Northern Ireland Assembly, 24 January 2022

331 contributions from 63 members. The official report.

Members' Statements

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

If Members wish to be called to make a statement, they should indicate that by continually rising in their place. Members who are called will have up to three minutes in which to make their statement. Members are reminded that statements will not be subject to debate or questioning, and interventions will not be permitted. I will not take any points of order on this or any other matter until the item of business has finished.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Across the North, there is a chronic lack of provision for NHS menopause services. There is only one dedicated NHS menopause service in Belfast, and, according to the Department's data, there are only two menopause specialists across the entire North. Throughout trust areas outside greater Belfast, women are treated for menopause symptoms by gynaecologists or GPs who quite often have no training in how to treat menopause, and women are not getting the understanding or the treatment that they need. There is clearly a need for more menopause services for women. These services can only be provided when doctors, nurses and other health professionals are given the education and the training that they need to treat and help women who are going through this, often disruptive, period in their lives.

There are many good reasons to invest in menopause training for our medical professionals and, indeed, to extend that training and knowledge to our wider society. One of those reasons is the significant contribution that women make to our workforce and their impact on our economic well-being. According to the Office for National Statistics in Britain, menopausal women are the fastest-growing demographic in the workforce, with women over the age of 40 being the fastest-growing demographic in the North's workforce. Data from an Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) survey in 2018 shows that 98% of women surveyed did not know whether their workplace had a menopause policy, while 49% said that menopause had been treated as a joke in their workplace.

Some 96% said that they would welcome a menopause workplace survey, and 97% said that they would welcome training for union representatives and managers to support women in the workplace who are experiencing menopause.

In October 2021, Sinn Féin Minister of Finance, Conor Murphy MLA, indicated that his Department was in the process of developing a menopause policy to support Civil Service staff. His Department has also delivered several awareness sessions on menopause. I commend the Minister for that move, and I hope that others throughout the public and private sectors can follow suit.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

Throughout the public health crisis, care homes across Northern Ireland have faced significant challenges as they have aimed to keep those who are in their homes safe and well. Our communities are full of examples of staff going above and beyond to protect residents, with some even moving into these settings full-time. The problems witnessed at the start of the pandemic with the supply of PPE, testing and availability of staff reflected the need for a fundamental rethink of social care. We must better support those who are some of the most vulnerable in our society.

As our economy seeks to recover from COVID-19, it is unlikely that the operating challenges facing care homes will get easier. It is therefore vital that we harness all available tools to reduce the practical and financial burdens that they face. The Care Act 2014 permits greater flexibility for state-registered care home providers to recover VAT, or value added tax, on supplies and other expenditure related to care services across the United Kingdom. That includes things such as meals, refreshments and certain toiletry products. It is regrettable that the terminology in health and social care trust contracts has not been updated as required to allow care homes here to benefit. It is crucial that they have the ability to reclaim VAT to the same extent as care homes in other parts of the United Kingdom. That will not only support residents and lessen burdens faced by individual homes but ensure that additional resources are available for reinvestment.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Being a parent is a blessing, but it is not always easy. It is one job role that maybe you are never truly prepared for, and, rewarding as it is, parenthood is not all sunshine and rainbows. Having little eyes always watching, looking for guidance and relying on you to restore a sense of calm during trying times is tough, and parenting over the course of a pandemic, when adults have just as many anxieties and questions as children, has been no mean feat. Today, in the run-up to Parent Mental Health Day this Thursday, 27 January, I pay tribute to parents, carers and guardians and remind them to take time to nurture their own well-being and to make their mental health a priority.

The events of the past two years have been the most challenging in living memory. Most parents and guardians have done their best to create a balance between work, home and school life. Without the practical support networks that we so often take for granted, parenting has never been harder, and single parents have shouldered a particularly heavy burden during the lockdown period. Many would agree that the old adage, "It takes a village to raise a child", has never been more keenly felt.

That sense of chaos has filtered out beyond lockdown, however. The "new normal" still feels pretty alien. Children are dealing with the ever-changing COVID rules in schools. Playground chat has morphed into talk of much more serious matters, and bedtime routines, at least in my house, are a distant memory. Family life in general has been turned upside down. For many families, the fallout of the pandemic has hit harder, whether that means struggling with the rising cost of living or grieving the cruel loss of a loved one. Expectant parents have had to contend with restrictive hospital visiting rules, in some instances being left without the crutch of their partner or family member. New parents still await the implementation of the perinatal mental health strategy and the support services therein. Raising children has never been more challenging.

As elected representatives, we have a responsibility to address those concerns, to improve support for parents, to create a fairer welfare system and to improve access to mental health support services. In the here and now, however, it is important to acknowledge that parenting can be overwhelming and to remind parents to take care of themselves. Putting your mental health first is not selfish: it is essential.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

We must all be mindful of our language: I have said so on the Floor of this Chamber on many occasions. We must guard against language that is both hurtful and harmful. Over the weekend, I let my guard down, and for that I am truly sorry. I posted a joke, and, regardless of what my intentions were, it was not just inappropriate but absolutely and fundamentally wrong. Therefore, it is important that I stand here and say to Mr and Mrs Poots that I am sorry for the hurt that I may have caused.

I have to say to wider society that my language was wrong on every level, and I have to apologise to everyone. We have to guard against that, and I did not. I did not show the leadership that I should have shown, but I can by standing here and saying that, although it was a mistake, it was wrong. Some people may accept my apologies, but I cannot make them do so. They may not see that there is sincerity in what I am saying, but I am being genuinely sincere. What I posted was wrong, and I unreservedly apologise to everybody for posting on Saturday night.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

I want to highlight the shocking lack of data on the women in Northern Ireland who are living with secondary breast cancer. I start by thanking Ann McBrien and Julie Ann Lillis of Beaconbridge secondary breast cancer group for coming to our all-party group meeting last week. It was a very powerful meeting, and the MLAs who attended very much appreciated their contributions and their sharing their personal experiences.

Whilst we know that around 35,000 people are living with secondary breast cancer in the UK, that is merely an estimate. Without accurate data, we cannot possibly provide the best care for those patients. Secondary or metastatic breast cancer is a truly devastating diagnosis for any patient. Women deserve the best possible care in order to prolong their life and spend their valuable time with loved ones. In Northern Ireland, however, we are failing those women, largely because our health service is not collecting the required data and, therefore, there are gaps in the service.

In May last year, thanks to the dedication of campaigners and charities, NHS England announced the first-ever national metastatic breast cancer audit to collect accurate figures for the number of people who are living with secondary breast cancer in England. NHS Wales has also committed to participating in the audit, but, unfortunately, Northern Ireland will not be taking part. I wrote to the Health Minister, in November 2021, to ask whether he had considered joining the national metastatic breast cancer audit. I was informed that we do not collect and organise the data that is necessary to carry out that audit. Whilst I welcome the fact that data collection will be a central focus of Northern Ireland's cancer strategy, it seems that we are missing an opportunity, and that is keenly felt by patients and campaigners.

Trusts in England are required to record cases of secondary breast cancer. According to Breast Cancer Now, however, compliance is relatively low here. Therefore, I question why our health service cannot undertake the audit, given that we are in a relatively similar position to that in England. As the charity points out, that information is vital for the effective planning of services. Without it, we are unable to identify how we can make necessary improvements.

For patients with this incurable diagnosis, the commitment in the cancer strategy to review the use of data seems like too little, too late. Those women already feel disadvantaged compared with patients in England. They have highlighted the lack of clinical trials in Northern Ireland, the additional administrative processes to access drug treatments and that the first dedicated clinical nurse specialist for secondary breast cancer has only recently been appointed here.

For those patients, every moment counts. I urge the Health Minister to take advantage of this opportunity and re-examine the decision —

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The Member's time is up

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

— not to take part in the audit.

Rachel Woods (Green, North Down)

I wish to speak about cervical cancer. Screening is one of the best ways to prevent cervical cancer, but over one in four do not attend their appointments when they are invited. We know that tests can save lives, but they are not easy for everybody. Some people find them uncomfortable or embarrassing. Others face additional barriers, such as a disability or an experience of trauma. We need to focus on reducing the barriers to this potentially life-saving test and encourage its uptake.

Last week was Cervical Cancer Prevention Week, and the charity Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust took the opportunity to highlight the importance of those tests. The trust opens up conversations about what follows a test, which are the results. A number of people in the Chamber and I know that, after receiving a screening, you receive a letter. I know what it looks like and the feeling about opening it. It can sometimes be really embarrassing and cause a feeling of shame. A lot of women who responded to Jo's Trust said that. However, each year in the UK, 220,000 women are told that they have cell changes following their routine cervical screening appointment. The cells are not cancerous, but they could develop into cancer if they are not monitored or treated appropriately. Treatment given to prevent the development of cervical cancer is highly effective, with a success rate of about 90%. That makes examination and treatment crucial aspects of prevention.

Recent research found that nine in 10 women knew little or nothing about cell changes before being diagnosed, and more than a quarter were ashamed. Nobody should feel alone, confused or ashamed when receiving their screening results. We need to have discussions around human papillomavirus (HPV), which is the virus that causes 99·7% of cervical cancers. Half of the calls to Jo's Trust focus on HPV, with women saying that they feel dirty, embarrassed and confused about having this very common virus. Far more work is needed to reduce the stigma surrounding it, starting at the age of the HPV vaccination being given in school.

In the rest of the UK, the screening programme tests first for the presence of HPV before testing for cell changes. That is a more sensitive and effective method for screening than that which is currently used here, as it allows those at greater risk of developing cancer to be monitored more closely and from an earlier age. The transition to HPV primer early has been agreed in principle, with an aim to implement it next year. I welcome that move to more accurate testing here. It is important that the roll-out happens as swiftly as possible to ensure that the women of Northern Ireland receive the highest standard of health screening. That is what they deserve, and there should be more testing, not less. Lessons should be learned about how to communicate changes in the screening programme. It is crucial to ensure clear and informative public health communications around this change so that it can be recognised as the good news and positive change to the programme that it is.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Last week, the Executive Office announced the very welcome news that an apology to victims and survivors of historical institutional abuse will be made in March this year.

I was elected to the Assembly in 2016 and became Sinn Féin spokesperson on victims just weeks before the launch of the Hart report. I will never forget attending the launch of that report and the feeling in the room that these children, who had been abused, in many different ways, now stood as adults, acknowledged and believed. The shame was given to those who own it: the institutions, those who carried out the abuse and the state.

The implementation of redress and support services has been a long and difficult road with many twists and turns. Now all these victims and survivors, regardless of the institution responsible, will get the apology that they rightly deserve from the state that failed them and allowed the abuse to take place. The state was responsible for every one of those children. Regardless of where the abuse took place, the state had a responsibility to look after, care for and protect them, and it failed them. We can never take away the pain or the harm that the abuse caused, and nothing that we can do will ever give those people back the lives that they should have had, but it is right that we say sorry to them all.

Many have not lived to see this day, including my mother-in-law and her sisters, but, if nothing else, I hope that they can now rest in peace. If we do not fully acknowledge and address what happened, we will leave the gates open for similar abuses to happen in the future. My thoughts are with all the victims and survivors. This belongs to them — they own it.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The reckless pursuit by some in the House of a net zero emissions target by 2045 is irresponsible and threatens devastation to the Northern Ireland economy, including our £5·2 billion food and drink industry. Let us not forget that the independent Climate Change Committee (CCC) recommended an 82% reduction target for greenhouse gases by 2050. It stated:

"In every scenario for achieving UK Net Zero that we have constructed, Northern Ireland would not get to Net Zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050."

The private Member's Climate Change Bill is out of step with that and out of touch with practical reality. All that you have to do to understand that is to speak to the farmers in my rural constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, where this Bill puts jobs and livelihoods on the line.

Northern Ireland makes up 3% of the UK population but provides around 20% of the food consumed in the United Kingdom. Fifty per cent of what we produce locally goes to Great Britain. Therefore, the reduction in herd numbers and food production that would be the inevitable result of the Bill would, perversely, leave a gap in supply that could be filled only via cheaper imports produced to lower environmental and animal welfare standards.

Sinn Féin TD Matt Carthy articulated the problem during a debate in the Dáil. He said:

"When I talk to people in rural communities and I ask them what climate change means to them ... they tell me it means higher taxes, higher costs on products for which they have no alternatives, job losses and greater fear for their livelihoods, particularly in farming families."

Tell me, then, what you will say to your constituents when you are looking at a 54% decrease in farm employment, which equates to 13,000 jobs, not forgetting the decrease of 86% in the number of farms in the dairy sector, as the KPMG report explains. Perhaps the Members opposite can explain why they do not share the same view on the Green Party Bill. It seems that they are very happy to implement partition when it comes to climate change targets.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I declare an interest as a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, as I wish to comment on correspondence published over the weekend from the Chief Constable to the Policing Board on budgets and his decision not to progress the planned recruitment drive this spring.

