the operators highlight, means that passengers find it increasingly difficult to get a taxi during peak busy hours.

The stimulus that operators seek, which the Committee for Infrastructure's motion endorses and supports, is an urgent review of taxi fare structures and the suspension, for the time being, of the practical and theory tests to become a taxi driver, to coax younger people into the industry and recognise it as a viable job.

The current tariff was calculated on 2011 prices and implemented in 2016 and has not changed since. That is tantamount to an earning cap for the past 10 years, making it a huge disincentive to those considering joining the industry. The fare structure that was introduced was based on a 2011 cost review. It was to be reviewed in 2018 under the Taxis (?Taximeters, Devices and Maximum Fares) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015. Although operators were told that the review was carried out by the Department, no rise was given. The next review was in 2019, and, again, no rise in tariffs. Then, when the pandemic happened, work on this was set aside. Operators are calling for an urgent review that will address the differences between days, evenings and weekends.

Furthermore, operators told the Committee that the current taxi driver licensing requirements are inhibiting entry to the industry, which is exacerbating the decline in driver numbers. Complex, lengthy and difficult licensing arrangements are an impediment to our taxi industry and must be grasped if we are to go forward and support the industry. The Committee for Infrastructure calls on the Minister to urgently implement measures to ensure that the taxi tests are less of a bottleneck in getting drivers into the sector. Prior to 2015, taxi drivers required a normal driving licence, a medical and Access NI clearance. The taxi operators who briefed the Committee advised that the number of applicants to take the taxi theory test last year was 111, which is much lower than the number needed to take the places of drivers who simply will not return. Pre 2015, it took six to 10 weeks to get people into the industry; under the current system, it takes between four and six months and, sometimes, much longer. That situation is simply unsustainable.

I urge the Minister to return to the issue of financial support for this delicately balanced and economically and socially vital sector. The sector's health and viability is your responsibility, Minister. Therefore, the Committee calls on Minister Mallon to take the lead and work with Executive colleagues to provide the support that the sector needs. To date, there has been no financial support from DFI for operators and only general support from other Departments for a small number of operators. The demand for taxis may be high, but, without the drivers to fulfil that demand, there will be greater implications when lockdown restrictions are completely relaxed. The taxi operators issued the Committee with warnings of an increase in drink-driving, of an increase in lifts in illegal and uninsured taxis and of the requirement for a greater police presence in our town centres at closing times to prevent antisocial behaviour due to increased numbers waiting for taxis.

I hope that, in the time that I have had, I have been able to give Members a sense of the abandonment felt by the sector and the challenges facing it, the proposed solutions that the Committee for Infrastructure has put forward and the concerns of the sector. Our economy and our communities simply cannot stand by without taking action.

I will make some brief comments as DUP spokesperson for infrastructure. Minister, the industry is struggling. Drivers and operators under the remit of the Department for Infrastructure feel let down. For our road haulage, bus, coach and taxi operators and drivers, the continued passing of the buck and the blame to other Ministers will no longer cut it. Kind words of thanks and pats on the back will no longer cut it for those key workers, who have kept this wee country moving in difficult times. They have been met with a closed door from the Department for Infrastructure. It is time to step up and deliver for those drivers. I commend the motion and the amendment to the House.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I welcome the opportunity to debate the issue. I support the motion and the amendment. The Chair has left little for the rest of us to say, but I will try to make some key points. The most important thing is that the motion and the amendment are supported by the entire Committee. It is a Committee motion.

I appreciate what the Chair said about the principal argument, which is that responsibility lies with DFI. We do not mind working with the Minister and other Ministers to deliver. There needs to be a swathe of things done to facilitate the industry. The representatives from the industry who came to us most recently were the operators. That is fair enough, but a number of single taxi drivers also came to us with key points and asks. Driver numbers are down, and there are difficulties with testing that are plain to be seen. There are online portal issues, among others. It is also the case that a lot of people have carried out work throughout the pandemic to support key workers and deliver essential workers to their work. There are people out there who have carried on through all of this. I praise the drivers out there who have kept going.

The Chair mentioned a drop in a number of significant figures over a number of years. He went back to 2013. Commitments were made to look at the fare structure, which is vital. Driver numbers have been declining since 2013 for a number of reasons. The industry has said that it wants there to be a review of the Taxis Act 2008. There are a number of things in it. It has been tried and tested. No matter whether you go to single operators or taxi operators, they talk about the single tier and everything else.

I appreciate what is in the motion. I want to expand on it, however, because, if we are serious, we now have an opportunity to address the whole of the industry and look at taxi provision. The key element of the motion is economic recovery and fighting back after COVID. The industry made a number of points to us. Fare structure, which the Chair outlined, is definitely one. That issue goes back a number of years. It seriously needs to be looked at. The Committee will work across the board on that. We need to see some of the reports and some of the figures that have been produced.

There needs to be a review of the Taxis Act. People have been talking about class A, class B and class C, and there are issues across the board. As part of her response, maybe the Minister will give us some detail on her thinking around that.

Turning to the financial side of things, I know that the Minister previously stated that it would take roughly £6,000 over a two-year period to support some in the industry. Others have intimated that certain schemes were run by different Ministers but some in the industry were not facilitated and could not get moneys. So, there is the £6,000 that was reported over a two-year period, and I believe that she has given out the £1,500 grant twice now — I stand to be corrected on that. There have been so many grants and funding streams and so many applications have been made, and I would like the Minister to comment on that as well. Online access has also been an issue.

I want to work with the Minister and the Committee, but, more importantly, we need to support the industry. When the night-time economy opens up again as, hopefully, it will shortly, we will need the taxi industry. I say that only in the context of having gone through the Taxis Act for a number of years, as have other Members, with a fine toothcomb to try to get the right solution. Sometimes it has worked, and sometimes it has not. That was a key element and a key argument, but my point is that the taxi industry has a big part to play in the economic recovery, especially in the cities.

I heard somebody use the terminology "town criers". The taxi industry are not the town criers in an urban setting. They are looking for support by way of regulation and financial support to ease their way back in and increase their numbers so that they can deliver the service and play their part in the economic recovery. I support the amendment and the motion.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

First, I apologise on behalf of Dolores Kelly, who is our party spokesperson on infrastructure. She has been detained at a Policing Board meeting this morning. She had expected to be back in time for this debate, but the taxis arrived unexpectedly early today

[Laughter.]

It is always when you do not want them to.

This is a Committee motion, which demonstrates the fact that all of the parties want a better deal for taxi drivers and support measures to strengthen and support our vital taxi sector. I say "vital" because the taxi sector is vital. Taxis play a vital role in so many people's lives, getting them where they need to be, whether that is their work, important health appointments, shopping or leaving kids to school. We need them to do our daily business and, critically, to get us home after a night out.

Taxi drivers are much more than mere transporters. They provide a lifeline to many vulnerable people and a listening ear. However, as has already been pointed out, numbers of drivers are dwindling. That was an issue pre-pandemic, but the risk to drivers' health and that of their families, together with the shutdown of town and city centres, turned a hard job in which to earn a living into a virtually impossible one.

The Minister has provided assistance to drivers over the pandemic, but her powers to do so as Infrastructure Minister were limited, meaning that a scheme could only be delivered if it replaced or refunded costs incurred by drivers for insurance and PPE but not lost income. That was and remains the case. The Minister demonstrated flexibility and that she was listening to the sector by designing the second scheme, in recognition of the fact that so many drivers had been ruled out of the first scheme because they had paused their expensive insurance policies as a financial necessity while there was no money coming in.

The reality now is that the industry is suffering. When the taxi industry suffers and struggles, so does our wider economy. People will be more reluctant to go out to socialise and support city-centre businesses if they are not sure how or even when they will get home. We need to look at the fare structure. We need a fair fare structure to incentivise drivers to work difficult hours that are not just unsocial but, sadly, in many cases, antisocial, with drivers under regular threat of attack.

The Taxis Act 2008 was one of the first pieces if not the first piece of legislation passed by the House. Part of the difficulty that we are still feeling the hangover from today is that that legislation, which was passed in haste, took so long to implement. I was the Minister of the Environment who finally implemented the final pieces. No review of that legislation could take place until the final pieces of the jigsaw were in place. It is essential now that there be a holistic review of the legislation that looks at all the issues, including the fare structure and the evident barriers, which are more difficult to navigate than might have originally been anticipated or intended, to people entering the industry.

We need younger drivers coming in. If you have a look at any taxi stand or do a wee straw poll of the taxis that you get, if you use local taxi companies, you will see the age profile of taxi drivers. They are generally people who are moving on in years and are now moving out, due to issues that have been exacerbated by the pandemic. What is vital is that we, as parties, all work together. We did that quite well during work on earlier incarnations of the Taxis Act and on the issues, of which there were plenty, that arose throughout that process.

Another ask of the motion is support for taxi operators. Taxi operators absolutely need support. They lost huge amounts of rent. However, to put the responsibility for all of that on the Department for Infrastructure or the Minister for Infrastructure, who does not have the power or the vires to deal with such an issue, is short-sighted and smacks of political opportunism, particularly when coming from a party colleague of the former Minister for the Economy, who worked to exclude operators from some of the schemes that she designed. We need to move away from that politicking and work together to deliver better for our taxis, our taxi industry and our taxi drivers. Give them a fair deal.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Taxis and taxi drivers play a vital role in our economy. They can take people to work. They were important during and at the peak of the pandemic, when there was reduced public transport, because they took essential workers to hospitals, shops, garages etc. Taxis play a vital role for those who may not have their own transport. In normal times, they play an important role for parents, often assisting in delivering children to school. They are also vital in giving people a lift to an NHS appointment, be it with a doctor or a consultant. Frequently, people are not able to use public transport because of an illness. Then, there is the night-time economy, which is yet to fully reopen. There is some activity at present, but we expect it to gradually reopen fully. In rural areas, where there may not be any public transport, a taxi may be your only means of getting to a shop or an appointment. Therefore, they are vital.

It is clear from the evidence that we have been given that the taxi industry is experiencing difficulties. As others have said, taxi drivers are generally an older workforce, and many have been driving for some time. However, some decided to shelter during the pandemic, and many have decided not to return to work. They have perhaps got used to other roles or are working in more nine-to-five jobs. Let us face it: taxi driving can be a very antisocial activity. You are required to work long hours, often late into the night and early morning. As others have said, the number of registered taxi drivers has dropped from 16,000 to about 8,000, but I understand that only about 5,000 are active. Many have not yet returned to work. They are waiting for better times or, perhaps, to see whether they can find another form of employment and not come back to taxi driving. In evidence given to the Committee by Value Cabs, it said that it had 800 drivers at one point but only 425 have come back. The company knows for certain that 100 drivers are not coming back. Some 150 drivers have still not decided what exactly they will do. We have a problem on the horizon, and it is important that we address it.