When the Minister of Finance came to the House to announce the draft three-year Budget, he mentioned a ring-fenced allocation of £14·8 million to the police for staffing. The 2% overall cut in budget of £14·6 million, however, largely and effectively offsets that money.

Let us be clear that, when the Chief Constable says, "I am not recruiting", that does not mean that the police headcount stays static. It falls because, annually, the police lose around 300 officers, for a variety of reasons but largely through retirement. If there is no money to recruit over the three-year Budget period, the headcount will drop by 900 and end up at around 6,100 or, at best, 6,200. Yet we have a commitment, not just from the Patten report of 20 years ago but in New Decade, New Approach two years ago, to increase the headcount to 7,500. On the current Budget projections, that will not happen. Over the three years of the Budget period, to increase the headcount from its current number to 7,500, the contribution would need to be north of £70 million, which the Chief Constable does not have.

The Chief Constable made it clear to the Policing Board in writing on 7 January that, were we to go the other way and see numbers fall by 300 per annum, dropping 300 in financial year 2022-23 would mean:

"the impact on frontline policing would be significant".

Where would that impact most likely fall? It is most likely to fall on neighbourhood policing, despite Patten's recommendation 44:

"policing with the community should be the core function of the police service and the core function of every police station."

This is a very serious situation. We are not giving the police the money that they need to keep people safe.

Finally, on a positive note, I welcome what I heard on Radio Ulster this morning, when she was discussing the police budget and the Chief Constable's decision to postpone recruitment in March, the Minister of Justice commented on operational matters. That was potentially the first time that I have heard that. I welcome that precedent and look forward to more of the same from the Minister.

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

I welcome the opportunity to talk a little bit more about my concern about the North losing its best and brightest young people to other shores. In December, a new report revealed that ongoing orange and green issues are as much to blame for Northern Ireland's brain drain as the economy.

It is very worrying that, in 2019, over 17,000 young people left Northern Ireland to go elsewhere. Among the reasons cited for our young people leaving Northern Ireland were segregation, poor community regulations and stuck-in-the-past political debates. Students in the study described themselves as:

"being 'sick' of ongoing community tension"

We have already lost generations of people due to our conflict. Now is the time to effectively address our current societal issues before we lose any more. Every participant raised concerns about political instability, and not one of them expressed confidence in governmental decision-making. How sad is that? Students also voiced the fact that they feel that they are not represented by politicians or in our political debates here. I welcome the representation by and engagement of our student unions across the North, which continue to turn their anger into action and to demand better from our Executive.

Looking at my own time under the age of 21, I, too, left Northern Ireland for elsewhere. I have lived in Liverpool, Dublin, Boston and California, looking outward for opportunity and beyond home for new starts and new chances. That should not have to be the case. We can provide those opportunities right here at home. We must act today to provide for our young people's future tomorrow.

The report also recommended that the Northern Ireland Executive develop a specific strategy to address the loss of our talented young people. It is time to retain and regain the lost talent here. Let us diversify our university course offerings, open a veterinary school, create an appropriate and effective strategy to develop our universities and invest in young people and allow for the energy and talent that they bring. Let young people create that, and let them stay here and live here. Young people also said that elsewhere has a broader range of higher education courses, greater availability of places and higher-quality student experience, which encourages them to leave Northern Ireland.

I believe that one thing that we can all agree on is that the fact that two thirds of our young people leaving this island and never returning home is absolutely unacceptable. Our own Matthew O'Toole MLA has crafted a proposal, called the make change programme, to transform our Civil Service so that it specifically tackles more deep-rooted challenges such as the climate emergency, economic underperformance and, of course, poverty. Our party is keen to see new opportunities and new starts for young people, and I know that other parties across the House do too. It is time that we create strong pull factors to encourage all those who have left to return home. I believe that we should act now.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I am tempted to comment on the exposure that the previous Member to speak gave to the Belfast Agreement institutions' failure to deliver for younger people and others, but I will address an issue that is afflicting our construction industry and wider industry, causing great fear and potential loss. That is the removal of the red diesel concession. That will hit our industry in a phenomenal manner, and it will hit us all through the passed-on increases in prices.

It is riddled with practical difficulties, particularly in the farming context. Red diesel will be permitted strictly for the farming context, but, if a farmer, for example, wanted to oblige a neighbour by taking his digger to dig out something, he would be regarded as a contractor and would have to wash out the tank and fill it with white diesel. That is so impractical that it is just not going to happen. Even charity tractor runs, ploughing matches and matters such as that will be blighted because they are not strictly farming issues. The removal of the concession on red diesel has a serious knock-on effect. I call on the Government to urgently review it.

In another niche sector, there will, from June, be an insistence that those who have pleasure crafts use white diesel to propel them. That imposition is being inflicted on us particularly because of the fact that we are still bound by a European court judgement and because of the protocol. The protocol, of course, has much to answer for as well in impeding our economy. We all know about the problem with our energy costs. There could be a 5% cut immediately from the removal of 5% VAT from energy costs, but, in Northern Ireland, it would not be allowed to apply because we are subject to a VAT regime that insists on 5% minimum VAT across its areas of control. The protocol is hitting ordinary consumers and ordinary people across the board because of its severe impact on such things. Therefore, the sooner we escape and the EU gives up its sovereignty over Northern Ireland on that issue and others, the better.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

This is not the happiest of topics to discuss of a late January afternoon, but there is a suicide epidemic in our society, and it really worries me. The number of young people whom it is affecting only adds to my concerns. Figures in a 2020 report by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health show that the rate of suicides in 15- to 24-year-olds has risen in recent years, and that was before the stress and strains of the pandemic had kicked in. My party colleague Órlaithí Flynn has done outstanding work on getting suicide prevention and resilience built into the curriculum. I feel really sorry for our teachers because, across the Chamber, we are looking for all sorts to be added to the curriculum and taught in schools. However, by educating students about the best way to respond to and deal with their feelings and emotions, we can save lives.

Unfortunately, my constituency has not been immune. I have been working closely with one young woman in particular whose partner took his own life in July 2020. Louise Boyle reckons that her partner, Michael Doherty, showed no signs of depression or mental illness. In Louise's words, Michael was laid back and always smiling. Since Michael's tragic death, Louise has set up a charity called Michael's Hope Haven. The charity will be for those who are struggling or who have lost a loved one to suicide and may just need some respite. The aim is to raise enough money to buy a static caravan that would be solely for charity use. Louise shares our belief that, if resilience and suicide prevention were built into the curriculum, it would go some way to tackling the increasing tragedies. We as a party will continue to work on that. I ask other parties and the relevant Ministers to support us.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

That concludes Members' statements. Members should take their ease for a moment or two.

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

Ministerial Statement

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

I have received notice from the Minister of Finance that he wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members in the Chamber that, in the light of 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 who are present in the Chamber must also do that, but they may do so by rising in their place, as well as by notifying the Business Office or the Speaker's Table directly.

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

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Thank you for the opportunity to make a statement on the outcome of the Executive's 2021-22 January monitoring exercise. While I advised Members of it on Thursday by way of written statement, today's oral statement will allow them to engage more fully on these important issues. I am aware that Members received two versions of the written statement. One version contained a minimal change to one figure. I can confirm that the original version that Members received is the correct one.

As was set out in my written statement on 13 January, the Executive agreed to allocate £55 million to the Department for Communities for an energy payment support scheme and £3·8 million to the Department for Infrastructure for energy cost impacts on Roads' street lighting and on Northern Ireland Water (NIW). Given their urgency, those matters were progressed in advance of January monitoring. Members will also be aware that the Executive agreed the allocation of £40 million to the Department of Finance for the omicron hospitality payment.

I turn first to resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL). We concluded the October monitoring round with all available funding having been allocated. Since then, Treasury has advised of £163·8 million of Barnett consequentials arising from spending by the British Government on COVID and support for households over winter. That is an extremely large amount of money to receive so late in the year. Departments have also identified £140·5 million in reduced requirements. The Department for the Economy returned the highest amount, £50·3 million, followed by the Department of Education, which returned £41·1 million. That is also a significant level of funding to be made available late in the year. I have taken all that into account, together with adjustments to a number of additional central items, and it means that a total of £245·9 million of resource DEL was available to allocate. Against that amount, the resource DEL bids submitted by Departments amounted to £146·7 million. Full details of bids and allocations are set out in the tables that accompany the statement. I will, however, highlight a few specific areas.

The Infrastructure Minister is receiving £68·1 million. In addition to £19·8 million to help mitigate the impact of COVID on Translink, £24 million is being provided to subsidise bus routes. A figure of £15·5 million is being provided to help with energy cost increases for Northern Ireland Water and Roads. A further £4 million is being made available to support the bus and coach industry. There have been allocations of £2·7 million for penalty charge notice (PCN) debt write-off and £2 million for the Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA). The Department of Education has been given £43·3 million. Of that, £22·5 million is to deal with COVID pressures in schools, including support for PPE and staff substitute cover. I have previously stated my desire to prioritise helping children with special educational needs. I am pleased that £18·4 million has been allocated for that. The Department of Justice has been allocated £12·3 million, with £8·7 million going to the PSNI for a range of pressures and the remaining £3·5 million helping fund the provision of legal aid. In addition to the funding being provided for the energy payment support scheme, £18·2 million is allocated to the Department for Communities to support local councils. The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs has been allocated £4 million to compensate people those affected by the avian influenza outbreak. A further £31·9 million has been provided across Departments to cover pressures arising from accounting charges for depreciation or impairment of assets. Following those allocations, there remains £70·5 million of unallocated resource DEL.

I turn now to capital DEL,. Some £100·5 million was available for allocation as a result of £44·5 million of Barnett consequentials and £57 million of reduced requirements from Departments, along with some central adjustments.

The Department for the Economy returned £16·7 million, which was the single largest amount.

Departments submitted capital bids totalling £4·6 million, all of which have been met. That includes £3·7 million for the Department for Infrastructure for costs associated with the A6. There is also £500,000 for the Department of Education for the supply of digital devices under the 'A Fair Start' report. With all the capital bids having been met, £35·9 million capital DEL is still available for allocation.

Financial transactions capital (FTC) of £72·7 million was available for allocation. With no bids submitted by Departments, £71·1 million of that will be put towards repayment of future liabilities. This leaves £1·6 million available to carry over into next year.

As a result of those allocations, we end the January monitoring round with £70·5 million resource DEL, £35·9 million capital DEL and £1·6 million of financial transactions capital unallocated.

We are currently within our Budget exchange scheme limit of £105·6 million carry forward of resource DEL by £35·1 million, and we are level with the £1·6 million carry-forward limit for financial transactions capital. Carrying over money will allow us to meet more of the pressures facing us next year. However, it is important that we do not breach our limit and surrender money to Treasury. I have therefore asked ministerial colleagues to minimise year-end underspends to ensure that we remain under our carry-over limit. I will keep the position under close review.

As things stand, the amount of unallocated capital DEL already exceeds our carry-forward limit of £27·5 million. I am extremely disappointed that we received such significant levels of departmental reduced requirements at this late stage from Executive colleagues that, if notified earlier, could have been utilised in other areas. I have already written to Executive colleagues seeking further proposals to utilise the remaining resources in the remaining months of this financial year. I have also pressed the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to allow more Budget flexibility. It is hugely concerning that Treasury may not permit funding to be carried into next year, even if additional funding is confirmed at such a late stage that it prevents it being used most effectively.

I commend the January monitoring statement to the Assembly.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement and for meeting me and the Deputy Chairperson earlier today to discuss the key points of it. The Committee will greatly welcome the allocations of resource DEL to the hospitality sector for omicron, to householders to meet energy costs, to Education for special educational needs and to Infrastructure for what appears to be unavoidable spend around energy costs and bus services.

It is surprising, given the year that we have had, that the Executive have underspent in resource, FTC and even conventional capital. The Committee will want to think carefully about the FTC and reinvestment and reform initiative (RRI) payback measures that, as well as non-ring-fenced DEL, have been employed to meet ring-fenced pressures.

The Committee has repeatedly raised concern about the capital programme and the difficulty that Departments appear to have getting the money spent. That is the cause of much frustration, especially in the construction sector. I again ask the Minister, given the significant underspend in capital, whether there is a systemic problem across the Executive in respect of capital project management and delivery? If not, why is the capital so significantly underspent again?

The Fiscal Council report on the Budget indicates that the Executive have in excess of £150 million of omicron Barnett consequential funding in 2021-22. However, if they spend beyond their Barnett share, the Executive will have to repay the difference to Treasury. Minister, how much omicron money will the Executive have to pay back? Have you withheld funding from other Departments in January monitoring to cover that COVID payback pressure? Thank you, Minister.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Chair of the Committee for his remarks. Capital underspend is concerning because, particularly at this late stage of the year, it is more difficult to allocate capital and get it spent within the financial year than resource. I do not think that there is an endemic problem across the Executive, but Departments need to be aware earlier of what they may or may not spend.