Tariffs cause difficulties. Taxi driving is not the lucrative job that it once was. The review was originally due after three years, in 2018, but it has not happened, and another three years have passed since then. That must be addressed urgently. We must make sure that the tariffs are reviewed. No one likes to pay more, but what would be worse than that would be being unable to get a taxi.

The review should look at whether there is a need to incentivise those who work longer hours, late into the night and the early morning, so that taxis will be available for the economy where there is that demand. Supply and demand are out of kilter at the moment.

Another issue that was highlighted was that class C taxis are unregulated and can charge whatever they want. Meanwhile, class A and class B taxis are limited to £1·57 per mile. There is clearly an issue with class C taxis. Are they operating fully within their remit? Is there a need to clarify that and protect the public from the higher costs that can result?

Most people recognise that taxi drivers are essential, and it is important that we address the issues. There is some time to do that. Schools will be back in September, so that pressure is coming. The night-time economy is opening, and we need to look at what we can do to improve things.

Tariffs are one thing, but I also ask that we look at issues such as the level of continuing professional development (CPD). Do we really need 35 hours per year of training for a fully qualified taxi driver? There is a cost involved, and there is the cost in loss of work.

I ask the Minister to ensure that there are taxis for those who need them.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

On behalf of the Alliance Party, I support the motion. One of the few silver linings of the pandemic has been a much greater appreciation across society of key workers. Those on the front line of the NHS, the delivery drivers at our doors and the supermarket staff who kept the shelves filled are some of the people on whom we relied during these unprecedented and difficult times. To that list we must add taxi drivers. Throughout the pandemic, they have been on the front line, bringing health and social care workers to work and helping older people to get to where they needed to go. Much of that was during a time when people were told to avoid public transport if at all possible, and all of it was happening while there was a significant risk to the health of the taxi drivers.

Important as taxi drivers have been during the worst of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is equally important that we help them to recover. If we want people to return to our high streets and particularly if we want to support tourism and hospitality as they gradually return to full capacity, we must have a thriving taxi industry.

Through the Alliance Party's 'Green New Deal' document, the party is committed to a green and equitable recovery from COVID-19. The taxi sector is absolutely a part of that. Research from the Northern Ireland Consumer Council shows that people on low incomes and those with a disability are disproportionately more likely to rely on taxis. Furthermore, having a taxi industry that is affordable, safe and reliable means that more people can give up car ownership but still rely on car transport if they need to. There is no contradiction between a green recovery from COVID-19 and supporting the taxi industry. They can be complementary. Taxis are part of sustainable travel solutions today and going forward.

Positive steps forward have occurred since the introduction of the Taxis Act in 2008 and the subordinate legislation introduced in 2016. However, as was made clear by the taxi operators when they appeared before the Infrastructure Committee, problems in the industry have been building. The Driver and Vehicle Agency's (DVA) figures show a consistent decline in the number of active taxi drivers in Northern Ireland. That has been exacerbated by the pandemic. While there is hope that some of the worst of that will be rectified once further restrictions are removed, many of the underlying issues from the past few years will remain. It is important that there be a thorough review of the fare structure. Operators have been able to attract new drivers into the industry with the prospect of a decent wage, but class A and B operators should not be at a disadvantage to those in class C. We support the call for the Minister for Infrastructure to work with her Executive colleagues on a suite of measures to attract new entrants to the industry. I caution that any change regarding any relaxation of driver testing and licensing requirements must go through proper scrutiny and consultation, as it is important that the public continue to have confidence in the industry. Any short-term moves in that regard could quickly backfire if confidence is undermined.

I move now to additional sector-specific support for operators. While we acknowledge that operators have been eligible for various forms of support during the pandemic, that has been comparatively low. There is still a case for considering whether anything more should be done with regard to how the pandemic has impacted on taxi drivers and taxi operators specifically and their ability, particularly that of the smaller operators, to rebound as we emerge from the pandemic.

Too often, during the pandemic, the taxi industry has been used as a political football for multiple sides, and the discussion has centred on a pre-emptive blame game rather than on collaboration and practical solutions. People look to this place to get something done. They do not want to hear blame; they just want something to be achieved. Blame serves nobody, least of all the taxi industry. I support the motion and call for Ministers to come together quickly, in collaboration, to respond to the concerns articulated by the industry.

Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom left the European Union. This is another demonstration and example of the issues relating to labour market mobility and access, alongside those relating to the logistics sector, which the Minister will be aware of. That also needs to be taken into account.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

As a new member of the Committee, I am privileged to speak in the debate. The debate is aimed at ensuring that Northern Ireland has a viable taxi sector capable of meeting the needs of the public as well as contract work for the Health and Education Departments. Currently, there is a risk to the viability of the sector. In recent years, there has been a dramatic drop in the number of taxi drivers throughout Northern Ireland. Some reports suggest that a drop of almost 50% has occurred. That has resulted in taxi services becoming more difficult to sustain, whether for the general public or contract work.

Ways have to be found to make the taxi industry capable of meeting every demand placed on it. That can be fully addressed only by a cocktail of measures, from a temporary postponement of theory and driving tests — not the other checks that are required — and a review of the fares. The review of fares is to ensure that the industry provides a financially secure job for people who have families to support. It is important for any industry that participants can make a living from it. Therefore the review of a fare structure that is about 10 years old is essential for the industry to attract new entrants.

There is also concern that the loss of drivers is putting contract work, such as that for Education and Health, in jeopardy. There have to be enough drivers to cover that essential work, as it often involves dealing with vulnerable people who are dependent on taxis for everyday life. Taxis are not just to take people shopping or home after a night out; they are a foundation for the economic success of many sectors of the economy. They are an essential support to a good quality of life for mobility-impaired people, and they help to meet the needs of a rural population. To ensure that we meet all those demands, there must be a proactive drive to recruit taxi drivers as a matter of urgency, with some of the possible measures that I have outlined. Please remember that taxis are essential for travel in many areas, including health and education, as well as economic well-being.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Certainly.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has indicated that he wishes to concentrate on attracting new drivers. Will he accept that it is important to ensure that we retain the qualified drivers that we have? They are the easiest drivers to get back into their vehicles and provide that service to the public.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has an additional minute.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Member has made a very good point. I fully endorse what he said.

Finally, I ask that the Minister and her Executive colleagues review the decision not to award financial support to operators due to COVID-19. The taxi industry has seen a drop in driver numbers, partly because the pandemic has made it not possible for drivers to earn a living. While the very limited support given to the taxi industry was welcome, it was nowhere near sufficient to prevent the exodus of drivers. With live music, hopefully, resuming shortly, the need for taxis will increase, and drivers will be needed for contract work. A package of measures for the taxi industry from the Executive in city, urban and rural areas is a must for the Northern Ireland economy and is the best chance for a speedy recovery. It will enable people to support business as normality begins to return.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Ba mhaith liom labhairt i bhfabhar an rúin. To fully comprehend the falling numbers of taxi drivers in the industry, as the motion notes, it is important to mention what the industry has gone through over the last year. As we went into lockdown, and as the Executive advised people to stay at home, the demand for taxis was almost upended overnight. Over the following months, drivers felt that they witnessed a ministerial ping-pong between the Minister for Infrastructure and the Minister for the Economy over a response and who was responsible for providing financial support. All the while, our taxi drivers, who are hard-working individuals, struggled to pay their bills, put food on the table and support their families. It is no surprise that, as the motion notes, taxi drivers began to leave the industry. As far as I know, not one operator in Derry received a single penny from the COVID restrictions business support scheme from the Department for the Economy.

On 1 April last year, in an open letter to taxi drivers, the Minister said that she would support taxi drivers and continue to press for more assistance. It took, however, five months to request powers to introduce the financial scheme for the industry: five months to ask for something that could have been done on day one. It took a very public campaign from drivers and the industry. Yet, still, when details of the scheme came to light, we discovered that any taxi driver who had paused or cancelled their taxi insurance, maybe because they were struggling even to live on the breadline, was not eligible for the first financial scheme. The second scheme deducted the time during which they could not afford insurance from the £3,000 grant.

It took almost six months for a financial scheme that provided financial support for drivers who had paused their insurance to take effect. In total, that was a year after drivers and operators were told that they would get financial support. Is it any wonder that drivers are leaving the taxi industry in their droves? The operators need a sector-specific scheme. Many felt completely abandoned by the Department for Infrastructure, which gave them far too little, far too late. Indeed, it is estimated that there has been a 30% decrease in the number of working taxi drivers because of the pandemic. Clearly, the taxi industry is a vital industry that is in crisis. We need urgent and decisive action so that more drivers will join the industry, and there must be incentives for drivers to return to it.

Access to taxis is not just about ensuring that people have a safe way to get home after a night out in Derry, although that is a large part of it. It is also about the carer whose car has broken down and who has to care for five different people that day. It is about the elderly person waiting for a taxi to their local community centre to see someone in person, possibly the first person that week. It is about the schoolchild who has missed the bus and whose parents are unable to drive. If the taxi sector no longer has drivers available to meet demand, there will be a massive implication for the rest of the economy and for our communities and constituencies as people struggle to get from A to B.

As is noted in the motion, we need to make the industry "more attractive to new entrants". That also means making it easier to become a taxi driver, at least in the post-pandemic environment. Furthermore, we need to ensure that taxi drivers get a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. Consistently low fares have meant consistently low wages and long hours for drivers, and hence a review of fare structures —.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for giving way, and I agree with much of what she has said. Does the Member recognise that, in our shared constituency, fares are very low compared with those in other parts of the North, let alone with those on the Continent? Does she concur that those fares are set not by the Department per se but by the operators?

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has an additional minute.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Fares across the city of Derry are consistently low. Many drivers who work very long hours do not feel that they are getting a fair wage. That is why a review of fare structures is needed, and that is what I am calling for.

It is no surprise that more and more drivers are leaving taxiing to get better wages working with, for example, local delivery services. Sensible, practical, bespoke support requires ministerial willpower to help drivers and operators. That is what the industry needs and deserves, and it is what we, as Committee members, are calling for. Sinn Féin supports the motion and the amendment.

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

I had reason to take a taxi from my home out to Moira on Saturday night. I got a text message telling me what colour the car was, its registration and what time it would be there. I took the taxi out and booked one to take me home at midnight, for which I got a similar message.