The bids at October monitoring were twice what we had to allocate. Earlier surrenders could have been allocated then, and now we have much more than the bids that have come in. It is not a good way of doing business.

I constantly remind my Executive colleagues to make sure that they manage funding well and to give us an early alert if funding will not be required. While it is concerning, I am hopeful that there will be further bids for that capital, because, as I said, we have already exceeded the carry-over amount. We will continue to press Treasury for more flexibility in that regard.

In relation to payback of the COVID Barnett consequentials that we received, we have had conversations with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and I am confident that we will not have to pay back any of that money. That is the clear sense that we have got from Treasury, and I expect that to be confirmed in the near future.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a ráitis ar maidin inniu. I thank the Minister for the statement today.

The education of children with special educational needs has been particularly affected by the pandemic, so I am delighted that the Finance Minister has prioritised special educational needs by providing an additional £18·4 million. Will the Minister outline briefly how that will be used to support our children with special educational needs? Will he continue to prioritise special educational needs in future monitoring rounds?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his question. Yes, over the past two years, we have tried to find ways to support special educational needs. The case for it is strong at any time, but the experience of the pandemic and the interruptions to school will have had a particularly profound effect on children with special educational needs, so I was happy that we were able to find that funding. The Education Minister had been flagging it up for some time that she wanted further support for it, so I was pleased that we were able to provide it. She will be able to give detail on how and where that will be spent. I will continue, as long as I have an opportunity to do this job, to try to provide as much support for special educational needs as I can.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Some £55 million has been allocated for the energy payment support scheme. Has the Minister for Communities put in a bid to support working families who also are suffering a great deal of hardship, considering the price of fuel, oil and gas etc? Subsequent to that, how are your conversations going with the Treasury regarding the VAT reduction in energy bills?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Having spoken to the Minister for Communities, I know that she is exercised about the people who need support. We all recognise that there is a cost of living crisis. The scheme will help a significant number of families, but there are others who will continue to struggle, and the Minister is seeking ways in which the scheme that we have put in place can be expanded to allow other deserving people to be included. Obviously, it will be for the Department for Communities to do that, but I am more than willing to assist and recommend further allocations, if that can be done, in the time ahead, because there is a recognition that energy prices continue to rise and that puts a huge stress on families.

In relation to the issues that we have raised with Treasury. I have written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I raised it with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in our meeting, as did the Ministers from Scotland and Wales. We expect announcements around the cost of living in the spring statement, which will be at the latter end of March. I hope that they move to address some of those issues.

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

Three months ago, Minister, at October monitoring, you told me that it was simple maths why £50 million was not allocated to offset the universal credit cut. Speaking of simple maths, now, in the final monitoring round before the end of this mandate, there is £100 million out of £250 million that is either reduced requirements or unallocated. That is as our public services struggle to deal with the end of the pandemic and families struggle to deal with the cost of living crisis. That is £100 million that could be handed back. If that is not an indictment of your stint as Finance Minister, what is it?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

If the £100 million came from the Department of Finance, it would be, but of course it comes from a range of Departments, including that of your colleague, surrendering money. It is late in the financial year for such a significant surrender, and I anticipate that there will be further surrendering of money between now and the end of the financial year. I have asked all Executive colleagues to give us the earliest possible warning in relation to that. We can carry over more than £100 million resource and, I think, £27·5 million capital. It would be beneficial if we could carry over that amount, but we do not want to be in a position where other funding is surrendered back to Treasury. There will be a need for further allocations between now and the end of the financial year. I have asked Departments to bid for that.

While I have responsibility for making propositions around the allocations and trying to manage the money, I do not manage the money internally in each of the Departments. That is where the surrenders have come back from. The issue that the Member raises is best raised with the Ministers who have made such significant and late returns.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

At the outset, I declare that my stepfather is a quality manager for the A6 project. Will the Minister agree that there is a systemic problem in being able to spend capital funding? We got only one bid from the Department for Infrastructure for capital funding, yet so many projects — bus, rail, active travel, road maintenance — are crying out for funding. Will the Minister provide an update on where we are in getting an independent infrastructure commission to address that problem? It looks likely that we will hand money back to Treasury, and, frankly, that is criminal.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

It is not my intention to hand any money back to Treasury. That is why I have asked for additional bids. There is one thing about capital spend being planned in normal circumstances, and, in this case, where capital has not been spent at the end of the year, generally speaking, it is returned. That is a normal cycle in our public finances. In my time as Minister in the Department for Regional Development, as it was then, Roads Service stepped forward and used up a lot of unspent resource and capital at the latter end of the financial year. It is a cycle that has happened.

We are above our capital limits, so we need to see further bids coming in. I have asked Executive colleagues to see where they can spend that between now and the end of the financial year.

The discussions on the infrastructure commission are ongoing with the First Minister and deputy First Minister and the Minister for Infrastructure.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

First, I thank the Minister for his ongoing commitment to local services and the support provided to our councils. In the time ahead, will his Department continue to engage with the Department for Communities, our councils and the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) to ensure that councils enjoy increased financial stability?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We recognise that the experience of the pandemic has been a challenge for local government as well as central government here. Local government provides vital services that continue to need to be supported. Over the course of the pandemic, we have been able to make substantial allocations to local government, and I am glad that the Department for Communities has come in for more support, which, I am sure, will be welcomed across our 11 councils.

I regularly meet councils on the local government partnership panel, which a number of Ministers sit on. We hear first-hand from council representatives, and I meet individual councils as often as I can. I am very aware of the pressures that they face, and I am sure that they welcome the allocations that have been made as part of the monitoring round.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Although the bids for the PSNI have been fully met in the in-year pressures for the PSNI, obviously they have arisen as a result of the associated costs in regard to the protocol and EU exit. The Committee has been advised that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury wants to make a decision on all NI protocol costs together. Given how many times the Finance Minister's statements are replete with phrases such as, "I continue to press" and "I have engaged", will the Minister provide an update on the written correspondence and discussions with the Treasury on its considerations of those costs and when a decision can be expected to inform future planning?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I write to Treasury and engage with it individually and with other Finance Ministers. The protocol costs are unique to us here, so we continue to engage. Officials are in very regular contact to make sure that we get a clear understanding of the costs that have been incurred and the agreement that Treasury has to meet those costs to make sure that they do not land on our Budget. We will continue to do that. We then have to gather in from each of the Departments that have a responsibility the actual costs that they are making and to make sure that those are itemised, verified and represented to Treasury in order to get the return from it. That is an ongoing exercise. I hope that, for managing our own budgets, we will know sooner rather than later, and we will continue to engage with them to make sure that that is the case.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I welcome the Minister's statement. I also welcome the additional funding for NIW, Translink and the much-needed funding for the bus and coach industry. No bid was made for additional roadworks, given the poor state of our roads. Is the Minister in a position to support a bid for additional roadworks, if that were forthcoming?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Making such a bid is a matter for the Department for Infrastructure. I have encouraged the Infrastructure Minister and all other Ministers to look again at what capital bids may be made between now and the end of the financial year. I hope to hear from them soon. If a bid is made to the Department, I am happy to recommend that to the Executive for support.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I welcome the additional allocations to the Department for Infrastructure. Again, I echo the calls saying that it is scandalous that we see no additional resource for road repairs, given the state of some of our roads.

Can the Minister tell us about NI Water funding? Obviously, the funding released by the January monitoring round is welcome, but, given the huge energy costs associated with NI Water and the current fluctuations in energy prices, is there a means for the Minister to revisit that if Northern Ireland Water finds itself in a distressing scene in the months ahead?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The additional support for NI Water's energy costs was part of an earlier allocation because we recognised that there was a particular pressure there. The support is included in the monitoring round, but we brought that to the Executive's attention a number of weeks ago alongside the home heating scheme that the Minister for Communities was trying to develop. The bid was made, and that is the amount of support that NI Water identified it needed to assist with energy costs; we met that bid. If there is a particular problem in the time ahead, I am sure that we will hear from the Department for Infrastructure. We rely on organisations to identify what they need between now and the end of the financial year and to bid accordingly. As the Member said, the bid was met in full.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Given the amount of money that now appears to be sloshing around, how does he view the bid in the last monitoring round for £55 million to reinstate the universal credit uplift? How seriously did Departments look for money when the Minister made that request?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

It is disappointing that, just a number of months after we asked people for returns in October, we had significant returns from across a range of Departments. The tables show the exact amounts that were returned. As the Member is aware, there was real pressure around universal credit, and we can manage and meet pressures if the resources are returned early.

When the Department for Communities wanted to bring forward a scheme to help people with heating bills, we asked Departments to indicate in advance of the monitoring round to let us know what was available. We put together a bid and a package for that with the Department for Communities. It is disappointing when people do not alert us early enough, because there are worthy schemes. If the returns had been delivered in October, we would have had more time to manage that expenditure between then and the end of the financial year. However, that is a question for MLAs to raise in the Committees to find out why Departments did not surrender in October and came with such significant late returns. Through the Committees, MLAs will want to ask the Departments about that.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Minister will be aware that the Department for the Economy gets two mentions in the statement. The first is for handing back more resource DEL than any other Department, and the second is for handing back more capital DEL than any other Department. Given that travel agents, the night-time economy and hospitality — to name but three sectors — are on their knees, what is happening?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I am afraid that I cannot answer for individual Departments; I can only give the figures that come back. I can assure the Member that I kept telling Ministers that COVID money is available. We had a significant injection of COVID funding late in the year. If Ministers have policy responsibility for sectors that need assistance, they need to bring forward a case to me so that I can make a recommendation to the Executive.

I am still content to do that if people bring those cases forward. We have been and are running the hospitality scheme, which my Department stepped up to deliver once again. Other sectors out there are struggling, however, and we have all heard from them. Their struggles are not necessarily a consequence of the restrictions. Given, however, the omicron variant of the virus out there, society tended to stay in and not go out as much, which meant a bad Christmas for hospitality and the sectors that support it.

We have heard from people who need support. The Ministers with policy responsibility need to bring forward propositions. I would be happy to support those.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, I share the concern about the significant reduced capital requirements across Departments. I am disappointed that DAERA has declared £10·1 million.

There are potential opportunities to support rural communities through, for example, boosts to rural development programmes, particularly in the context of lost EU funding because of Brexit, farm business improvement schemes and Project Stratum, to name but a few. Would the Minister support such initiatives if the AERA Minister were to bring them to him?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Project Stratum is the responsibility of the Department for the Economy. Certainly, however, as a rural dweller and someone who represents a largely rural constituency, I am acutely aware of many of the issues that the Member has raised and the need for support in rural communities. Broadband and connectivity are particular difficulties in rural areas, and I assure the Member that they are even more acute for those who live in border areas. I would be happy to support such propositions. Again, however, it will be for the Departments concerned to bring those forward.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Minister, as described today, there is lots of money floating around. The Department of Justice may have fared well with its propositions, but how does that fit with last week's statement from the Chief Constable that the PSNI will suspend recruitment? What considerations did your Department and, indeed, the DOJ give to financing the PSNI appropriately so that it can continue recruitment and fulfil the requirement in 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA) for additional officers?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

How the Department of Justice spends its budget and the prioritisation of that budget are matters for the Justice Minister. I have heard various statements about the level of support. There is ring-fenced money for policing that was not included in some of the recent commentary, and including that would paint a slightly different picture.

In one of the last Budgets set by the Executive in 2015-16, the Department of Justice received an allocation that was 4% lower than its baseline, and the overall departmental spend was 0·6% lower than its baseline. If the draft Budget that is out for consultation is agreed, it will certainly have a better outcome than that over the next three years. We have to decide whether we prioritise Health and support that prioritisation through allocations to enable the Department of Health to conduct the transformation that is required.

There are challenges across all Departments. There will, however, be an increase in spend year-on-year, and it will be up to whichever Minister happens to be in the Department of Justice in the new mandate to prioritise according to the budget that he or she has.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his statement. My question follows on from the previous one. Given that the Minister set up the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council, will he outline his response to that council's independent and expert view that the Department of Justice continues to be the major loser when it comes to allocations from monitoring rounds?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I do not think that the council said that it was a loser when it comes to allocations from monitoring rounds. The council was referring to the three-year draft Budget that is out for consultation. As I said, there are ring-fenced resources for the Department of Justice in that that were not identified, which skewed the figures somewhat. When those figures are put in, you get a much clearer picture.

All Departments are being challenged. If, as has been stated many times, the Executive and the Assembly's priority is health and if we want to engage in its transformation, other Departments will be challenged more. The Department of Justice is no worse or better off than any other Department.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Ar dtús, gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. At the outset, I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, the £40 million that has been allocated to those who have been affected by the omicron variant is to be greatly welcomed by all, and those living in border areas in towns like Strabane, Castlederg, Newtownstewart will especially appreciate that support. Is it likely that businesses that are newly established or those that have previously not made an application for support will also be able to access that funding?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Yes, the businesses that have been identified are being contacted directly by Land and Property Services (LPS), but for those that have been established since the previous payments, there is an application process through which they can make themselves known to the Department and make an application. I am sure that that will include people who have not previously had localised restrictions support (LRS) but think that they qualify for that allocation. As well as the Department directly contacting businesses that have previously been supported, there is an application process for those who have come on board since that last payment.

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

I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon. He will recall my proposal at the Infrastructure Committee about pressing for vital funding for NI Water and our public transport. I welcome the fact that he has listened and has now provided those much-needed funds. Will he give a guarantee that he will meet the bids for those critical services in the multi-year Budget?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The consultation on the multi-year Budget is out, and people can respond to it and make their case. One thing that should liberate all of us is that it is for an incoming Executive. None of us know whether we will be here in May, whether the same people will manage the same Departments or which political party will have responsibility for particular Departments. We can approach the consultation by taking the departmental interest out of it. That is why the central question in the consultation is this: are we going to prioritise Health, as we have said repeatedly, and will we provide the funding to prioritise it and begin that transformation? If that is the case, that presents a challenge for all other Departments. The Executive and Assembly will have to take that decision in the time ahead, and it will dictate what the Budget will be in future years.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the £4 million for avian flu compensation. It is certainly a lifeline for the farmers who have been affected. In the Minister's view, does the Budget adequately meet the needs and targets set out in the Executive's Climate Change (No. 2) Bill, particularly the challenges for Northern Ireland citizens and for agriculture and agri-food businesses?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We are straying from the January monitoring round to the next three years' Budget, but, whatever the outcome of the climate change Bills that are proceeding through the Assembly, it will be a matter for the Department to prioritise according to the budget that it gets. The next Agriculture Minister will have the authority in his budget to prioritise according to the needs that he establishes for the Department.

Peter Weir (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Will he expand on the part of his statement where he indicated that he is in discussions with Treasury to seek greater end-year flexibility, particularly in light of the problems that have been raised about the restrictions on capital? Are any of the approaches that are being made being coordinated with other devolved institutions?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Yes, they are. The last meeting was held the week before last, perhaps. It was a quadrilateral engagement with the Scottish and Welsh and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. We have consistently raised that issue across each of the devolved areas because there are often late allocations from Treasury and it is a challenge to spend them. While many deserving schemes will welcome some support, even if it is late, trying to spend at the end of the year in a rush is not the best way to manage money. The Member will know that from his experience in the Executive. Yes, we consistently raise the issue. It is a small amount: we can carry over only £27·5 million of capital and about £105 million of resource. We continue to press for that. Treasury has never given any indication that it is willing to move that, but we will continue to press for it.

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

Minister, many small businesses are suffering the consequences of omicron, even if they were not subject to restrictions. I think of travel agents, many suppliers to the hospitality trade and others involved in the night-time economy. Given that £100 million is still unallocated, surely you and the Economy Minister should get together and find ways to support the businesses that are on their knees.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I am happy to get together with any Minister who wants to bring forward a proposition. I have said to them time and time again and continue to say to them that, if they have a proposition for a sector that is struggling — I have heard, as he has heard, from many sectors that continue to struggle — I am happy to make a recommendation to the Executive on that basis. They have to bring it forward to me; I cannot reach into a Department and do that.

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

The Economy Minister.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I am happy to work with all Ministers, including the Economy Minister, to do so.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Finance Minister for his statement. The Health Committee recently heard that the Department of Health has had to examine additional ways of outsourcing fertility treatment to independent providers. Meanwhile, the delivery of the IVF NDNA commitment seemingly lies dormant. Has the Minister had any discussions with the Health Minister about bids for the funding needed to deliver that time-sensitive NDNA commitment?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The short answer is no. I have not heard from the Health Minister about that. I do not, as a matter of course, go to Departments and suggest issues that they should fund. What I do say to them is that, if they have something that requires funding in-year, particularly now when we have resources available, I would be happy to hear from them. I would be happy to hear from the Health Minister or, indeed, any Minister, if there is a particular issue that they want funding for in the next number of months.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Minister, thank you for your statement. The height of criticism in the Chamber today has been about the £50 million-odd returned by the Department for the Economy. Minister, what responsibility do you bear for that as the Minister of Finance with overall responsibility to ensure that our moneys are spent effectively and efficiently? I share the concerns of others about that money being returned by Economy when businesses, particularly small businesses, have been crying out for support and resource.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Each Department has a responsibility for its own budget and a significant degree of autonomy. As part of the Good Friday Agreement and the infrastructure of this institution, Ministers are given a significant degree of autonomy within their own Departments. I am not making any proposal to change that.

What I want, as the Finance Minister, is to get early indications from Departments if they are not going to spend out their allocations. It is much better if we have an early sense of that, so that we can put together other schemes or make sure that the spending is done in a way that is effective and can reach areas where it is badly needed, including some of the areas that the Member mentioned. When Departments surrender late in the year, the difficulty for me is in finding a way to manage that. Essentially, I have responsibility for managing what comes back. However, I cannot dictate to Departments how they spend money or whether they return it early; all I can do is exhort them to do so. I will certainly put my mind to it, and I hope to get cooperation from across Departments to ensure that we spend what we need to spend, do not return any money unnecessarily and carry over the maximum amount that we can so that we can assist next year's budgets.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

The Minister's decision to distribute money to the Department for Communities for an increment to social welfare payments in March is welcome. If he has a resource surplus, as it were, a quick way to get rid of that would be to add a further enhancement to those March payments, which could be paid in this financial year.

Secondly, the Bryson charitable money has been a lottery. I think that every MLA has had a lot of complaints from people about the system, about not being able to access the portal and about arbitrary decisions being made. Surely he could take the money that has been allocated to Bryson and add it to the increment to the £200 grant in March.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I will try to explain some of the schemes, but it is not my area. My understanding is that the Bryson House scheme was for people who were in immediate danger of having their services cut off because of their inability to pay. It was a limited scheme. When it came out in advance of the £55 million scheme, a lot of people tried to access support from it but were more suited to the much larger scheme. It is my understanding that that put severe pressure on the system in trying to respond to people, and I hope that it is now clearer that the larger scheme will provide support by reaching a significant number of people.

The Department for Communities is looking at other issues, and, if resource is available towards the end of the financial year, it may be able to step in and see whether it can make good use of that money in other areas. I am happy to work with the Communities Minister in the time ahead to make sure that we do not end up with unnecessary returns to Treasury at the end of the financial year.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

There was £246 million of resource funding available to spend, and, despite all the needs that, as MLAs, we meet daily in our constituencies, all that the Northern Ireland Departments could come up with were plans to spend £146 million, leaving £100 million unspent. Does that not speak to severe financial mismanagement across the Executive? Given that there is also £200 million of further Barnett consequentials, are we not now in the territory where the Minister's constant refrain of "Tory austerity" is wearing very thin?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Tory austerity is a fact, and it has impacted on our public services and continues to do so. The reason that we are having such a debate about the next three-year Budget is that, in order to prioritise the Department of Health, we have to squeeze other Departments, and we have to do that because the outcome of the spending review was not what we wanted.

Of course it is disappointing when Departments surrender money later in the year than they perhaps should have done, but we had £100 million for COVID and the outbreak of the omicron variant, and that money came very late in the year, as the Member will understand. With some of that money, we had no certainty around whether we could spend it, and we got that certainty only very close to the January monitoring round. There were extraneous factors, as well as late returns from Departments, but, as I have said repeatedly here, if Ministers identify a need to support people or businesses in other policy areas for which they have responsibility, I very much welcome bids for additional funding and am happy to recommend those bids to the Executive.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Minister, the cost of living is through the roof. Officially, inflation is at 5%, but the cost of living far exceeds that. There has been a 29% increase in the price of bread. The price of apples is up by 51%, while the price of pasta is up by 141%. Families and individuals struggle to get by as it is. Given that there is nothing in the January monitoring round to alleviate that hit for people and given that he still stands over what are effectively below-inflation pay cuts for workers, what work is the Minister and his Department doing to provide some financial protection for people in these very difficult times?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The Member obviously missed the £55 million scheme to assist people with heating bills. There is money in this to assist people in the time ahead. We will have discussions with trade unions and others about pay awards into the future and will try, within the constraints of the budgetary outcome, to see whether we can give the maximum pay awards possible. As I said earlier in the year, we have made the Executive a living wage employer to assist people who are struggling. The Department for Communities in particular and others across the Executive, including mine, have taken measures to support ordinary working families who continue to struggle, and I know that the Communities Minister would like to expand the scheme to assist people with their heating bills over the winter, if that is possible in the time ahead. I am happy to support her if she does that.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Minister has spoken of the importance of indicating early that money cannot be spent and returning it to the centre so that it can be reallocated, yet, in this monitoring round, over £400 million has been returned. Equally, the significant difficulties facing Northern Ireland Water have been well known for some time. In order for it to get to this monitoring round, the Minister had to give Northern Ireland Water an advance, and it and the Department had to forgo other expenditure. Why was such essential expenditure, which was known about, not funded earlier? Also, what discussions has he had with the Minister for the Economy about bringing forward something to help travel agencies and hotels, which were not included in earlier schemes?

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

A bid was made in the October monitoring round to assist Northern Ireland Water with its energy costs. That was partially met because, in that monitoring round, we had twice as many bids as we had money available to allocate. We tried to juggle that to give people a certain amount to keep them going until January, with the intention of revisiting it. Of course, as the Member knows, energy costs, which are outside the control of the Assembly, continue to rise, and that created a pressure before January monitoring. That is why, as well as bidding for £55 million for the home heating support scheme, we included the money that was required by Northern Ireland Water for the increase in its energy costs. Of course, the bids for it have now been met in full.

As for the other schemes, it is the responsibility of whichever Minister has policy responsibility for those matters to bring forward a case, be it for travel agents, who have been supported in the past — I am happy to look at a case for them now and into the future — or, indeed, hotels. I only received, over the weekend, material on support for hotels. I intend to bring a paper to the Executive this Thursday to try to include hotels in the hospitality scheme that the Department of Finance has put together. We do not have the information. The Department of Finance has the addresses of all those business premises, but it does not have the information on what support they need. It is up to the Department that has policy responsibility for that to bring forward a case. I now have the one for hotels. I am happy to try to include them in the hospitality scheme that we have rolled out. That will be a decision for the Executive on Thursday. If there are other sectors, whether the supply chain sector, travel agents or others, who have sought support in recent times, it is up to the Department that has responsibility for them to make the case for that. If that is done, I am happy to recommend to the Executive that support be provided.

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

That concludes questions on the statement.

Executive Committee Business

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

I call the Minister of Finance, Mr Conor Murphy, to move the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr C Murphy (The Minister of Finance).]

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

No amendments have been tabled to the Bill. I propose therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to group the two clauses of the Bill for the Question on stand part, followed by the Question to agree the long title.

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Long title agreed to.

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

That concludes the Consideration Stage of the Non-domestic Rates Valuations (Coronavirus) Bill. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

I ask Members to take their ease for a moment or two before we move to the next item.

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

Just by way of information, the Minister for Infrastructure will join us by StarLeaf. She is trying to get on to StarLeaf, but there seem to be some technical difficulties. We will iron those out and then move to the item of business.

Members, I think that we have overcome the technical difficulties. Glaoim ar an Aire an rún a mholadh. I call the Minister for Infrastructure to move the motion.

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

I beg to move

That the draft Grants to Water and Sewerage Undertakers Order (Northern Ireland) 2022 be approved.

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

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

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

The order that I am bringing forward today extends the power for my Department to pay a grant to Northern Ireland Water in lieu of domestic water charges. Members will be aware that it is the Executive's policy and, indeed, that of previous Executives that domestic consumers should not pay a separate charge for water and sewerage services. Such services are instead funded through a subsidy paid by my Department to the water and sewerage undertaker, which is Northern Ireland Water.

The subsidy is paid to Northern Ireland Water under article 213 of the Water and Sewerage Services (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, as amended by the Water and Sewerage Services Act (Northern Ireland) 2016, which has an end date of 31 March 2022. On 7 October 2021, the Executive agreed to the continuation of the policy of not implementing water charging for domestic use. To give effect to the Executive's decision to continue to bear the cost of water charges on behalf of domestic customers for the next five years, a new statutory rule is required.

I am therefore bringing forward the draft Grants to Water and Sewerage Undertakers Order (Northern Ireland) 2022, which proposes to extend the period during which a subsidy may be paid to Northern Ireland Water to 31 March 2027. The order is subject to the draft affirmative resolution procedure — the purpose of the debate today. The five-year extension to 31 March 2027 gives the next Executive time to consider how the future of our water and sewerage services should be funded.