When I spoke to the taxi driver on the way back, he informed me that he does not have a work pattern or a 40-hour week to do. He can work whenever he wants to. He can come in and go out, 24/7. He can come in and go out at the busy times. I asked him, "How does that work at night-time?", and he said that it is up to each individual driver. He is with a large taxi company from Belfast that has now set up in Lisburn. Technology is therefore changing the way in which taxis drivers operate and the way in which they can switch on and off. It made me think about how, when I had the bar in Belfast, I had to have a relationship with all the taxi drivers. My office makes a joke that, every time that I mention the ring of steel that was around the city, I have to put money in a box. People coming out of bars late at night used to have to walk to one of the exit points of Belfast to try to get a taxi. Our taxi drivers kept the city going, and we know the difficulties that they experienced during the worst times of the Troubles. As an MLA, I know what they have done, the part that they have played in Northern Ireland, and the fun and the craic that tourists told me that they had with them.

I am pleased to be here speaking on behalf of the SDLP. There are problems, but our Minister has stepped up to the plate to help the taxi industry throughout the pandemic. While others ducked and dived, the SDLP Minister stepped up to provide not only regulatory support to the taxi industry but financial support of up to £3,000 for each driver. Many in my constituency of Lagan Valley have been so grateful for her Department's work. As we look to recovery, the industry will need our support, particularly to bring in new drivers to support the local economy. Those matters are on the Minister's radar, and she will ensure that the Department works to support the industry through this period of recovery. It will be helpful if the Minister can outline the next steps and options that she is exploring to support the industry's recovery from COVID-19 and to support our town and city centres as we hopefully continue to work our way out of crisis and into recovery from the pandemic.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I apologise to those Members for whose contributions I was not in the Chamber. I have been listening to the debate from my office and have been back and forth.

There is general acceptance in the Chamber that our taxi industry and taxi drivers require support. There may be disagreement on where that support comes from and how it is delivered, but that is the nature of politics. The taxi industry and the drivers will want to know only when they will get the support.

If I may, I offer the Minister some advice on the next steps. I am a wee bit like the previous Member to speak, who hankers back to the ring of steel: sometimes I hanker back to when I was the Minister — once too often sometimes, perhaps. Sometimes, as Minister, your focus and that of your Department is on what you cannot do rather than on what you can do. The approach required for taxi drivers is this: what can the Department do and what can be done in conjunction with other Departments to support those drivers? As a number of people said, COVID has brought a reality check to many of us or, at least, to society. We took many roles and jobs in our society for granted, whether they were shop workers, taxi drivers or even, in some instances, healthcare workers. We now realise that our society cannot operate without many of our service industries, and taxis are one of those.

When I meet Translink and others to talk about funding opportunities for services, they tell me that, if they do not get more funding, they will cut rural bus services. I look at them and say, "That will be difficult for you, because there are very few already". Transport in rural communities is provided by taxis. If you do not have access to a car and the chances of you getting a bus are limited, you rely on a taxi. Taxis are a vital support for rural communities and those who are vulnerable or isolated. Taxis are not only about coming to pick you up to take you to where you are going. Often, they provide an important link for the elderly, the isolated and the lonely through the conversation that takes place on the taxi run, such as, "How are you keeping? Is everything OK? Do you need anything? Are you supposed to be at the doctor's?". Taxi drivers complete many tasks. Moreover, the taxi industry brings in staff who are finding it difficult to find work elsewhere, and, as has also been said, the unsociable hours suit some workers. However, I urge that, even with the introduction of technology, basic workers' rights should be protected. We do not want the gig economy to create a scenario where taxi drivers have fewer rights than they have now.

The case has been made for financial support. The industry and the drivers need financial support. I urge the Minister to do everything in her power to bring that forward. I recognise the Committee's work, some of which I have followed. The Committee, including my colleagues, lobbied intensively on taxi drivers' behalf. The case is made; now, taxi drivers need to see it delivered.

I also note the comments on training, how often qualified drivers require training and how drivers access the taxi industry. Of course, there has to be safety for drivers, passengers and other road users. When you look at the timescales involved, however, a review is required. A review of fares is also required. As everyone who runs a private, family car knows, costs are always increasing. The costs, such as insurance, that are associated with running a taxi have increased.

I congratulate the Committee on its motion. Hopefully, the motion will be agreed today, and, as a result, we will see delivery for our taxi drivers.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I support the motion and the amendment, and I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important issue.

The taxi sector provides key services to people across Northern Ireland, as others have said. It is especially flexible in meeting the needs of many individuals in different places and at all hours of the day and night.

As Members have said, that includes accessing hospital appointments, shopping, school transport and many other activities.

As we reopen our economy, we see the need for taxis more than ever, particularly for our tourism and hospitality sectors. Taxis open up parts of Northern Ireland that are not accessible in any other way to tourists, for example. They also allow bars and restaurants to serve many more customers later and people to know that they can get home safely. However, as shortages have become clear, there are risks that constraints to the taxi sector could limit the reopening and recovery of the hard-hit tourism and hospitality sector. We have seen changes to hospitality rules on licensing, which will be a further challenge for taxi operators. If people cannot go out with the confidence that they can get home safely, they may simply stay at home. It is vital that we do what we can to help to secure that sector and protect those services and the jobs that it provides.

Prior to the pandemic, the taxi industry was already facing considerable headwinds, including falling numbers of drivers and an ageing workforce. During the first and subsequent lockdowns, we saw the complete collapse of travel, which has started to recover but which is not yet at pre-lockdown levels. That meant low-earning potential and little reason for drivers to go out, spend money on fuel and, of course, put themselves at risk of COVID-19 infection. Unsurprisingly, many drivers left the sector or retired, leaving us with significantly fewer drivers.

That was, sadly, not helped by the lack of timely support from the Government. Unfortunately, support during the COVID-19 pandemic has been patchy. The taxi sector has fallen between the Department for the Economy and the Department for Infrastructure. While those two Departments disagreed with each other for months, time was lost to support the sector. Then, the Department for Infrastructure had to basically find a way to pay out funds, which it does not regularly do. Rather than the Department for the Economy, it was the Executive Office that, inexplicably, administered support schemes for travel agents. Similarly, it is clear to me that the Department for the Economy should have taken action to assist the taxi sector. I acknowledge, of course, that some non-specific assistance was provided to depots through the coronavirus restrictions business support scheme.

We need a comprehensive package of support to rebuild the industry, with the full engagement of the Economy and Infrastructure Ministers. The Department for the Economy needs to stop disowning whole sectors and to recognise that we have one integrated economy. As I outlined, there are real risks to our tourism and hospitality recovery, as well as a social impact, of losing taxi services. On the structural issues faced by the industry, it is clear that a package of support and incentives needs to be looked at to stabilise and rebuild the sector. Drivers are leaving the sector and not being replaced. It is vital that the Department for Infrastructure looks at what needs to be done to tackle that now, before it further deteriorates.

The sector has also highlighted the regulation of taxis as a problem. I am well aware of the issues of taxi regulation, as I have worked on the issue, and the odd regulation of the wedding car industry that makes it a challenge to even operate that service. I know that the Minister is aware of that, and I have been in contact with her office on the issue on many occasions. Today, I would appreciate if the Minister would indicate what progress has been made on exempting wedding cars from the Taxis Act 2008 and the onerous and, in my opinion, unnecessary bureaucratic burden that it places on them. Let us be sensible: wedding cars are not taxis, not least because many drivers do not do that as their job. Legislation in Northern Ireland is a mess of red tape, and it is far behind the rest of the United Kingdom. For example, I recently read on the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) website about how easy it is for a family member or guest to hire a car for a wedding and drive it themselves on their regular licence. That simply cannot be done in Northern Ireland.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for giving way. It is a vital point. I, too, have been lobbied heavily about the inequalities faced by those who run wedding car businesses. Does the Member agree that red tape and bureaucracy are not only stifling their businesses but preventing part-time work? Many people who have retired from their day-to-day jobs look to that industry for part-time income to support their families.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has an additional minute.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you. Yes, Mr Buckley, I wholeheartedly agree with you. There is a whole variety of reasons that people do that job, particularly as wedding car drivers. Some of them do it just because they love driving classic vehicles, others because it provides extra income or is their main income and, indeed, others because it is their business to supply the cars and drivers.

The DVLA advises that the quickest way to view or share driving licence information when hiring a car is to use its view and share driving licence service, but that service is not available in Northern Ireland. As the motion states, a review is needed, particularly of tariffs, which I understand were essentially set in 2011.

It is clear that we need to act now to stabilise and rebuild that broad sector, from taxis to wedding cars. The Infrastructure and Economy Ministers need to get together to sort it out and provide specific support. Long-term planning is also needed to encourage new drivers into the sector; that is important. I look forward to the Minister's response to those matters.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

The plight of taxi drivers during the pandemic was sorely underestimated. Frankly, the way in which they were treated as far as receiving financial assistance is concerned was unacceptable for too long, and it was due only to their determination and protest that they were able to access help eventually. The decline in drivers is less of a concern for the economy getting back on its feet and more for the workers who were overlooked. Even now, some — many — are struggling to get into work because of overheads or do not see the job that they held as feasible or possible to maintain.

While I agree that having a transparent and capped fare structure is paramount to driver and customer trust, my party does not think that looking at taxi fares alone will ultimately provide the solution to the precarity of taxi drivers or having fewer drivers in cars, especially when that solution will presumably involve fares being increased. The main problem that needs to be addressed is the massive outgoings and overheads that have to be paid out in depot fees, insurance and other charges. The Assembly would do better to intervene to cap those costs in order to ensure that drivers can take home a fair wage for their work. By focusing on raised fares instead, the root of the issue is left untouched, and large depots will continue to make a killing at the expense of drivers and those who have to use private taxis because they have a disability or are elderly. Those customers face the harshest impacts of fare rises and, in some cases, will be priced out of using taxis entirely.

Ultimately, the solution is to have either a state-run or cooperative worker-run taxi fleet that pays drivers a fair wage, guarantees better conditions by capping outgoings and provides a service that is not too costly for some and that is run in an eco-friendly manner, with electric cars and the like. If the Department and the wider Executive take their duty to workers, communities and the environment seriously, that is the kind of plan that they should or would be putting in place, instead of focusing exclusively or narrowly on solutions that do not address the environmental impact of cars, the rising costs to customers and, most importantly, the ridiculous outgoings that workers are expected to fork out to drive for a living. Ultimately, that is the kind of plan that we need to see being implemented through the prism of a just transition that puts workers at the centre.