Northern Ireland Water is regulated by the Utility Regulator and operates according to its licence. The regulator sets prices through its price control processes, which ensure that Northern Ireland Water has the funding to maintain high-quality drinking water supplies and to deliver environmental and customer services at the lowest reasonable overall cost.

The Utility Regulator has determined that Northern Ireland Water will require investment of about £2 billion in water and waste water services over the six-year price control (PC) period from 2021 to 2027. Sustained and secure levels of investment by the Executive over multiple price control periods will be required.

This financial year is the first in many years in which Northern Ireland Water has been fully funded in line with the price control. I stress the importance of the need for Northern Ireland Water to continue to be fully funded in future years in order to improve the water and waste water infrastructure here. Clearly, a lack of funding would see those critical services become suboptimal, risking public health, curtailing economic growth and putting our environment at risk of pollution

I commend the motion to the Assembly and ask that it approve the order.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

On behalf of the Committee, I wish the Minister a speedy recovery.

As Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure, I wish to take the opportunity to speak on the draft Grants to Water and Sewerage Undertakers Order (Northern Ireland) 2022. The purpose of the rule is to extend the period during which the Department will pay a subsidy to NI Water in lieu of domestic water charging. The Minister has adequately provided a detailed explanation of the content of the statutory rule, and I do not propose to repeat that.

The Department made the Committee aware of the proposal for the statutory rule on 18 October 2021, and it was considered by the Committee at its meeting on 24 November 2021, with a briefing from departmental officials. As Members are aware, the subsidy in lieu of water charges is an Executive policy, and the Committee supports the statutory rule. In line with their scrutiny role, however, and with due diligence, Committee members were rigorous in their engagement with officials on the detail of the rule.

I will now briefly outline the Committee's considerations. The Committee sought assurances from departmental officials about the rationale for the five-year subsidy period. The officials explained, to the satisfaction of the Committee, that the five-year time period is so that it ties in with the Assembly's election cycle and gives the Department and, ultimately, the Executive time in the next mandate to instigate the necessary work to consider alternatives to the subsidy and to bring forward legislation, should that be considered appropriate.

The Committee sought clarification regarding how the amount of the subsidy is calculated. The officials advised the Committee that the subsidy is calculated in agreement with Northern Ireland Water and the Utility Regulator through the price control process. The Committee was content that the subsidy, which was drafted between the Department and Northern Ireland Water with the agreement of the Utility Regulator, is based on a clear methodology and in regulation. Furthermore, the Committee was satisfied to hear that the subsidy methodology is based on what is affordable for customers and what is necessary in order to deliver water and sewerage services in an efficient way. The officials advised the Committee that no consultation had been carried out on the legislation as there is no change to policy.

One of the Committee's major concerns was the impact of current increases in energy prices. Members may be aware that Northern Ireland Water is Northern Ireland's largest consumer of electricity. The Committee asked the officials about the impact of recent energy price increases and were advised that the subsidy was calculated before prices started to spike. The Committee explored with the officials and in writing what actions Northern Ireland Water can undertake to reduce its energy consumption.

The Committee has been advised that NI Water has delivered a number of energy-efficient and cost-reduction projects over the PC15 period and continues to develop and implement opportunities for improvement within the current regulatory time period and price period. Those projects include measures such as time-of-day optimisation in order to avail itself of electricity at off-peak times in order to support the reduction or curtailment of wind energy and to avail itself of cheaper electricity prices. We were advised that NI Water has invested in renewable generation capacity, with 57 solar sites now installed across Northern Ireland, alongside existing hydro capacity and generation of electricity from sludge.

The Committee was pleased to hear that NI Water generates approximately 13 GW of electricity per annum from outside sources and that its energy-related projects have delivered an additional £4·5 million to £5 million of annual recurring benefit from the PC15 period for the business. Northern Ireland Water has advised that energy is identified as a key business improvement focus area, with a range of efficiency measures and revenue-generating opportunities delivered and explored.

The Committee will continue to explore this issue in some detail, given the huge costs involved in the production of clean water. The Committee also sought assurances that greater efforts will be put into raising public awareness of the need to save water, not just during periods of water shortage but all year round.

The funding of NI Water is a live issue. It is one that my Committee is very cognisant of and continues to explore at every opportunity. Next week, the Committee will hear from Northern Ireland Water on its financial situation and will continue to drill down into that budget.

The Committee for Infrastructure supports the statutory rule.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Ba mhaith liom labhairt ar son an rúin. I speak in favour of the motion on the order.

The purpose of the order is to extend to March 2027 the period during which the Department for Infrastructure may pay a subsidy in place of charges for domestic water and sewerage services.

I reaffirm Sinn Féin's commitment to oppose the imposing of water charges so that homeowners in the North will not be charged for water. This order will ensure the continuation of the policy against water charges. Access to water is a basic right, and we will ensure that water charges continue to be blocked. Sinn Féin will continue to stand up for families and homeowners on this issue, particularly now, when energy costs are rising and many people continue to feel the impact of COVID.

I support the motion and the order.

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

I thank the Minister for introducing the motion, and I, too, wish her well with her recovery over the coming days.

I agree with the Minister that water charges must never be allowed here. People already face a number of increased costs, and the Minister shares with me our party position of strong opposition to charging for water. I welcome the fact that the motion puts in place a subsidy to allow a water service to be provided to all our citizens for years to come.

Whilst this is a technical motion, it points to the type of society that we want to be: one that cares for and protects its communities. We recognise the value of and the right to clean, free water for families across the North.

Rightly and responsibly, the Minister has pointed to the need for NI Water to have the correct funding. We know that she has made a case on the basis of the pressures that NI Water has suffered. At the Committee, members from across the political spectrum shared her concerns and supported her efforts to access that vital funding.

As we look forward to the multi-year Budget, we must keep in mind the need to ensure that basic services, including water, that underpin everyday services, such as hospitals and schools, get the correct investment.

I support the motion.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

At the outset, I wish the Infrastructure Minister a speedy recovery from COVID-19. I also want to put on record my absolute abhorrence at the abuse that I saw yesterday on social media towards Nichola following her diagnosis. Words cannot describe my view on some of the abuse that was directed at her. It is just not acceptable — it really is not.

At present, our water and sewerage system in Northern Ireland is in an incredibly worrying state. Although the current subsidy paid to Northern Ireland Water is over £300 million every year, our waste water infrastructure is outdated and at maximum capacity in many areas. Half a billion pounds is needed to address strategic drainage problems in Belfast alone. There are currently more than 100 areas across Northern Ireland, including 25 cities and main towns, where sewerage and waste water infrastructure has little or no capacity left. It is expected that another 30 towns will reach capacity by 2027.

Towards the end of last year, we were given a clear image of how volatile our water and sewerage systems are. The Minister for Infrastructure warned that the provision of clean drinking water and the processing of waste water could, due to financial uncertainty, be compromised. The allocations in the January monitoring round are welcome, but the concerns remain.

Whilst the Alliance Party is firmly opposed to the privatisation of Northern Ireland Water, the company's funding model is, in our view, unsustainable and needs to change. We need a waste water public service that is fit for purpose and that can borrow to invest in the future. We believe in a shift in resource that is raised through the regional rate on an entirely revenue-neutral basis and coupled with a change in the governance model for Northern Ireland Water, which would provide a stronger footing on which to borrow commercially and, in turn, provide Northern Ireland Water with the vital funds that it so desperately needs.

Northern Ireland is the only UK region where the water utility is not funded to the levels that are required by its independent regulator. By continuing to throttle funding to Northern Ireland Water through its current financial operating model, we are continuing only to drag out an issue that is increasingly becoming a risk to our everyday lives and is inhibiting economic growth. Allowing Northern Ireland Water to borrow by establishing it as a mutual company, as has successfully been done in Wales, would mean that we could transform the state of our water and sewerage systems, bringing them up to date and making them adequate to deliver the resource that we require. What we propose can be done without having to incur any additional net revenue from households. It can be done by shifting the money that we raise through the regional rate. In essence, we will get more for our money if we explore alternative and creative solutions.

Without the willingness to pursue that option, we are presented with the draft Grants to Water and Sewerage Undertakers Order. Failure to approve it will bring serious and severe consequences. We support it, but, again, we call for consideration to be given to the options that I have outlined. We cannot forever kick the can down the road. At some time, we will be forced to face up to mutualisation, hopefully within the lifetime of the order, which will enable us to plan for a more sustainable future.

I note that the last time that the order was passed was in January 2017, days away from when the Assembly collapsed and we were left with no devolved government for three years. It is my strong hope that that does not occur once again. Before and after the election, the people of Northern Ireland deserve to have a government delivering for everyone, not the politics of crisis, stand-off and stalemate.

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

Before I call the next Member to speak, I thank Mr Muir for drawing to our attention the anonymous trolling of the Minister. I was not aware of it yesterday. Mrs Dodds has come through something similar. All of us join in outright condemnation of those despicable anonymous trolls, who people are subject to, irrespective of their party, as are members of the media or other public figures. It is awful and despicable behaviour by cowardly people who keep themselves anonymous and troll people, coming off with some of the most awful comments. Our solidarity is with you, Nichola, as a friend, and I know that we have expressed that to you too, Diane.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I join in wishing the Minister a full and speedy recovery and in the condemnation of the trolling. Some of the trolls really are more suited to the sewers that Northern Ireland Water has responsibility for. They are beyond description.

The measure today is another stopgap. It just keeps Northern Ireland Water somewhat in limbo through a lack of strategy. When you go to the 25-year strategic plan for Northern Ireland Water, which is supposed to take us up to 2046, you see that it states, amongst other things:

"Our status as both a Government Owned Company and a Non-Departmental Public Body is recognised as less than ideal for a provider of infrastructure investment. We require a sustainable funding model to support delivery of our strategy. There is a growing risk that the levels of service to our customers in Northern Ireland will fall behind the water companies in the rest of the UK, against which we are benchmarked by the Utility Regulator. The current Executive policy is that the funding arrangements will remain in place until 2022."

The date that was given when the strategy was written was 2022. Now, however, the current Executive policy seems to be that it will remain in place until 2027.

This is not just a theoretical problem about what sort of Northern Ireland Water we should have; it is a problem with real, lasting and damaging practical consequences. As I have raised previously with the Minister, there is a series of villages in my constituency of North Antrim where capacity has been reached and where, as a consequence, no new building has been possible for years. In previous replies, the Minister has indicated that the earliest that it might be possible to do something about that for the villages of Armoy, Dervock, Mosside and Stranocum, as well as, I might add, a good part of Ballycastle, is post 2027. That is just not acceptable. It is a consequence of the funding inadequacies and arrangements that affect Northern Ireland Water.

It manifests itself in other day-to-day issues. Last Tuesday and Friday, raw sewage was flowing across the green area behind Maine Park in Galgorm. It is appalling that things are in that state. I say to the House, therefore, that simply replicating this limbo-land for Northern Ireland Water is not forward-looking and is not sufficient to take us to the realistic funding position that we need to get to in order to deal with our substandard infrastructure. In Northern Ireland, there are 100 villages and towns that experience difficulties with waste water capacity. That is an astounding indictment.

Yes, there is no doubt that this statutory instrument will have to be approved as yet another stopgap. Will we, however, simply be back here in five years — if we are here — with another proposition of this nature?

The Minister may be able to cast some light on this point, which is more satiric than anything else. When I looked up www.legislation.gov.uk to look at the 2017 order, I read these words:

"This is a draft item of legislation and has not yet been made as a Northern Ireland Statutory Rule."

Can it be correct that, five years on, it has never been made, or has the very diligent website, www.legislation.gov.uk, got it wrong? Perhaps the Minister can tell us.

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

We are running close to the wire. The next Member to speak is Roy Beggs.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I, too, send my best wishes to the Minister. I hope that she has a speedy recovery.

On trolling, it is important that we, as an Assembly, condemn trolling, and, ultimately, take what action we can, and encourage action at a higher level if necessary, to unroot and stop that ongoing difficulty.

It is regrettable that we are coming near to the end of this Assembly term without having given any significant consideration to alternatives for Northern Ireland Water's funding. There are more efficient methods of funding. There are too many sewage treatment works. Investment is not occurring, and it is vital for our economy that it happens. It is vital that this draft order passes, otherwise we may face the difficulty of Northern Ireland Water not being able to operate. We have no choice, so I will support the draft order. As I said, it is regrettable that alternative arrangements were not considered by the Executive to ensure that better long-term funding arrangements were in place. I support the order but urge that long-term planning occur in future.

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

Question Time begins at 2.00 pm, so I suggest that the House take its ease until then. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the next Member called to speak will be Gerry Carroll.

The debate stood suspended.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — The Executive Office

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

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

1. Mr O'Toole asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether any proposals on the operation of the protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland have been raised via the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC), as per article 14(b) of the protocol. (AQO 2977/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

To date, no proposals on the implementation and application of the protocol have been raised to the Specialised Committee via the NSMC. The NSMC will, however, keep that matter under review and will consider utilising article 14(b) to refer proposals to the Specialised Committee, should it be appropriate to do so.

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

I thank the deputy First Minister for that answer. We have heard repeatedly from the First Minister and his party that people and his party, in particular, are not being listened to when it comes to the operation of the protocol, a protocol, I should say, that most people in this place support. Certainly, the majority of parties in the Assembly support it. Is it not ridiculous that, given that the text of the protocol provides for the North/South Ministerial Council to make representations on behalf of the Northern Ireland Executive, that has not happened yet? Why has it not happened?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

From a party political point of view, I concur with the Member's comments. It is ridiculous that a crucial component part of the apparatus of the Good Friday Agreement is not being operated; indeed, the courts have had their say on that matter with regard to the lack of attendance by DUP Ministers. It is not acceptable, and the courts have said that it is unlawful. Obviously, we urge that position to be reversed. When people talk about listening, it is important that they understand listening and that it is not just about hearing their own view but about hearing what is right for people here. When it comes to making the protocol work, the rest of us have turned our faces towards finding a remedy, making the protocol work and ensuring its smooth operation, whilst the DUP finds itself on the wrong side of that debate and of the best interests of the people who live here.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Can the joint First Minister confirm that any legal requirements of the protocol, including checks and associated infrastructure at local ports, are determined by Westminster and EU legislation and that any deviation from that would be a contravention of existing Executive policy and legal obligations?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for that question. As he knows, it was the Executive collectively who agreed that the Department of Agriculture was the designated competent authority to perform the checks and controls on the Executive's behalf. It is Executive policy that we are legally obliged to fulfil our responsibilities under law in areas of the withdrawal agreement and te protocol that are within the Assembly's devolved competence. That includes performing checks and providing the associated infrastructure at local ports. For that reason, the Agriculture Minister knows that any interference with checks or controls would be a breach of Executive policy, the rule of law and the statutory duty on Ministers.

At a time of economic uncertainty and rising energy costs and cost of living, cynical stunts by the DUP do nothing to positively influence negotiations on the protocol. We want to see an agreed way forward. I am committed to maximising the opportunities of the protocol as regards access to the EU single market as well as to the British market. I encourage others to join those of us who have people's best interests at the forefront of our minds.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

Having called for the rigorous implementation of the protocol, the deputy First Minister now assures us that she is seeking ways to change it and make it better. The deputy First Minister will be aware that the operation of these institutions arises out of New Decade, New Approach (NDNA), which contains a commitment that she signed up to, along with all other parties, to frictionless trade within the United Kingdom. Does the deputy First Minister accept that there will be no return to "As you were" until that commitment is fulfilled?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

No, I do not accept it, and I do not accept the mantra from the DUP repeatedly on the issue. You helped to deliver the hardest possible Brexit, which our people are having to live through. The implications of Brexit are being felt across our community as we speak — the implications of the protocol. We would not have a protocol if we did not have Brexit. The protocol provides a solution. I maintain the position of rigorous implementation within the framework of the protocol.

Despite the utterances of the DUP, the protocol is not up for negotiation. As we speak today, talks are ongoing between the EU and the British Government. I really hope that the momentum is built on, as we saw before Christmas on the issue of medicines. There was some forward movement on that. Let us be pragmatic. Let us be reasonable. Why do you and your party not turn, with the rest of the parties, to work for the best economic interests of the people who live here? We want to find a way forward within the framework of the protocol that allows all the issues to be ironed out. I believe in east-west trade and want that to continue. I have said that I want to see access to both markets. There is huge potential here, but the DUP is so blindsided that it cannot see it.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The deputy First Minister will be aware from some of the discussions she has on the North/South and east-west dimensions of the issue of VAT on fuel. The Minister will be aware that, in the rest of our nation, it looks as if we will be able to remove VAT on fuel but, because we are saddled with the protocol, we would be in breach of EU regulations if we went for zero-rating on VAT on fuel. Will the Minister comment on whether that is an equitable situation? Should we, in fact, for the good of everybody in Northern Ireland, push to get to the lowest rate of VAT possible on fuel?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member knows that his party has had a bit of an in/out approach to Brexit. It was against it, for it, against it. It can make up its own mind on any given day. I want to see the protocol work. I want to see the full implementation of it. I want to iron out all the issues that have arisen as a direct result of Brexit, the outworking of that and what it means for the new trading realities that we face. I also want us to avail ourselves of all the opportunities that we now have, which is access to two markets: the EU market and the British government market. The Member is right to be concerned about the cost of living crisis. The Member is right that we, as an Assembly, should look towards finding ways to lift the burden. Conor Murphy has been clear in calling on the British Government to ensure that they remove the VAT. He has been proactive on that issue and continues to —

[Interruption.]

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Order.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

— engage with the Treasury. As I said, the rest of us are very focused on the ongoing discussions and what is happening today in the latest round of discussions between Liz Truss and the European Union. I hope that that bears fruit for the good of people here and for stability, certainty, building our economy, creating jobs and grabbing on to the protection and the job creation that the protocol has given us. I hope that there is a positive outcome.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I remind Members that, when asking a question, they should ask the question and not make a long speech before introducing the question. I will stop Members in future.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

2. Ms Dolan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the development of a strategy to address violence against women and girls. (AQO 2978/17-22)

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

9. Mrs Dodds asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how their Department intends to address online abuse against women on social media platforms. (AQO 2985/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Cheann Comhairle, with your permission, I will answer questions 2 and 9 together.

We are committed to tackling all forms of violence, abuse and unwanted behaviours against women and girls, whether at home, in the community or online. While much good work has already been done, we recognise that a new strategic approach is required to deliver the cultural and societal change necessary to ensure that there are healthy behaviours and attitudes towards women and girls. A whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach is needed. Therefore, a team has been established in TEO to lead the development of the new Equally Safe strategy to tackle violence against women and girls. Engagement is ongoing with stakeholders and Departments across these islands.

Our approach is ambitious and is focused on working collaboratively. We want to look at the root causes, tackle the progression from damaging attitudes towards abusive behaviours and understand how to intervene at the earliest possible stages. It is vital that the strategy is evidence-based, and therefore we are seeking a wide range of evidence, including from those with lived experience. As a first formal step, we launched a call for views on the new Equally Safe strategy on Monday 10 January. It will run until 7 March. We encourage as many people as possible to participate in that call for views, as responses will help us to inform the scope of and the approach to the new strategy.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the joint First Minister for that response and positive update. While there is an onus on government to protect women and girls from violence, does the Minister agree that there is also an onus on government to uphold women's rights and that it is entirely unacceptable that women here are still being denied access to the compassionate and modern healthcare that they are legally entitled to?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I absolutely agree that that is unacceptable. It is a statement of hypocrisy to talk, on one hand, about protecting women and girls from violence and, on the other hand, to seek to deny women their rights to modern and compassionate healthcare. The issue is very much about trusting and respecting women, which, as the Member knows, are two sides of the same coin. Women's rights are human rights. It is appalling: women of this island have had to wait far too long for equality and access to modern and compassionate abortion health services. It is over a year since the law was changed, but the Health Minister has still not moved to implement those services: that is totally unacceptable. The provision of that modern and compassionate healthcare is core to delivering a rights-based society — a society in which the rights and entitlements of everyone are upheld, protected and delivered. That is what I am committed to delivering without further delays. I encourage the Health Minister to bring forward and commission those services immediately.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the deputy First Minister. She says that we must tackle violence against women in all its forms and wherever it comes from. I presume that that includes late-night misogynistic tweets or, as in my case, a shameful tweet that, many believed, was in response to the posting of a video on the anniversary of an attempt by the IRA to kill my family and police officers. For the avoidance of doubt and for the record of the House, will the deputy First Minister take the opportunity to show leadership and condemn that attack by the IRA and other IRA killings of women such as Jean McConville, Joanne Mathers and Yvonne Dunlop? If she fails to do that, all the talk about tackling abuse and violence against women and girls is nothing but talk.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you for tabling the question. I sent you a message about the tweet that referred to your beautiful son at the time, and I hope that you received it. That tweet was disgusting and deplorable by anybody's standards. I unreservedly condemn it and offer my thoughts to you, because I have no doubt that it will have had a retraumatising impact on you, your partner and your family. I want to be clear on that. On the issue of late-night tweets or commentary on social media, there is no place online or in society for such behaviour. Everybody, particularly those in political leadership, needs to think twice before they offer up types of commentary. To be clear, I saw no fun or joke in any part of that tweet.

You mentioned the past. We share the same ground in that we need to work together to deal with the past. The politics of condemnation is not the right space for us to be focused on. I encourage you to work with me, because I want to ensure that we heal the wounds of the past and work together to properly deal with it. Otherwise, we burden today's generation with carrying the same thing. We know that it is intergenerational. Join me, and I will join you in trying to deal with the past sufficiently. We had a way in which to do that; we had agreed a way in which to deal with the past. It was the Stormont House Agreement, but the British Government have reneged, as have the DUP by pulling back on its development. For the first time, we had cross-party support to deal with the past. I want to deal with the past, but I also want to be about the future and building a better future.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

In advance of the completion of the violence against women and girls strategy, will the First Ministers commit to having a fully resourced media campaign targeted at men and boys, in particular, to stress the need to respect women and girls?

That is really important. We need action now. We cannot keep waiting for strategies to come forward. We need a firm commitment from the Executive Office for that campaign.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for her question. I very much welcome the fact that we have commenced the work, and I look forward to working with the Chair of the Committee on the development of the proper strategy that we need. It has to tackle the root causes of why such violence occurs. We have to get right down in depth, so I will work with the Member on that.

Suffice it to say that the strategy is one of a number of strategies. Sister strategies are also being brought forward at this time. We need to keep considering all options and all the potential things that we can do, including the area that the Member talked about around educating men and young boys and looking at whether there are opportunities for us to do that in the media. I am absolutely open to that. We have asked officials to continue to look at what we can do even in advance of getting to the final point of having a strategy and an action plan.

I am very clear that we cannot stand still. We cannot have the outpouring of grief that many people expressed in the Chamber last week on the death of Ashling Murphy. We have to turn that energy into action. I am glad that we are progressing a range of strategies. I am open to the idea of a media campaign, but I am more open to the idea that, if we go down that route, we get it right and target it properly.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will Members please get to the questions?

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

In the deputy First Minister's response to Mrs Dodds, she mentioned dealing with the past. Although I welcome the strategy, we still have to support those women who were affected by mother-and-baby homes. Will she confirm or provide details as to how the redress scheme for those affected is being brought forward? Is legislation being drafted?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Given the sensitivity of the issue, I do not want to say a word wrong about the development of the strategy, so I will write to the Member and confirm that for her.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Minister, do you agree that the abuse of women and girls is as old as time, and now is the time for change? The previous Member to speak referred to mother-and-baby homes. We need to end all abuses against women, girls and their children, and we need to ensure that it is exposed for all the world to see in any upcoming inquiry.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for her question. I know that she is very passionate about the issue. I am always conscious that, when we speak about the issue, we always acknowledge in the first instance that our thoughts are very much with the mothers and their children who were treated in what can only be described as the most barbaric, inhumane and disrespectful way in all the institutions across this island and other islands.

We always have to remember that this is about women who have had their babies stolen from them. This is about child trafficking. This is about a cover-up by the Church and state. The recent publication of the report very much speaks to that and to the real lived experience of so many women. It remains an open wound on this island, and it is vital that the voices of women, girls and their now adult children are heard. That will be really important in the development of the inquiry.

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

4. Mr McGrath asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what work their Department is undertaking to secure representation from Northern Ireland during the development and approval of new EU legislation. (AQO 2980/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We welcome the EU’s proposal of 13 October 2021 for enhanced engagement with authorities and stakeholders here on the protocol and its corresponding recognition that we need to be more engaged in shaping and bringing into force EU legislation applicable here. However, further clarity is needed as to how proposed arrangements would fit into existing governance structures and the role of the Executive.

We raised those concerns with David Frost on four occasions when the First Minister and I met him to receive updates on the negotiations towards the end of last year. Following Lord Frost’s resignation, Liz Truss took over the role of chief negotiator, and we will also raise our concerns with her.

Our officials continue to engage with their colleagues in relevant Whitehall Departments to gain the clarity required on the proposals and the other issues being discussed in the ongoing negotiations.

Arrangements to manage the relationship with the EU are currently in place through the withdrawal agreement governance structures. Information on the legislation in the protocol is exchanged via the joint consultative working group, which our officials attend. In addition, Departments here are afforded the opportunity to see and provide input into the British Government's explanatory memoranda process on EU legislative proposals.