I apologise to the House: I have to run out to the front steps for a protest. I will not be able to hear the comments of the Minister or the Chair, but I will be able to look back at them. It was important to put those matters on the record even if I cannot hear the responses to them.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

While Mr Carroll attends his demo

[Laughter]

I call the Minister for Infrastructure, Ms Nichola Mallon, to respond to the debate.

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure for tabling this important debate on the challenges that are faced by the taxi sector.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant and long-lasting impact on many businesses. At the onset of the pandemic, in recognition of the challenges that were faced by the taxi sector, I acted swiftly to put in place a number of regulatory easements, which amounted to over £1 million of support for the sector. During the pandemic, my resources have also been focused on providing financial assistance to those in the taxi sector who needed it most but could not avail themselves of the other grant schemes or loans: that is, taxi drivers. As Mr Durkan pointed out, through two bespoke taxi driver financial assistance schemes, my Department has provided £15·5 million in support to taxi drivers, having received new powers from the joint First Ministers under the Financial Assistance Act to do so.

We engaged with taxi drivers and the industry, and their analysis indicated that they would require £6,000 of support over two years. I was therefore pleased to have a grant scheme in place that paid out £3,000 over one year to taxi drivers. Of course, as Members have pointed out, as we worked through the schemes, it became evident that a number of taxi drivers had taken breaks in their insurance. That is why we tailored the second scheme to ensure that support could be provided to them and, importantly, also ensure that payments could be made retrospectively so that they were also paid for the duration of the year.

Of course, as we look to the future and turn our focus to post-COVID recovery measures, my Department has stepped up to ensure that the services that it provides are ready to support the businesses that it has responsibility for regulating. That includes the taxi sector. Vehicle testing resumed for priority vehicle groups, including first-time taxis, on 20 July 2020. From 10 March 2021, DVA also resumed testing for taxis that qualified for the regulatory easements that I introduced, which allowed for the automatic renewal of taxi vehicle licences free of charge, including those without a prior test, for a period of 12 months. The DVA also resumed practical driving and theory tests for all categories, including taxi drivers, on 23 April 2021.

I am confident that applications for taxi-driving tests, vehicle tests and taxi-driver and operator licences are being processed in line with normal timescales. I am pleased to confirm to Members that there is no backlog. However, there is still work to do; we are not out of the woods yet. I accept that as we move into recovery from the challenges of COVID-19, unforeseen challenges will emerge. Regardless of our, at times, divided views on dealing with the pandemic, we have one thing in common: we are all in unfamiliar territory. It is about how we step up and deal with the challenges and find solutions to them that will be key to our recovery.

I am willing, as ever, to listen and carefully consider the concerns raised here, and I have asked my officials to continue to engage closely with the sector on issues as they emerge in order to gauge what additional practical steps we can swiftly put in place to assist those in the sector in getting back on the road to earn a living. However, as Minister for road safety, it would be remiss of me to consider or introduce any measures or easements that would compromise road-user standards, the safety of the public, or remove parity between drivers entering the industry and existing drivers who have worked hard to acquire the standards that are legally required of the industry through the current framework that the Assembly approved.

I do, however, recognise the pressures that the taxi sector has been under and remain committed to working with the sector in continuing to monitor the impact of COVID restrictions on it and consider, with my Executive colleagues, how we should respond to support our drivers and all other areas of the economy as we move towards COVID recovery.

I thank Members for drawing attention to the concerns of the sector and for providing me with an opportunity to set out my responsibilities to the sector and the actions that I have taken to support it. I have listened carefully to the views of all Members and will turn to some of the specific points that they have raised.

The decline in the number of taxi drivers has, as Mr Buckley and others pointed out, been happening over a number of years, but there is no doubt that it has been impacted on by the pandemic. In addition to some existing taxi drivers whose taxi licence expired in the period, a number of taxi drivers decided that they would not incur the cost of renewing their taxi-driver licence until the COVID restrictions had been lifted. We want to work with them, and we have reduced processing times for customers through our commercial licensing system. We are also doing what we can to redesign the portal page to make it easier for customers to navigate. The portal is an issue that Mr Boylan raised.

The industry is looking for measures that will support and improve it. That is why I am keen that we continue to work with it — with taxi drivers, operators and the wedding car industry — to support it through this difficult time.

The issue of a fare review was raised. As Mr Durkan said, we need a fair fare structure: I agree. The previous review, as Mr Boylan pointed out, was carried out in 2019. It was not implemented, owing to the suspension of the Assembly, followed by the COVID pandemic, but I am sympathetic to it. Of course, public consultation will be required to gauge the views of the taxi industry and other stakeholders, including the Consumer Council as a statutory consultee. Any changes to the minimum fare would require retesting, recalibration and the resealing of meters. There is work to be done, and that would need to be planned out. I am sympathetic on the issue, and I have asked my officials to look at it.

A number of Members raised points about barriers to entry and the taxi theory test. It is important to point out that DVA has already been proactive in introducing measures to support new entrants to the taxi industry. It has reduced the band score from 19 to 18; aligned the test pass with bus and lorry pass rates; developed practice papers and published them on nidirect; redesigned and improved training materials; English voice-over has been made available; and there is better signposting where candidates performed poorly. I take my responsibility as the Minister for road safety seriously, and, as Mr Muir pointed out, it will be important, if we are looking at changes in this area, that we make sure that they are thoughtfully considered, with all of the implications worked through.

Mr Beggs referred to training and continuing professional development in the industry. He identified a requirement of 35 hours of training over a year. The process actually involves 35 hours of training over five years. An important component of that is disability awareness training, which raises standards in the industry and is valued by the customer base. Again, it is about how we work through some of the issues without compromising road safety or standards.

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

On a review of the Taxis Act 2008, it is, of course, good practice to review legislation. The suspension of the Assembly and the pandemic are the reasons why we have not been able to progress that work. Prior to the pandemic, I engaged with the sector to discuss the issue. I assure Members that I have asked officials to look at that work, and I hope to be in a position to provide greater clarity on it once officials have worked through the details for me.

Stewart Dickson and other Members have raised the issue of wedding car operators on a number of occasions. I have had the opportunity to meet him and representatives of the wedding car industry. I will provide him with the update that he requested. He will know that we have received initial advice from the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO) on exempting wedding car operators from the current taxi regime. I have asked for further advice, because careful consideration and analysis are required on a range of issues before I am in a position to make a final decision. I will, of course, keep him updated.

On the lack of financial support for operators, when we engaged with the industry to devise the scheme, we were aware from the evidence submitted by taxi operators that a number of them were able to avail themselves of the £10,000 and £25,000 schemes. Some were also able to avail themselves of the rates and VAT deferrals and furlough. A number were also able to avail themselves of part B of the COVID restrictions business support scheme (CRBSS) from the Department for the Economy. I shared with the Committee correspondence from the Economy Minister that confirmed that. My officials have met taxi operators, and we will continue to meet and work with them and their drivers to ensure that we support them as best we can through this difficult time and beyond.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for giving way. In light of the motion that we have discussed today, will the Minister commit to working with the Committee? That is important, because, as she knows, while she will have discussions with the taxi industry, if its representatives do not get enough from the Minister or the Department, they will run to us. I suggest that we close that communication gap; otherwise, they will keep coming back to the Committee. That is all that I ask the Minister to commit to today.

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his intervention. It is an important point. One of the regrettable things from the pandemic is the ping-pong between the Economy Minister and me that Martina Anderson mentioned. Early on, there was, regrettably, a ping-pong match between me as Minister and the Committee about establishing where the vires lay. I stated on a number of occasions that I did not have the power to bring forward financial assistance, and we had to go through the rigmarole of trying to get new, additional powers. We should learn from that. I have provided multiple briefings to the Committee, but it is clear that, going forward, the Committee wants to see the right level of support given to the industry, and I am committed to providing that.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Will the Minister give way?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

In a wee second.

I commit to keeping the Committee updated. I will work with the Committee but also with Executive colleagues, because, as Members rightly pointed out, I am the regulator of the taxi industry, which is critical to our tourism industry and to our night-time economy. As Mr O'Dowd said, it is critical to our rural communities. As Mr Robinson said, it is critical to providing school transport. It is also critical to getting people to their health appointments. It is therefore really important that we work at all levels to try to support the industry as we emerge from the COVID pandemic. I am happy to give way to Ms Anderson.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister. As Members, we were acutely aware that you did not have the vires, but we were also acutely aware that there was the Financial Assistance Act 2009 to help you get the assistance. We were delighted that, when you put in for it on the Friday, we were notified on the Saturday that you had received it. Financial assistance was available and accessible, and, thankfully, you asked for it and got it the next day.

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for her intervention. That is the point that Mr Dickson highlighted. We all have to learn from the process, and, when I reflect on the learning, my view is that much greater benefit would have been derived from taking a more holistic and inclusive approach to providing support to those who are vital to the economy. There was a fracturing, but we are where we are now. I am pleased that I was able to provide financial support for taxi drivers by putting money in their pockets.

The taxi operators themselves raised an important point. Their view was that they would have highly rated giving the indirect intervention to themselves through the individual taxi drivers. We gave that support, and we provided the regulatory easement of £1 million. As I have committed to today to Members, I have asked my officials to look at providing me with options, taking the can-do approach that Mr O'Dowd highlighted, to see what more we can do. Whether that is on the regulatory side, on the fare review side or on the Act itself more widely, I am committed to trying to do more.

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

I call Mr Jonathan Buckley to conclude and wind on the debate on the motion and the amendment. The Member has up to 10 minutes.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank Members and the Minister for their responses. We have heard much today about the issues affecting the taxi industry, both drivers and operators, and I thank all those who have contributed to the debate. There will be many listening in who will take much encouragement from Members' words, but, as I said in my opening comments, we must now move beyond words. Action must soon follow.

Collectively, Members spoke about how vital the industry is to our broader economy and to our community, both rural and urban. Members reiterated how the COVID pandemic had worsened the issues affecting the sector. They also highlighted the legacy difficulties that need to be addressed, which are fare structures as a priority and the taxi licensing complexities, albeit there were different views on how far and how quickly we could move on that. It is a welcome start, however, that there is a recognition that there is an issue that must be looked at. Members highlighted the need to encourage younger drivers into the industry to revitalise it in a post-COVID environment and the need to incentivise work in unsocial hours through bespoke policies and financial packages. That would recognise the need that our economy has for taxi drivers to work sometimes very unsocial hours to provide safe and practical solutions for the general public. There was also a desire to see a collaborative approach taken across the Executive, with a clear lead taken by a designated Minister, to ensure that the Committee can scrutinise actions for the industry and, indeed, give some reassurance to the industry and to Members.

It is clear that there is no disagreement about the dire situation facing the taxi industry. Everyone here today recognises the concerns of the individuals and organisations involved and the impact on their lives and those of their families. We have heard that this is an industry that has been in decline for a number of years: since 2013, in fact, when it provided employment to approximately 16,000 drivers. Year on year, however, that figure has dropped, until, by 2020, only around half of that number remained. We have also heard much about the impact of COVID and how it has further driven down numbers so that post-COVID economic recovery in the industry is now being supported by around only 5,000 drivers. That a totally unsustainable situation. That is a shocking figure. It is less than one third of the number in 2013.

We have also heard that drivers are self-employed and thus are responsible for the cost of insurance, vehicles, training and the personal cost of unsociable hours that many work to provide a service to society. That service not only benefits our hospitality sector, reduces drink-driving and contributes to wider economic recovery but assists the health and social care sector and the education sector by ferrying individuals back and forth for various appointments and by taking children to school.

We have heard rehearsed the reasons why, during the pandemic, taxi drivers stopped working because of the drop in demand for their services and to keep themselves and their families safe. That led to many having to cancel their insurance and even return their vehicles as they were unable to maintain payments without the necessary income, which, in turn, impacted on their ability to access some of the packages that were in place.

Now that lockdown is easing and the world is beginning to reopen, taxi drivers and the vital services that they offer are needed more than ever. Yet, we find that many drivers do not wish to return to the industry, and few new drivers are being coaxed into joining it. That is something that we have to grasp because, as we emerge from the pandemic, we undoubtedly face a lack of workers in the industry. It is not only impacting on the taxi industry; I hear concerns from road haulage drivers and other industries that are vital to Northern Ireland and its functioning that we have to be really live to and aware of in the days ahead. The Committee for Infrastructure heard calls from the sector about how it is in need of support to mitigate the decline in driver numbers, and it is for that reason that today's motion was brought to the Chamber. There is clear evidence from the sector to suggest that an intervention or a stimulus is needed to reverse the downward trend and assist in the recovery not just for the benefit of the sector but for the wider economic recovery of Northern Ireland post COVID. The industry has offered solutions on what those interventions could be, and the Committee has lent its support to those in the Chamber today, collectively with one voice.

The call for an urgent review of fares is not unreasonable. The current taxi fare tariff is tantamount to a 10-year earnings freeze. It is a huge disincentive to joining the industry, as is the complexity of taxi driver testing with set test periods, both practical and theory. I thank the Minister for her indication that she recognises the inequalities in that taxi fare system and the need for a fair fare system.

The contributions in the Chamber today have acknowledged those areas of concern and echoed the calls for action. Therefore, we urge the Minister for Infrastructure to recognise those factors and take the action that is required. Measures include an urgent review of the taxi fare tariff and working with her Executive colleagues to see what other measures can be initiated, including a review of sector support for operators. We all recognise the problem and know that support is needed. That is a good place to be, and we must recognise that. Politicians are united in their desire to help the industry, and we must now get to work and ensure that that happens. I commend the motion and the amendment to the House.

Question, That the amendment be made, put and agreed to.

Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to. Resolved:

That this Assembly notes with concern the falling number of taxi drivers in the industry and the impact this will have on post-COVID-19 economic recovery; recognises the impact that the delay in reviewing fare structures and the complexity of taxi driver testing have had in exacerbating this decline; and calls on the Minister for Infrastructure to implement measures to address the fall in driver numbers, to expedite the review of fare structures and to work with her Executive colleagues to identify a suite of measures that can be initiated to make the sector more attractive to new entrants, including a review of sector-specific support to operators.

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

I ask Members to take their ease while we move to the next item of business.

Private Members' Business

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to introduce the Small Scale Green Energy Bill [NIA 33/17-22], which is a Bill to make provision for the establishment of a scheme to promote the microgeneration of renewable electricity; and for connected purposes.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I beg to introduce the Political Appointments Bill [NIA 34/17-22], which is a Bill to amend the law on public appointments in Northern Ireland and amend the Commissioner for Public Appointments (Northern Ireland) Order 1995.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

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

Members, just take your ease again while we move to the next item of business.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Integrated Education Bill [NIA 23/17-22] be agreed.

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

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

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

I will just take a breath because I am quite nervous on the Bill. Thank you to all in the House for coming along to the Second Stage of the Integrated Education Bill. I appreciate that the Bill is the last piece of legislation that we will debate before the summer recess and I am keeping you from a summer spent in your constituency offices, so my apologies.

The Bill makes provision for integrated education and its promotion. It will also provide for reform and expansion of integrated education. The sole topic of the Bill is education.

In advance of coming to the House, I consulted over an initial period of 12 weeks during the 2016-2017 mandate. That consultation took the form of online surveys, one for adults and one for children, resulting in over 800 written responses. I also had face-to-face discussions with educationalists, academics, including the local teacher training colleges, and many organisations and individuals interested in the provision of education here. I wrote to the Minister of Education and the Committee for Education to seek clarification that no similar legislation was being brought forward.

After the collapse of the Assembly in 2017, I continued to work on the Bill to refine and define content. When the Assembly returned in January 2020, the Bill was accepted by the Speaker and allowed to continue with the existing consultation findings and the work already completed by the Assembly research team to be included. I thank the Bill Office for its work to enable the Bill to reach this stage.

I wrote again to the Minister of Education and the Committee for Education to ensure that no similar legislation was going to be brought forward and that nothing had changed in the interim. On that basis, the Bill was submitted to the Speaker and subsequently allowed to go forward for drafting. I admit that I found the drafting, like this debate, quite nerve-racking. When you have worked on a Bill for so long and there has been such in-depth research and discussion, it is hard to hand it over to someone else. However, the drafter, Mr Daniel Greenberg, who is a barrister specialising in legislation and was commissioned by the Assembly's Bill Office, managed to convey in legislative language what I hope to bring forward. I extend my sincere thanks to Mr Greenberg and the staff in our Bill Office, including James Gilsenan and Denise Morgan, who patiently produced the Bill. It is the first private Member's Bill in this mandate that has been crafted with the support of our Bill Office. The legislation has followed all of the stages, consultation requirements and drafting processes outlined in Standing Orders, and it is within the legislative competence of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

The Integrated Education Bill has nine policy objectives. The first is to place a duty on the Department of Education and other education bodies to promote — not merely to encourage and facilitate — the development of integrated education. That will require the Department to ensure that resources are dedicated to the sector for that purpose. Secondly, it will require the Department to ensure that there is proper auditing of demand on a biennial basis for integrated education in Northern Ireland by area. Thirdly, it will require the Education Authority (EA) to report on and publish the auditing of demand to the Department and take account of it in budget and planning decisions. Fourthly, it will establish a presumption to overarch area-based planning that all new schools should be either integrated or otherwise non-single identity schools. The fifth objective is to require the development of an integrated education strategy that will be published six months after the commencement of the Act. It will report on the implementation of the Act, along with regular biennial reporting on the implementation of the provisions of the Act, a post-legislative scrutiny clause.

The Bill will require funding to be dedicated by the Department of Education, according to the remit of the strategy, to be available for the facilitation of integrated education and resourcing in the Department itself of a dedicated team for that purpose. The seventh objective requires a standardised and accredited diversity and all-inclusive module on how to teach in a truly inclusive and integrated classroom for primary and secondary schools and for PGCE for schools in initial teacher training provided by the teacher training education providers. The eighth objective requires the Department to ensure that there is a dedicated departmental resource to help schools to strengthen their ethos and to make sure that all integrated schools put an integrated ethos at the heart of everything that they do now and in the future. Finally, the ninth objective requires integrated schools to be inspected by the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) team as part of its usual programme of inspections to ensure that they uphold their integrated ethos.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Not just at the moment, thank you. I will move on to the clauses, and maybe we will come back to that.

The explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) provides you with commentary on the 15 clauses of the Bill. I will now detail the clauses as introduced.

Clause 1 defines the meaning of "integrated education" as:

"the education together, in an integrated school, of— (a) those of different cultures and religious beliefs and of none, including reasonable numbers of both Protestant and Roman Catholic children or young persons" —

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Not just at the moment, please. I would like to go through the clauses.

The definition in clause 1(1) continues:

"(b) those who are experiencing socio-economic deprivation and those who are not; and (c) those of different abilities."

I draw it to Members' attention that the term:

"reasonable numbers of both Protestant and Roman Catholic children"

is already stated in the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 and that clause 1(1)(b) has already been agreed by the House in the Shared Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2016. However, I have added to and updated the definition to reflect the changing demographics of Northern Ireland and the actual mix of children who attend integrated schools. I have added children of other faiths "and of none", "socio-economic" and "different abilities". None of those additions causes any issue for existing integrated schools. There are children of many faiths and of none. There are children who receive free school meals and those who do not. Children with differing vocational skills, special educational needs (SEN) and academic abilities attend integrated schools. The new meaning of integrated education adds further information to what is already in other legislation.

Clause 1(2) defines an "integrated school" as

"a school which intentionally promotes, protects and improves an ethos of diversity, respect and understanding between those of different cultures and religious beliefs and of none, between those of different socio-economic backgrounds and between those of different abilities."

I confirm to the House that that meaning of integrated education does not replace or change Mr Justice Treacy's ruling, in which he emphasised integrated education as a "standalone concept". That is:

"that it cannot be argued that shared projects or mixed schools with a 'partisan board' or denominational ethos, are the same thing."

The case outcome confirmed that the article 64 duty in the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 refers to integrated schools alone, not shared or mixed schools. The ruling reaffirmed that the Department of Education has a statutory duty to fulfil article 64 of the 1989 Order. It is also important at this point to confirm that the requirements to create or become an integrated school, as set down in the 1989 Order, do not change.

While schools, other sectoral bodies and even politicians, may use the word "integrated" to describe mixed schools, they are not integrated. Only schools that fulfil the requirements as set down in the 1989 Order can legally be recognised as integrated. Mr Justice Treacy, who confirmed integrated education as a stand-alone concept, said that the term cannot be used to describe any other school, no matter how mixed or how others might consider themselves to be.

I refer Members to clause 10(1), which requires that

"The Department of Education must make regulations supplementing the provisions of this Act"

and, in 10(2)(i), the

"inclusion of matters relating to the provision of integrated education in the school inspection regime".