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

I thank the deputy First Minister for her response. Will the joint First Minister give consideration to the model that has been developed in Norway, in that Norway will be consulted as part of the future arrangements? Might that be a blueprint for here?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is a good suggestion. Why not? We need to look at how we can best input and have a say in the things that affect our lives every day. I am up for looking at ways to manage our input and ensure that it is meaningful. Also, our input needs to be at the right time, not at the end of a process. Our input needs to be up front so that we make a meaningful impact. I am happy to take that on board.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Minister clarify what she meant when she started her answer by saying, "We welcome the EU's proposal" on this dimension? Was she speaking for the First Minister? Let me make it very clear: any token, meaningless input into a foreign jurisdiction while the EU continues to exercise its ill-gotten sovereignty in Northern Ireland is not an answer. The only answer lies in the restoration of sovereignty to the United Kingdom, whereby we are governed by the laws that we make and change ourselves, not by foreign laws that we cannot change.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

There is no question there.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Minister, last Friday, I met Workspace, a group that you will be familiar with from your Mid Ulster constituency. Workspace does brilliant work on the ground and depends on the European social fund (ESF) for the delivery of a lot of its programmes. At the minute, Workspace is incredibly worried about the short term, because of a lack of match funding from the Department for the Economy, presumably because of its loss of core funding as a result of Brexit, and the longer term, because of the lack of detail from the British Government about —

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Have you a question?

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

— the replacement for the ESF. Is the Minister concerned about the impact on the Executive of the funds lost as a result of Brexit?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member. I know of her passion for our constituency, and there is no doubt that she will always fight Workspace's corner well. It is an excellent project, and I am glad to have been able to visit it on many occasions. There is no doubt, whatever way you cut it, that the prospect of a net loss of £100 million of European funding will have a huge impact on to a lot of groups, including Workspace and not just on the groups and the work that they do on the ground but on the Executive's finances. Normally, the Executive had a say in what that money funded, and it was complementary to the work in the Departments. Now, as a direct result of the delivery of Brexit, a huge challenge faces so many groups out there.

The figure of £100 million is stark, and it graphically highlights and exposes the scale of the loss of EU financial support. We have relied on that support, and it has underpinned many areas of work. Whether programmes are economic, agricultural, community or educational, they are all equally impacted. It is for those on the Benches opposite who championed Brexit against the democratic wishes of the people to take responsibility for the scale of the financial loss on the ground from its outworking. I always found it quite ironic that the Ministers and party who championed the hard Brexit are out shouting about the loss of funds to the Department that it leads at this time. The irony is not lost on the groups that are massively impacted by the loss of funding.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the deputy First Minister. Ironically, we are in a democratically elected House discussing the implementation of laws that we do not make and will have no say in. Does the deputy First Minister recognise that as the rest of the United Kingdom moves away from the very difficult and tight laws of the EU on issues such as subsidy control, Northern Ireland's firms will be less competitive and their burdens more onerous because we are stuck with EU legislation in that particular area?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Of course, we are stuck with Brexit because you and your party helped to deliver it, but we have been trying to mitigate the worst —

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

It was a democratic vote.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Order.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Of course, the majority in this democracy and this House are opposed to Brexit and are for making the protocol work, for certainty and stability, for job creation, for a more prosperous economy and for the best interests of the people who live here.

There is no doubt that divergence is going to increase over time. We have been dragged out of the EU against our wishes. That is going to become hugely problematic for us to manage. Our officials continue to work to develop a whole list of actions and key tools to mitigate and limit the potential impact of policy and regulatory divergence, but it is going to increase over time. That is a direct outworking of Brexit.

Anyway, we will get on with the work of trying to manage that as best as we can. We have been working our way through it, and we will continue to.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The previous answer was a fine example of the esprit de corps that undercuts this coalition.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member come to his question?

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

5. Mr Stalford asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the review of the international relations strategy. (AQO 2981/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, junior Minister Kearney will answer that question.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Our international relationships are hugely important for the Executive and our people. As we seek to rebuild our economy and revitalise our society, it will be crucial for us to maximise opportunities from overseas investment and partnerships. We have had discussions on the development of the next international relations strategy with officials and a number of stakeholders. We are now considering proposals in parallel with our COVID recovery plans and the emerging Programme for Government.

The international relations strategy will build on what has achieved success for us in the past, including the work of our overseas bureaux and our global relationships with governments and organisations. It will also strengthen collaboration with Invest NI and key partner organisations, including councils, businesses, education institutions, NI Co-operation Overseas (NI-CO) and others, in order to strengthen our economic position, increase trade, investment, tourism, education and research connections and to support best practice in public services.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

The conduct of foreign policy is clearly not a devolved matter, but we can decide who we do business with. Does the junior Minister agree that it is important to have an ethical policy, one in which we are very careful about engaging with countries with appalling human rights records?

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. He is quite right: foreign policy is an excepted matter. We have no influence over it. However, we are at one on the importance of ensuring that we have an ethical and rights-based approach towards who we do business with. In the relationships that we develop and the importance of ensuring that, insofar as our international work brings economic, cultural and educational dividends in in-person relationship terms back to this place, we are sending a very clear message internationally to all our partners and prospective partners, that, particularly on the basis of the experience of our peace process, we have an institutional memory. We are a friendly and inclusive people when you consider the work that we have done in assisting those who have come here to flee wars in other places — our Syrian refugees and those who have come here to seek asylum. As a people, I believe that we have an important role by demonstrating how this place can act as a model of best practice. That must be a key component of how we take forward our approach to all the decisions that we make in all our international relations.

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

First, I will say to the junior First Minister that we have Northern Ireland bureaux in Washington and Beijing. In both instances, those organisations work very closely with the Irish and, of course, the British embassies in those countries. They seek to maximise the benefit from the duality of this place, a duality that, too often, has been a hang-up for us. Is that not the model for how we should approach our representation in Brussels? We have dual access to the EU single market and the British market. Should that not be a cornerstone of our international strategy in our relations with the EU? Will the Executive Office take that forward?

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin a chur. The fact that we have such a substantive and well-resourced bureau in Brussels is indicative of the importance of our relationship with the European Union. Notwithstanding Brexit and the protocol impasse, our officials have been very helpful in ensuring that communication channels remain open between the Executive and the Executive Office and the European Union.

We have a unique competitive advantage available to us through the proper implementation of the protocol.

For that reason, it is essential that we have the focused relationship that you speak of with the European Union and the European Commission. An earlier question alluded to how we should continue to be given a special status, not only given our economic realities and the new trading realities that we have to navigate but to ensure that there is no democratic deficit impacting on our political arrangements. We have to be imaginative and strategic about how we create a greater policy convergence and strategic relationship and partnership with the European Union and the European Commission.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

That ends the period for listed questions. We now move to 15 minutes of topical questions. Topical question 3 has been withdrawn.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

T1. Mr Stalford asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, with the Executive due to meet this week, whether the deputy First Minister can give Members a sense of where she thinks that we are heading with the easement of coronavirus restrictions. (AQT 1951/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member is right: we will meet on Thursday afternoon. Any further lifting of restrictions is not intended at this point. We have identified 10 February as our next point for review. It is fair to say that there is fair degree of cautious optimism about where we are. We were able to make some strides forward last week, and I hope that we continue in that vein. As I keep repeating, a lot of uncertainty surrounds a pandemic, but it looks like we are following a more hopeful path. Hopefully, we can all see the light at the end of the tunnel that people talk about. Our next review of the restrictions that are left will be on 10 February. Of course, we had baseline restrictions in place until 23 January. We brought in additional measures, and they have now been drawn back. Our next staging post is 10 February.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the deputy First Minister for that positive-sounding answer. In the context of heading in the right direction, does she agree that the renewal of further restrictive powers that reside presently with the Department of Health should not be undertaken?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We have to learn to walk before we can run. The Department of Health has guided us the whole way through on the need for and effectiveness of the restrictions. We do not want to have to use restrictive powers. We do not want to be in that space, and, if we can avoid it, we will. We have always said that we will keep things in place only for as long as they are necessary. Let us get to the meeting on 10 February and review all those things. The pandemic has thrown us many curveballs. I hope that we do not get any more, but we have to have the ability to respond if that were to happen. Let us hope that we do not have to resort to any additional measures in the future and that we keep going like one-way traffic.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

T2. Mr Chambers asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to confirm that the Executive Office received correspondence dated 1 December 2021 from Mr Gerard Lawlor, chief executive of the Northern Ireland Football League, in relation to the release of the subregional stadia funding. (AQT 1952/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not have a list of my correspondence in front of me, so I will have to confirm to the Member in writing whether we have that correspondence. I am more than happy to do so.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Thank you, deputy First Minister. Will you commit to meeting representatives from the Northern Ireland Football League to discuss ways to guarantee that that important funding is signed off in the current mandate?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Again, I am more than happy to look at the correspondence. I have a very open-door policy. I meet many people, both those with whom I agree and those with whom I do not agree. I am more than happy to talk about how we can invest in our sports and to take a look at the correspondence.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

T4. Ms Armstrong asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether any thought has been given to increasing the parenting programmes, which were one of the Executive Office’s six Delivering Social Change initiatives, to help carers who have been abandoned by the system, given that, at this stage in a mandate, it is inevitable that Members start to look at what should have been delivered. (AQT 1954/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will write to the Member to give her more accurate information about where we are with those programmes. I am all for expanding such programmes. They are crucial interventions that help people, particularly in the early years, as we know how formative those early years are. I am more than happy to look at that.

I concur with you. Given that we are in a more positive and hopeful position with the pandemic, the situation surrounding carers needs to be urgently reviewed. I know many families that still do not have access to day care for the person for whom they care or even access to their day opportunities. That is not acceptable and now needs to be reviewed. I urge the Health Department to look at the policy urgently and to support the families who found themselves in trying times for the whole two-year period. They never had an on-off time. They never had a time that the person for whom they care was back in, in the normal way of things prior to the pandemic, and that needs to be fixed quickly.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you, deputy First Minister. I agree, but it has gone beyond Health and is now a cross-departmental issue. Do you agree that having a register of carers is now a necessity so that we can know exactly who our carers are and how support can be provided for them?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member. That is so important, because, as the Member will agree, carers are unsung heroes on many occasions. The benefit that they bring to their loved one, family member or friend — the person whom they care for— could not be quantified if we as a Government were to provide that care. They need to be supported, but, in order to get the polices, strategies and supports right, we have to understand how many carers we have and the nature of that care — young or old, still at school or working, full-time or part-time — so I concur with the need to have a register. I will probably have to correspond with the Health Department on its current plans. I am not sure, but I am happy to take that on as an action.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T5. Mrs Erskine asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, in light of the publication of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee report on Westminster's Online Safety Bill, when such legislation will come into force in Northern Ireland, particularly because, as the deputy First Minister will agree, the language and discourse online is toxic, with us only having to look at what happened over the weekend with misogynistic tweets based on family members and appearance. (AQT 1955/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member is right that that legislation has been published. Our officials are working on it. Department of Justice officials are keeping all Departments up to date on what it looks like and will mean for us here. Justice is engaged, and it has that cross-party work in order to look at the roll-out of the strategy. Let me get an update for the Member, and I will write to her to tell her where that sits. As we learn more, however, Departments will be kept abreast of all developments.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

We know that legislation can take some time. In the meantime, what are you doing, deputy First Minister, to address online abuse, particularly against women and, indeed, against women in the Chamber?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

You are absolutely right about the need to stamp out online violence. We call on and will continue to call on social media companies in particular to do the right thing. They have a moral and corporate responsibility to ensure that those who are engaged in misogyny, sexism, online abuse and threats are blocked from their services. We should not be subjected to that sitting in our home whilst online, providing a public service and doing our job as an elected representative. None of us deserves to be abused in any way whatever.