That means that the Education and Training Inspectorate can now measure whether an integrated school is, indeed, meeting the meanings laid down by this legislation. An integrated school will be able to confirm how integrated it is not only by the number of types of pupils but through its intentional promotion, protection and improvement of its ethos of diversity, respect and understanding between those of different cultures and religious beliefs and none, between those of different socio-economic backgrounds and between those of different abilities. To clarify, that applies to pupils, teaching staff, non-teaching staff and the board of governors. As we all know, an integrated school does not just consider the ethos of the school from the viewpoint of pupils attending; it seeks a balance across all persons involved in the school body.

Clause 2 defines the purpose of integrated education. While some Members have commented to me that all schools have that purpose, the unique position of integrated schools is that the promotion of equality, good relations and respect for identity, diversity and community cohesion happens every day in every class under one roof, as children are educated together, learning about themselves and their friends together from teachers, non-teaching staff and governors who are all integrating.

In clause 3, I have not defined what the advisory body is, as it is left to the Department to recognise any body that includes in its objectives the provision of support and advice to the Department in its promotion of integrated education. I expect that the Department will continue to engage the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE), as the Department already recognises and engages with that body as part of its encouragement and facilitation of integrated education.

Clause 4 amends the Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 to include a duty to promote integrated education as well as to encourage and facilitate it. Clause 4 also amends the Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 to require the Education Authority to

"encourage, facilitate and promote integrated education."

That subtle change will enable integrated education, at long last, to be placed on an equal footing with other education sectors.

In clause 5(1), I have defined that promotion means

"(a) identifying, assessing, monitoring and aiming to increase the demand for the provision of integrated education (including, in particular, monitoring the number and success of applications for integrated education), and (b) providing sufficient places in integrated schools to meet the demand ... and without treating the religious demographics of an area or spare places in existing schools as evidence of lack of demand for integrated education)."

Importantly, clause 5(2) states that, in clause 5(1)(a):

"'monitor' means monitor by reference to data collected in respect of relevant catchment and other areas."

The word "relevant" has been used specifically to counter the ongoing argument that, if you look at integrated education, you can identify a number of empty desks across Northern Ireland. When you look at the whole of Northern Ireland, you see that all sectors have empty desks. It is worth noting that integrated education happens to have the fewest empty desks. It is vital that the relevant catchment area is considered.

In my constituency, more children are refused a place at a post-primary integrated school than can attend one. Integrated schools have fewer unfilled places than the Northern Ireland average, and some of the post-primary schools are among the most oversubscribed in Northern Ireland. Lagan College, as we know, turns away an average of 200 plus pupils per year. Priory College in Holywood is oversubscribed. Strangford College — I am member of the board — turns away over 100 per year. That is a full year group of pupils denied the opportunity to attend an integrated school. If the House supports parental choice, where is the parental choice for families who want to send their child to an integrated school?

Under "Planning and strategy", which is clauses 6, 7 and 8, clause 6 places a general duty to include provision for integrated schools when:

"(a) developing, adopting, implementing or revising policies, strategies and plans; and (b) designing and delivering public services."

Why is that needed? It is because, unlike the controlled or maintained sector, there is no planning for integrated education. New integrated schools are set up by parents, many of whom have remortgaged their homes to fund a school. An integrated school depends on charitable funds raised by the Integrated Education Fund to support the building or rental of premises; to fund the recruitment and hiring of teachers; and to survive for two years before the Department may consider funding the school. That does not happen in the controlled or maintained sector.

In clause 7, the presumption that a new school will be controlled or maintained based on:

"the religious demographics of an area"

or

"the existence of spare places in existing schools"

is flipped on its head to change the law to the presumption that any brand-new school will be integrated:

"unless that would be inappropriate by reason of special circumstances."

I have not defined special circumstances. I believe that the Department and the existing employing bodies will be able to agree that process. The 'Community Conversation Toolkit' created by Ulster University is one example that is already being used by the Education Authority. That toolkit allows a ground-up approach to decide the type of school that should be in an area. Not defining special circumstances allows the Department and the Education Authority to provide a special school, should they need to meet a growing demand for that. For clarity, a "new school" is a brand-new school. I have not intended "new" to include amalgamations or shared campuses. It will be for the Department to define how it will use the clause.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Not at the moment.

I remind all Members that we have already agreed to the independent review of education and to the panel considering a single education system. That review report will, hopefully, be published in mid- to late 2022. The recommendations from that report, if accepted, will take years to implement. I expect that any fundamental changes to education that are proposed will take decades to implement. Bengoa will seem like a walk in the park compared with any attempt to change our education system, but we have committed to that. My clause 7 is an interim measure, with a get-out clause for where and when the local community decides something different from the presumption. I have spoken to parties already and highlighted the fact that there has not been a new school in years, and there is not likely to be a new school for quite some time. When there is, why do we not have a school that everyone can attend and that will allow all pupils and teachers to be together under one roof?

Clause 8 places a statutory duty on the Department of Education to:

"prepare, publish and maintain a strategy for the encouragement, facilitation, promotion and provision of integrated education".

The integrated education strategy must:

"include provision for resources".

— that means in the Department —

"include provision ... to facilitate the maintenance and protection of the ethos of existing and new integrated schools ... identify funding ... for the promotion and provision of integrated education (including ... facilitating the establishment of new integrated schools, the expansion of existing integrated schools"

— to meet parental demand —

"and [enable] the transformation of existing schools into integrated schools)".

It is worth noting that much of that is already being done through policy. I placed it as a requirement in the Bill, however, to ensure that, no matter who holds the Department of Education portfolio, resources and support for integrated education will continue.

The integrated education strategy must include an action plan that is co-produced, includes timetabled targets and benchmarks against which the success of the strategy can be measured. The Bill provides potential targets and benchmarks for the Department to include.

After the Bill receives Royal Assent, the strategy will be published and a report produced that updates the strategy every two years. That means that the Department of Education will be required to demonstrate how it has performed its integrated education functions. The report will not simply sit on a shelf. The strategy and all updates to it have to be laid before the Assembly. The Education Committee will then be able to scrutinise effectiveness of performance against targets. I felt that it was important that the Assembly be given a key role in scrutinising the strategy and the action plan.

Under "Final provisions", the Department of Education must make regulations supplementing the legislation's provisions. The Bill states what the regulations may include and allows the Department to add to the provisions listed in the Bill, where appropriate. The Department will confirm how it will set benchmarks, how data will be captured, and how assessments and monitoring will take place and be measured. The action plan will set out how steps to promote integrated education will be taken, how mandatory standardised training for teachers, non-teaching staff, governors and education bodies will be provided, and how the school inspection regime will take forward its inspection of the integrated ethos.

The regulations require collaboration and coordination on integrated education among other stakeholders. For example, there is a clear recognition between the need for shared housing and integrated education to enable the community cohesion for which we are all striving to happen. Importantly, regulations will include those on integrated education in systems for the planning and development of urban and rural areas. The Department of Education has been given flexibility to develop and produce guidance on the legislation for education bodies and any other public authorities.

Clause 12 confirms the consequential amendments to legislation named therein as a result of the Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you for allowing me the time to go through the clauses. Since First Stage, I have spoken with all the parties, except Mr Allister's: I have not spoken to the TUV. I am looking forward to hearing from all who will contribute to the debate, and I will hopefully be able to answer any questions and respond to any points of clarification that anyone wishes to ask.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

I will allow you to respond when you are making your speech. I am just about to finish.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I simply wanted to ask a question.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

You can ask it during your contribution.

I thank you, Mr Speaker, and your office, the Assembly Research and Information Service (RaISe), the Bill Office and the parliamentary drafter Mr Greenberg for all their work on the Bill to get it to this stage. I know that she is not going to be too happy with my saying this, but I pay tribute to my research officer, Fiona McAteer, who has dedicated five years of her life to drafting the legislation and bringing it to this stage. Together, we have brought forward legislation for you to consider, and I look forward to hearing your comments and questions.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I will start from where I am coming from on integrated education. When my children were about to embark on their educational journey, it was my wife and my contention that we wanted to ensure that our children would mix with children from all backgrounds. Many others in the Chamber have taken a similar approach. We chose the schools with a degree of care, at primary and secondary level. They did not enter the integrated education movement. That is not to, in any way, take away from anyone who has decided on that approach. My children met with people from all religious backgrounds, and no religious backgrounds. Each of the schools, from their boards of governors to their principals and teachers, were extremely supportive of how the educational process was handled. My children had an extremely rounded education, certainly in respect of those whom they engaged with throughout their school years, to the extent that many of the pupils with whom they were friends at that stage remain friends.

It would be remiss of us not to acknowledge that principals and teachers in the main sectors of education handle those situations well. My office is located in an inner-city area, and I see children, particularly newcomer children, engaging and being educated together.

Kellie Armstrong is passionate about integrated education, and, when we were talking about her Bill previously, she indicated that she had made sure that her children were educated in the integrated sector. She is passionate about integrated education, to the extent that she is zealous about it. She is an ardent advocate for it. However, it was demonstrated in her presentation, to some extent, that the Bill is dictatorial. I will come back to that, Mr Deputy Speaker. I believe that she is sincere, but I believe that she is sincerely wrong in pushing this legislation, certainly at this time.

I wanted, and I know that many Members want, to see our children being educated together. As far back as when Peter Robinson produced his document on shared education and educating our children together, he said:

"Shared education is a pathway that ultimately and logically leads towards integrated education so we would support both. We have to live in the world that we exist in, and you cannot have a revolution in education that would not be deeply difficult and divisive by just imposing integrated education overall."

Not too long ago, every party in the Chamber signed up to 'New Decade, New Approach'. That document deals with educational performance and states:

"The Executive will? establish an external, independent review of education provision?, with a focus on securing greater efficiency in delivery costs, raising standards, access to the curriculum for all pupils, and the prospects of moving towards a single education system. To help build a shared and integrated society, the Executive will ?support educating children and young people of different backgrounds together ?in the classroom."

The Minister may comment on this, but my understanding is that we are close to appointing the panel that will drive that initiative forward. If this Bill were to proceed, we would be standing on the toes of the 'New Decade, New Approach' document.

The Bill's Explanatory and Financial Memorandum indicates that the proposer has been working on this initiative since 2016-17. It states that she has had:

"face to face discussions with educationalists and academics from local universities including the teacher training colleges. The Member also wrote to the Minister of Education and the Committee for Education to ensure similar legislation was not being brought forward by the Department."

It is complimentary to me, as a member of the Education Committee, that the Bill's proposer wrote to the Committee, and we confirmed that no other similar legislation was going through. However, in doing her consultation since 2016-17, the Member has not discussed the Bill with the bodies that represent the education sectors. Mr Mark Baker, chief executive of the Controlled Schools’ Support Council (CSSC), said:

"The Controlled Schools’ Support Council (CSSC) supports controlled schools, which are open to all faiths and none, in providing high quality education for children and young people to enable them to learn, develop and grow together, within the ethos of non-denominational Christian values and principles. Our concern is that the Integrated Education Bill would result in the secularisation of controlled schools and the removal of their Christian ethos."

That begs this question: why did the proposer, who has been working on the Bill since 2016-17, not have the courtesy to speak to Mr Mark Baker, as chief executive? He went on to make a number of other points. He confirmed:

"CSSC has to date not been consulted on this Bill and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this further."

He also said:

"In its current form the Bill does not take into account the diversity of the controlled sector and neither does it acknowledge that the ethos of the controlled sector is 'open to all.' The New Decade New Approach priority to support educating our children and young people of different backgrounds together ... is delivered on a daily basis in controlled schools."

I would have thought that anybody who wanted to produce a serious piece of legislation would have said, "Who do I need to consult? Who are the vested interests? Who are the interested bodies? Who are the bodies that are delivering on the ground?". Certainly, Mr Mark Baker should have been consulted.

On the other side of the cake, we have the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). Mr Gerry Campbell, chief executive of CCMS, indicated that he had not been consulted. Therefore, we have what might be regarded as the state schools and the Catholic maintained sector not being consulted. He makes a number of —

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Will the Member give way? I will say that I have consulted CCMS —

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

No. Sorry, hold on. Chair?

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

If the Member assents to give way, that is grand, but, please, let us have no commentary from a seated position.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

On three occasions, the Member was asked to give way — by Mr Storey, Mrs Dodds and Mr Allister — as she made her remarks on her Bill. She refused to give way, and yet she is asking me to give way —

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

You well know, probably better than I do, that that is her prerogative, as it is yours.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Yes, and I will give way.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

The Speaker's Office allowed me to carry out that consultation in 2016-17. I met CSSC and CCMS at that time. Since the Bill has been introduced, I have not had the opportunity to consult with them, but I had contact from CCMS today asking me to meet it for discussions following this stage of the Bill, if it is passed. There is plenty of opportunity to do that. The Bill has not been passed yet, unfortunately, but I will take that opportunity. I met those organisations many times, however. That may well have been before Mr Baker took up his post, but I met them on several occasions. You have to remember that controlled integrated schools also fall under the CSSC.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

It is somewhat rich that the Member says that she is prepared to meet with those bodies at this stage, after they have contacted her and after she has brought the Bill to this stage.

Anyway, Mr Gerry Campbell said:

"Given the commitment made by all parties when they signed up to New Decade, New Approach, and that we expect the panel"

— he is anticipating what I am anticipating —

"to be confirmed shortly regarding taking forward the independent review of education, we are somewhat surprised and concerned that this draft Bill is being put forward in advance of the independent review process".

Peter Weir (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for giving way. Is it not particularly concerning that consultation on the draft Bill with the likes of CCMS is taking place only at this stage, particularly given that CCMS is actually named in the Bill? In fact, as it is listed as one of the education bodies that must do certain things, if the Bill is passed into law, some of the provisions will apply directly to CCMS, and yet the Bill has not been discussed with CCMS. At this stage, CCMS is an afterthought.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

The Member is one step ahead of me. CCMS made the point:

"the proposal to place a duty on the Department of Education and other bodies such as CCMS to encourage the development of integrated education, how does this sit with the existing statutory duties held by CCMS with regard to Catholic education? Would this mean promoting integrated education over and above Catholic education?"

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for giving way. The Member made some really important points about the lack of consultation on the Bill. When, as DUP members of the Education Committee, we carried out our consultation on the Bill and met all the bodies, what really concerned them — you were just making this point — was the fact that, for the first time in statute, there would be a legal obligation on the Department in clause 7 to impose integrated education on any new school that is built. Does the Member agree that that places integrated education in a different place from every other sector — indeed, a place above and beyond every other sector — and that all the sectors with which we consulted were extremely concerned about that aspect of the Bill?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Member. That point is extremely concerning. In much the same way as Mr Weir did, she reached the point just before I did. That point was made by Mr Gerry Campbell. This is what he said:

"The issue regarding building new schools, and that education bodies must apply a presumption that the school would be an integrated school, again this places one sector above others and gives no recognition to the fact that demand at a local level remains very strong for Catholic education".

Those are the concerns of two bodies that represent our children's education.

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

Excuse me, Mr Newton. I am sorry for interrupting. Question Time is coming up at 2.00 pm. If you do not mind, we will allow Members to come in for Question Time, and you can resume your contribution afterwards. It is a management issue.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

You are in control, Mr Deputy Speaker.

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

You have been here before. I am sorry for interrupting. Thank you. Members should take their ease.

Oral Answers to Questions — Infrastructure

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

1. Mr Butler asked the Minister for Infrastructure to outline her Department’s plans for the reopening of the Lisburn to Antrim railway line. (AQO 2350/17-22)

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Members will know that I am ambitious for our rail network, and I have a vision to enhance our rail connectivity to better connect our communities while delivering cleaner, greener and more sustainable transport. Alongside my counterpart in the Irish Government, Minister Eamon Ryan, I was delighted to announce the all-island strategic rail review, which will allow us to consider our network across the island and how we can improve it for everyone. The review will examine the potential for rail connections across the island, including how our existing connections could be improved and where new rail links would be best placed.

I want to ensure that any proposals for changes to the rail network include operational and financial viability and have a very clear focus on the part that rail can play in growing our all-island economy while improving people's ability to connect and access opportunities and addressing long-standing regional imbalances. The review's purpose is to allow data to drive how to improve and expand our rail connections, allowing us to press ahead, at long last, with enhancing our rail connectivity in Northern Ireland and across the island. The reopening of old railways, including the Lisburn to Antrim railway, will be considered as part of that overall review.

My Department is also preparing the regional strategic transport network transport plan for public consultation. It is anticipated that it will be published for consultation later this year, and I welcome all representations from the public, including those about reopening the Lisburn to Antrim railway line via Knockmore, through that process.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her encouraging answer. The Minister is fiscally responsible in her outlook, and she should be commended for that. There are obvious financial burdens in providing new rail networks or opening up older ones. Does the Minister accept that reopening the Lisburn to Antrim railway line might be one of the most cost-effective options available to her?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. We always have to be mindful of fiscal constraints and the importance of fiscal responsibility. The Member may know that, since 2005, Translink has spent just over £2 million maintaining the line to allow for its current non-passenger use. While he makes a key point, the all-island rail review will allow us to consider our rail network and how we can improve it for everyone. It reflects the commitment in 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA), but I want to use the opportunity to examine the data and the operational and financial viability to ensure that we do what we can to enhance our rail network. There is a specific focus in the all-island strategic rail review on how we can connect our international gateways through rail. Our ports and airports are also important elements of the railway line highlighted by the Member.

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

I thank the Minister for her answers to my elected Lagan Valley colleague. I know that the Minister knows how important rail connectivity is in helping us to reduce emissions. Will she provide an update on her work with Minister Ryan to improve all-island connectivity?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. Of course, improving our rail network is about connecting communities to opportunities, and it enhances our tourist offering, but the Member makes a very important point: it is also about ensuring that we take action to encourage more people to use sustainable transport and public transport. Our rail network is an important part of that.

The procurement process for the all-island strategic rail review has begun. It is restricted to a maximum period of 12 months. As I said, it will be data-driven, and it will report back, but an important part of that process will be a public consultation exercise. I encourage the Member and others to make sure that they feed into that process.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Minister, as you know, I have been vocal — maybe too vocal sometimes — about rail connectivity, particularly in the north-west. It was welcome that my Adjournment debate received cross-party support a few short months ago. In light of that, will you provide an update on the feasibility study to improve the Derry line, such as the phase 3 works and the consideration of the half-hourly halts at Ballykelly, Strathfoyle and City of Derry Airport?

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

As that is not necessarily the question that has been asked, it is at the Minister's discretion to answer.

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am content to answer it.

As I have said many times in the Chamber and outside it, rail has huge untapped potential to deliver multiple benefits across our island. It is also an important component of addressing regional imbalance. That is why, as Minister, I have been very much focused on improving connectivity to the north-west.

In line with that commitment, I commissioned a feasibility study to get phase 3 of the Coleraine to Derry project back on track. As the Member highlighted, I also commissioned additional studies to explore the possibility of a half-hourly service between Belfast and Derry, as well as to provide additional rail halts at Ballykelly, Strathfoyle and the City of Derry Airport at Eglinton. I can tell Members that work on the phase 3 feasibility study is ongoing, with a number of topographical and pilot studies under way. A report is still on schedule to be completed by November of this year. A full and robust business case will then be prepared and submitted to me that will ensure that all future spend is fully informed by it and that there is high-level assurance on costs, risk and benefit realisation.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

The focus is rightly on the importance of connectivity and, in the original question, rail connectivity. Connectivity is hugely important for growing the economy. It is important for our relationships across this island. The Minister makes much of her engagement with all-island strategies. Will she tell the House what engagement she has had and continues to have with the Union connectivity review, which is extremely important for connectivity in the United Kingdom?

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

Again, that supplementary question is not specific to the question that was asked, so it is at the Minister's discretion whether she wishes to answer it.

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. As I have demonstrated on multiple occasions, I very much value the importance of connectivity across these islands. I am also very committed to partnership working across these islands. I have met the chair of the UK connectivity review, Sir Peter Hendy, and made a written submission to that review. As part of my commitment to working across these islands, I met my ministerial counterparts in Scotland and Wales as recently as last week to discuss a range of shared challenges and opportunities in transport, making a modal shift in people's travel and tackling the climate emergency. I remain very much committed to working across these islands to improve the lives of everyone in Northern Ireland.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Reopening old and abandoned railway lines is a key aspect of our green recovery for which we need to plan. What is the situation with railway passenger numbers on our existing network? What more is being done to encourage people back on to the railways?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. I do not have the most up-to-date figures to hand for the passengers who are travelling on our rail transport, but, from recollection, some of the most recent figures that I have seen are around the 60% mark. Of course, when we have periods of very good weather or a bank holiday weekend, we see an increase in passenger numbers. Translink has therefore put measures in to mitigate that, working with the PSNI.