For those in political leadership to engage in that everyday sexism and think that it is a joke is disgusting in itself. That is not political leadership. Political leadership is calling out things whenever they are wrong. In this case, misogyny online is a huge problem. In the period that we have just come through, in the aftermath of the death of Ashling Murphy and the outpouring of grief from that but, even more than that, the anger at the fact that misogyny still exists in such a systemic way, that a political leader should be engaged online in what he deems to be jokes — I do not deem them to be jokes — leaves me incredulous.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

T6. Mr Beggs asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, in light of the fact that, in GB, under mounting pressure, it is likely that there will be a reduction in VAT on heating fuel, and given the record prices and the associated fuel poverty, whether the deputy First Minister believes that the EU, through the Northern Ireland protocol, should not continue its role, potentially blocking the reduction of our heating costs. (AQT 1956/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Your colleague raised that issue earlier. As I said, the Finance Minister, Conor Murphy, has been calling for a reduction in VAT. That is doable. There is no reason for it not to be done, so I urge the British Treasury to do it.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I hope that that will be permitted and will not be blocked by the protocol. Does the Minister accept that there are significant cost pressures on the construction industry from the banning of red diesel? In addition, there will be increased isolation in the agriculture sector, and people will not be able to go on tractor runs or to ploughing matches using red diesel in their tanks. Have the First Minister and deputy First Minister made representation on that issue?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I concur, and I acknowledge the challenge that is being faced, particularly in the agriculture sector. More needs to be done, and, as a political party, we have written. I do not think that we have written jointly on that, but we could perhaps do that together.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

T7. Mr McAleer asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the implementation of the recommendations in the Hart report, albeit he very much welcomes the recent announcement of an apology to the victims of historical institutional abuse (HIA). (AQT 1957/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As the Member knows, the date for the public apology has been set for 11 March, and I am glad that we were able to announce that last week. I am committed to ensuring that the apology is delivered in a manner that is meaningful to victims and survivors. People have asked me over the last number of days, "Why did you announce a date to make an apology?". It is, first, to allow time to make sure that it is meaningful, and, secondly, it is important that we allow the victims and survivors that short number of weeks to be ready and to be well informed about what we intend to say.

On the other recommendations, I am pleased to say that the review of the redress process has now started, and the commissioner is taking forward discussions on the memorial. I am also pleased to say that, as of 31 December, 2,081 applications had been received, with £30 million paid out in redress. We know that the Victims and Survivors Service (VSS) continues to support victims and survivors who have registered for support, so I hope that the Member can see that we are making progress across all the Hart recommendations. I am committed to ensuring that that continues and that the needs of victims and survivors, in the first instance, are continually met.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her response. In relation to the HIA redress process, has there been any progress regarding the contribution from the religious institutions?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The First Minister and I hosted a round table on 14 October that included representatives of six institutions identified in the Hart report. That was specifically about contributions towards the cost of redress. Since that meeting, the independent facilitator, Paul Sweeney, has undertaken a series of bilateral discussions with the respective institutions. We have received a preliminary report from Paul Sweeney and have agreed that further work should now be undertaken on a proposed framework to seek contributions towards the cost of redress. It is ongoing and necessary work.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

T8. Ms Ennis asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether the deputy First Minister agrees that it is time for fundamental change in how women are viewed in this society, with the horrific murder of Ashling Murphy leading to a renewed focus on the issue of violence against women, as well as a focus on the wider culture of misogyny and sexism, which unfortunately still exist, allowing such attacks to happen. (AQT 1958/17-22)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Put simply, yes; I absolutely do. There are simply no words to convey the cruelty and the injustice of what happened to Ashling Murphy and to far too many other women like her. My heart still goes out to her family and all who loved her.

We can all acknowledge that the treatment of women and girls has been nothing but shameful across this island, and you and I know that we need to call that out whenever we see it. I feel that we are at a tipping point — that is maybe the way to put it — and that we need to break the silence that facilitates violence in the home and threatening behaviours. We need to expose and call out the behaviour of men towards women and girls — our mothers, our daughters, our sisters and our aunts — that causes the fear, the feeling of discomfort and the anxiety that are a continual barrage. We have to stand together because we have to say together that enough is enough. This is a necessary first step in changing how women are viewed and treated in this society.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the joint First Minister for that response. I know that progress is being made on the strategies to tackle violence against women and girls. Does the Minister agree that, for far too long, the focus has been on women and what women need to do to protect themselves and that we need to shift that focus to the perpetrators and how we can prevent the violence in the first place?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I totally agree with the Member. Ashling's murder speaks to the vulnerability of all women when they are alone in the public space. There is no doubt that Ashling's tragic death has prompted many women, me included — I said this last week — to think about our everyday routines, what routes we take, where we go, how we do it, how we exercise and how we do the basic things.

Together, we have a job of work to do. We need a step change in order to challenge the scourge of everyday sexism and misogyny that exists and expose the behaviours of perpetrators, whether it is at home, in the workplace or online, because, unfortunately, this reaches into every sphere of life. What we are about is delivering an enforceable approach that exposes, at all times, all forms of male violence against all women. That has to be our key objective in what we do next. We need to build, as I said, on the momentum that has been created as a direct result of the attention that has been brought to the issue because of Ashling Murphy's horrific death.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Time is up. I ask Members to take their ease for a moment or two.

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

Oral Answers to Questions — Economy

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

1. Mr Allister asked the Minister for the Economy what is the ongoing cost of the protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland to the Northern Ireland economy. (AQO 2992/17-22)

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

15. Mr Stalford asked the Minister for the Economy for his assessment of the overall cost to local businesses arising from the provisions of the protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. (AQO 3006/17-22)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is, of course, difficult to provide a complete analysis given that the protocol has not been fully implemented. Therefore, when grace periods and mitigations come to an end, things are likely to get much worse. It is clear that, during 2021, many local businesses and, indeed, consumers experienced a range of issues as a result of new requirements for sourcing goods in Great Britain. I have spoken personally to many of those businesses, and I have received correspondence from Members across the Chamber, including those who publicly called for the full implementation of the protocol yet privately acknowledge the damage that it is doing to our economy, who have alerted me to problems that businesses in their constituencies face.

In respect of costs, Dr Esmond Birnie, an economist appointed to the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council by Finance Minister, Conor Murphy, on the agreement of the Executive, reports that frictions in our trade with GB could cost the Northern Ireland economy in the region of £900 million. Other published studies consistently point to the profound economic consequences of disrupting trade with GB. It is clear that tinkering around the edges will not cut it. We need action from the Government now and permanent and complete solutions that remove those frictions in GB-NI trade.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The crippling costs to our economy of approaching £1 billion a year are unsustainable, I suspect. On 13 September 2021, the Minister said:

"If there is a choice between remaining in office or implementing the protocol in its present form, then the only option for any unionist Minister would be to cease to hold such office."

When will he make that choice?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am certainly not implementing the protocol, and I agree with the Member's point. The cost to our economy is £900 million. We have to remember, however, that this is all taking place when we have extensive grace periods and mitigations in place. It is up to the Government and the EU to take action. I hope that they will do so. I hope that they follow through on the concerns that they have expressed in their Command Paper. We have not seen progress being made, but it needs to be made, and action needs to be taken.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Minister confirm that he is grouping question 1 with another question?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Apologies, Mr Deputy Speaker. With your permission, I will group questions 1 and 15, if it is not too late.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

OK.

Christopher Stalford (DUP, Belfast South)

I am grateful to the Minister for the grouping as it brings me from the bottom of the list to the top.

The Minister has detailed the economic cost of £900 million, and we all know what our health service could do with £900 million. There is also a political dimension to this. Can the Minister confirm that there is not a single unionist elected representative in the Assembly who supports the provisions of the protocol? We never, ever will.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I can absolutely confirm that that is the case. These are extraordinary arrangements that are in place in Northern Ireland, without the support of unionists. I think that that is in direct contravention to the Belfast Agreement. In fact, the Belfast Agreement had to be changed to allow the consent mechanism to be put in place. I think that that is absolutely scandalous. If that took place on any other issue, other Members around the House would find it absolutely scandalous as well, but, because it fits in with the political position of the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin, they are quite happy to change the Belfast Agreement in this regard to suit their own particular political circumstances.

This is not just an issue that affects unionists. It is affecting everybody in Northern Ireland, and I have the evidence and the data from different businesses and organisations that are saying that it is increasing costs, which are passed on to all of our constituents, wherever we sit in the House. In fact, recently, the Road Haulage Association wrote to me and said that a 10% to 20% increase in costs is directly attributable to the protocol. That is having a real impact on people in Northern Ireland. We are already in a cost-of-living crisis, inflation is already making things different and the protocol is making it worse. I wish that there was a recognition of that and that this is not the way to sort out this issue. Instead, we should look at some of the other arrangements that have been highlighted and which could work, rather than putting a border in the Irish Sea, which is having an impact on everybody, whatever your constitutional position.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The Minister and his colleagues are fond of cherry-picking figures. I see that he is not quoting the bit in the same study about substituting imports in the EU and the rest of the world, because we can. Under the protocol, that could reduce the impact on GDP by half.

Anyway, a recent Manufacturing NI survey showed that the biggest issue facing businesses is the shortage of labour, with the protocol being down their list of priorities. Two thirds of businesses do want the protocol —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member come to her question, please?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

— to be made to work, and 40% want the Executive to maximise opportunities. Does the Minister accept that, just like with Brexit, he and his party are out of step with the majority of businesses here on the protocol?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Absolutely not. In fact, I say to the Member that it is her party and the parties on that other side of the House that are out of step with the public. Public polls are showing that people recognise the issues that the protocol is causing and the impact that it is having. That is clear, and it is clear to me. It is also clear to Members on the other side of the House because I have the letters here. I have letters from Members on the other side of the House. Here is one complaining about the checks that face a business in his constituency:

"'I have been in business for over 24 years. Every single item which needs to be brought in has to be declared. A supplementary declaration with a consignment number.' She must declare the item weight before and after packaging. This is resulting in countless hours of phone calls, all of which feel unnecessary to her. Is there any help or guidance which your Department could provide?".

We have here correspondence from Members on the other side of the House. I would be very careful if I were the Member because it is someone from her party who wrote to me. She may complain about Brexit, but, ultimately, it is the protocol that is the problem. That is absolutely right. It is the protocol, which they did not reluctantly accept but called for the rigorous implementation of.

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

Minister, I have a letter too. You named Esmond Birnie and his claims around the cost of the protocol. I have a letter from the Fiscal Council, which makes it clear that that claim is not from that organisation. I note that Dr Birnie has failed to publish his claims in any reputable peer-reviewed journal, so you should be aware of that before you start bandying it about on the Floor of the Assembly.

May I draw your attention, Mr Deputy Speaker

[Interruption.]

May I draw your attention, Minister —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Can I have a question, please?

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

— to specific statistics? There was a 60% increase in exports from Northern Ireland to the EU single market and the Republic.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Can we have a question, please?

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

Two thirds of Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry members see the protocol as an opportunity. Some 80% of Manufacturing NI respondents believe —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Will the Member take his seat? I have asked for a question. If he asks a question, I will let him; if he does not, I will move on.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker, I was getting to my question. I was listing the real, actual opinion of businesses in Northern Ireland on the protocol, and —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order. Please resume your seat. I call Steve Aiken.

[Interruption.]

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

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Points of order are not taken during Question Time.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I put on record the fact that Esmond Birnie is an absolutely exceptional economist. He should not be denigrated in the House, and I hope that Mr O'Toole will withdraw his remarks.

Earlier, I asked the deputy First Minister a question about VAT on fuel. It is clear that we will not be able to reduce VAT across the rest of our nation to 5% or lower because of the provisions of the EU protocol. What direct engagement has the Minister had with the Finance Minister and other Ministers across the United Kingdom to make sure that Northern Ireland is not disadvantaged by the ridiculous protocol methodology?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I agree with what the Member said about Dr Birnie. It is not appropriate to denigrate somebody or their work simply because we disagree with it or it does not line up with our own political view. It is unfortunate that that happened. We should not listen only to those who agree with us and share our views. Other Members would do well to listen to the real concerns.

Unfortunately, the issue that the Member raises is another consequence of the protocol. Perhaps it was unintended, and some people did not see it coming, but, here we are, yet again, with another consequence of the protocol and another way in which it limits our control over the issues. Although it is an issue for the Minister of Finance — all issues of taxation and rating are matters between the Department of Finance and the Treasury — I recognise it as a concern, and I believe that it needs to be dealt with.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Minister, did I hear you correctly when you said that you were not implementing the protocol? Will you tell the House how you are doing that and why you are avoiding meetings on North/South inter-parliamentary business between you and your counterpart in the Republic, when it is clear to everyone in Northern Ireland that the shelves in our supermarkets are well stocked in comparison with the rest of the UK and that Brexit is the problem? Brexit is the problem, not the Northern Ireland protocol. In reality, Minister, you need to encourage —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Where is the question?

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

There is a very clear question

[Interruption.]

The question has already been asked, Mr Deputy Speaker. The question to the Minister is: what action is he taking to avoid the protocol?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Here we have yet another Member who refuses to acknowledge the impact that the protocol is having. I can read out lists of businesses and people who have contacted me to tell us about the problems that the protocol is causing. It is here in black and white. Unfortunately, it is not only what we are experiencing now that worries me. It is about what is coming down the track, when we think of all the grace periods that will end and the mitigations that are due to end. Remember, too, that all this is being held together by a £500 million Trader Support Service that will go at the end of this year. What has eased some of the issues that we are facing will be gone. I understand that the truth is difficult for some Members. I understand that they are feeling sore, perhaps because they called for the rigorous implementation of the protocol. The truth is that it is having an impact, and we need to get it sorted out.