Throughout the pandemic, we have put measures in place to give passengers the confidence to travel. The Member will know that we introduced the mandatory use of face coverings on our public transport. We have taken additional deep-cleaning measures and run a public awareness campaign. As a public transport provider, we take our safety responsibilities extremely seriously, but we remain committed to giving passengers the confidence to come back onto public transport safely. That will allow them to go about their everyday lives, but public transport is also an important part of tackling the climate crisis.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Would reopening the Lisburn to Antrim line not greatly facilitate a connection to the International Airport? Is that not vital to its future success?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. As I said in response to Mr Butler, part of the all-island strategic rail review is rail connectivity and the links to our international gateways. Those are our airports — Belfast International Airport, Belfast City Airport and City of Derry Airport — but also our ports. That provision for passengers is important, but it is also important, as Mrs Dodds highlighted, for growing the economy and will therefore be a key element of that work.

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

Before we move to the next question, I remind Members that question 9 has been withdrawn. Also, topical question 4 from me has been withdrawn, as it could have presented some practical difficulties.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

2. Mr Chambers asked the Minister for Infrastructure how many housing proposals have been delayed or abandoned because NI Water did not have sewerage or water infrastructure in place to facilitate additional housing in the last five years. (AQO 2351/17-22)

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Northern Ireland Water is a statutory consultee in the planning process and, as such, does not make planning decisions. Local planning is the remit of local councils. Northern Ireland Water provides information and advice to the appropriate local council, and the council is obliged to take that advice into consideration. However, councils ultimately make the planning decision, which may or may not reflect the advice of the statutory consultees.

Northern Ireland Water does not receive notifications of the reasons for planning refusals or delays and is therefore not in a position to advise on how many planning refusals are related to sewerage infrastructure issues. Such information would be best obtained from the planning authorities based in our 11 local councils. However, Northern Ireland Water is due to roll out a new planning response template this month. The implementation of the template will help to facilitate the tracking of negative planning responses provided to the various planning authorities.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she detail any cooperation that she has had with the Minister for Communities on the issue? What solutions have been put forward to allow housing, particularly social housing, to be built in areas where Northern Ireland Water infrastructure is weak?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. He raises an important point. We have an acute shortage of social and affordable housing in Northern Ireland, and we need to work collaboratively to address that. Part of the case that I made at the Executive to secure funding was that, if we do not invest in our water and waste water infrastructure, we will not be able to build the many homes that we need.

As the Minister for Infrastructure, I have also engaged with the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations, recognising the importance of the issue, and I am keen to work with them on any possible pilots for sustainable drainage systems. I also assure the Member that Northern Ireland Water has met the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations and the chief executives of housing associations on several occasions. We are working with them to address the challenges. I can also advise that we are working with one of the housing associations — Choice Housing — to look at a pilot programme to address some of those issues.

It is an issue that we are very alive to. It is one that I have engaged with all Executive colleagues on, and we are working with the housing providers and developers on it.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I welcome the Minister's answers. Minister, you know that NIW received a budget of £344 million for the one year. You mentioned regional imbalance, and we need to avoid a regional imbalance in sewerage infrastructure. There are 100 areas of constraint for sewerage infrastructure. Do you have any indication of what areas will have those capacity issues and constraints addressed over the next year?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

The Member is right to highlight the acute difficulties that present themselves when we try to address the historic underfunding of our water and waste water infrastructure. As a Committee member, Mr Boylan will also know that the Utility Regulator has identified an investment requirement of £2 billion over the next price control period. He rightly identified that, this year, I have allocated £345·5 million, which is the first time in a long time that the funding requirement identified by the Utility Regulator has been met.

We know that we have around 100 locations in Northern Ireland that are either at or beyond their developmental capacity. As a result of this year's funding, we should be able to address 40 of those locations. I am happy to provide the Member with a detailed list of the projects that we intend to take forward, because I have also ensured that, by allocating from my Department this year, we can accelerate some of the projects that were due to be worked on. I am happy to provide that detail to the Member.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Minister for her answers, which include the reference to the substantial investment that is being made in Northern Ireland Water. Northern Ireland Water has been looking for that investment for a long time, and it will undoubtedly also go a great way towards resolving a lot of the problems in the construction industry. Will the Minister detail how long it will take for Northern Ireland Water to assess the capacity concerns so that people can start to get some sort of timescale to assist them with their work?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Given the level of investment that is required, it is envisaged that it could take some 12 years, or two price-control periods, to address the issues with our water and waste water infrastructure that have been identified. It is clear that we need to have a plan. We, as an Executive, need to continue to prioritise investment in our water and waste water infrastructure if we are to realise any of the outcomes in our draft Programme for Government.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

While I welcome the Minister's response, and I know of the pressures that are on Northern Ireland Water and of the need for continued investment to allow development to continue, the Minister will know about my continual plea on behalf of residents of uncompleted developments that still cannot be connected with road and water infrastructure because of problems with legacy developers who are no longer on the scene. I think of Birchwood Manor in my constituency, for which I have repeatedly lobbied. Has the Minister engaged with NI Water about ways in which it can help to connect those forgotten developments so that citizens there can benefit from the full infrastructure that they deserve in their developments?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. He has identified an issue. As I have said in response to previous questions, we are struggling to secure the requisite funding for Northern Ireland Water to fulfil its statutory obligations in respect of water and waste water infrastructure. A number of sites across Northern Ireland remain unadopted. Their water and waste water infrastructure is not under the ownership or within the responsibility of Northern Ireland Water. That having been said, Northern Ireland Water has engaged with residents across a number of those sites, and it remains willing, able and ready to engage with developers and residents to find some forms of resolution to that very difficult issue.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

3. Ms Flynn asked the Minister for Infrastructure what investment is planned for the development of cycle lanes in West Belfast in this financial year. (AQO 2352/17-22)

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

Last year, I established my blue-green infrastructure fund to focus efforts on a green recovery. Out of that fund, I invested £6 million specifically in active travel schemes, including spend by my Department and grant funding for greenways delivered by councils. That is the highest level of funding for active travel projects in a single year. For 2021-22, I have more than doubled the commitment to active travel to £13·5 million.

I am very conscious of the need to develop better walking, wheeling and cycling infrastructure right across the city and particularly in areas, such as north and west Belfast, where there is a notable lack of facilities. To demonstrate my commitment to enhancing cycling connectivity in Belfast, I announced on 4 June 2021 the publication of 'Making Belfast an Active City – Belfast Cycling Network 2021'. The network publication provides a blueprint for the development and delivery of coherent, connected and safe infrastructure for everyday cycling in the city over the next 10 years.

As part of a £3 million investment in walking and cycling in Belfast, some £750,000 is earmarked for Belfast cycling network schemes in 2021-22 as a starting point. Work will also be undertaken on developing schemes for delivery in subsequent years. I want to move from plans to actual delivery on the ground. I have asked officials to focus on what can be delivered in all parts of the city in the short term and to work with stakeholders to make better walking, wheeling and cycling infrastructure a reality in west Belfast and throughout the city.

I met the West Belfast Partnership Board recently, to discuss its vision and ambitions for the development of safe, attractive, comprehensive commuter cycle routes in west Belfast. I very much welcome its positive response to the Belfast cycling network and the proposals for West Belfast. My walking and cycling champion continues to work with stakeholders from the partnership to increase active travel in the west of the city.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for her detailed response. She has probably partially answered my supplementary.

The additional money for active travel, which is a big improvement on previous years, is welcome, but only a small percentage of that goes towards cycling. Although the Belfast cycle network plan is also very welcome, the funding has to be delivered to the areas that need it. West Belfast only has 1% of the city's cycling infrastructure. Beyond the meetings with officials and the West Belfast Partnership Board, can the Minister use any other initiatives to ensure that active travel is firmly rooted in her budget and to spread that evenly across all areas?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

As the Member points out, it is important that we enhance our walking and cycling infrastructure, particularly in the areas across Northern Ireland where there is a dearth. In reality, we are starting from a very low baseline. Considerable time and effort has to go into the design of the schemes and doing community consultation. The other restriction that we have is that we are still operating from single-year budgets, so, while I have identified a £100 million investment for the Belfast bicycle plan over the next 10 years, of course I can commit only a single year of funding to that. I have given a commitment, and, as I said, I have put the greatest amount of investment into active travel compared with any other Minister. I remain committed to doing that, and, as I said, I have also increased the staffing resource in each of the divisions across Northern Ireland so that, at the heart of each of our roads divisions, we have a very clear focus on active travel and the design and expansion of our networks.

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

Minister, what plans are there to expand the greenways and cycling across Belfast and Lagan Valley?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

To deliver my ambition of £13·5 million specifically to active travel, as I said, I have resourced additional staff in all four roads divisions. Those staff, along with existing staff, are working on bringing forward schemes for delivery this year and next year. Officials are also working on a delivery plan for the Belfast cycling network, which I plan to publish in the autumn. The delivery plan will identify key schemes throughout the city, with a particular focus on areas where there is currently little separated or traffic-free infrastructure. It will also provide a focus on linking pieces of isolated infrastructure into a more coherent routes network. A key element of securing delivery is communication with stakeholders and consultation on proposed designs. That is resource-intensive and inevitably means that that will form a greater proportion of the work in the earlier years of delivery. Consequently, capital expenditure will be low in year 1, but it will build year-on-year over 10 years to deliver the £100 million that I have identified as being required for implementation.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister, for answering the questions for written answer that I submitted about South Belfast, where there are a lot of very keen cyclists. Thank you also for the information on the Belfast cycling network. You mentioned stakeholder engagement. I would appreciate a bit more detail on that. Also, how will you cope with arterial routes, especially in South Belfast, where cars are parked in the middle of cycle lanes at present?

Nichola Mallon (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

As I said, an important part of this work is to bring communities with us, so we carry out community consultation. For example, in the Member's constituency of South Belfast, there is a pop-up cycle lane on the Dublin Road. The Member will know that there are two current petitions: one to have it removed and another to keep it. That is an example of the difficulties and challenges that you can face when you try to bring about change. That said, in respect of that cycle lane, we are engaging in a survey that we hope will be completed by September. The survey will get the views of people and, hopefully, build on that. There will be challenges in South Belfast, which is why we are trying to take a pragmatic and flexible approach.

The best approach is to advance those schemes where they are easily implemented, because I am a believer that, when you demonstrate success, you can build momentum. We will be very much led by that, but, of course, we will continue to work with elected representatives and councils so that we can make as much progress as possible. Related to that is pavement parking, which is an issue that I am keen to explore, so I am working with officials on that. We need to take a more comprehensive and holistic approach to these matters rather than just looking at cycle lanes on their own. It is about how people can move about much more freely and how we can maximise the opportunities to engage in safe active travel as much as possible.