Northern Ireland Assembly, 14 October 2024

327 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I refer to the Second Stage of the Justice Bill, which occurred on 1 October. At that stage, I stood in my capacity as Chair of the Committee. Today, I do so in a private capacity as an MLA. At that time, further to the Committee's request for a Keeling schedule, the Minister outlined this in her response to me:

"On the Committee scrutiny issue that was raised, I reference the Keeling schedule to which the Chair of the Committee drew our attention. That has never been provided by any Department or the OLC as part of the Committee scrutiny process in the House. It is not part of TEO guidance on the legislative process either, and it has no legal standing. In effect, it has no standing because it cannot be verified until the Bill is complete. I consulted with the OLC, and it indicated that it has never produced such a schedule. However, I know that the Committee will seek to engage with first legislative counsel directly on that point. If a Keeling schedule is thought to be of assistance to the Committee, it can commission that from the Bill Office, but that is not a matter for me or the Department to take forward." — [Official Report (Hansard), 1 October 2024, p76, col 2].

Mr Speaker, I submit that, thus far, three Keeling schedules have been provided: one to the Committee for Justice on the Legal Aid and Coroners' Courts Bill in 2014; one to the Committee for Finance on the Government Resources and Accounts Act (Northern Ireland) 2001; and one to the Committee for Education on the Special Educational Needs and Disability Bill in 2015. Whilst a Keeling schedule was not specifically found for the Committee for Employment and Learning on the Employment Bill in 2015, there is a clear commitment to provide one in this case, and it is clear and unequivocal.

On that basis, I seek to correct the record and ask the Minister to reconsider her decision not to accede to the Committee's request to provide that schedule in order that changes to the Justice Act and various Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) schedules and other legislation that is mentioned in the Justice Bill can be tracked and traced by the Assembly.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has placed her point on the record. She will know that I have previously spoken in the Chamber about the importance of proper scrutiny of legislation. I am sure that the Committee will continue to liaise with the Minister about the information that it requires to scrutinise the Bill. It is important that Ministers give accurate information to the House. Sometimes, Ministers may say something inaccurate inadvertently, in the heat of the moment, or because they have been advised wrongly. It is normal in such cases for Ministers to correct the record, in writing or in the Chamber. Given that the Member has put her point on the record, I assume that she is also corresponding directly with the Minister or tabling questions. I am sure that the Minister will review her remarks and consider further action. If the Minister does not take further action, the Member can take advice from the Clerks on the options that are available to her.

Members' Statements

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Last Tuesday, the Communities Minister, Gordon Lyons, held a meeting with the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC) at its request. That was the second such meeting between the LCC and a DUP Minister in a matter of weeks. Those meetings have generated large media interest, and the public are, rightly, expressing concerns about the matter.

Let us be clear about who the LCC are. The LCC is an umbrella group made up of members of the UVF, the UDA and the Red Hand Commando. Those loyalist paramilitaries regularly engage in criminal behaviour and terrorise their own communities through fear and coercive control. Those paramilitary gangs are involved in drug dealing, racketeering and sectarian acts of violence. They are also strongly suspected of orchestrating the racist attacks in Belfast during the summer. They have no place in our society, and they should have left the stage long ago. It is wholly inappropriate and unacceptable for any Minister to consult those groups on matters of public policy.

In the wake of a meeting with Education Minister, Paul Givan, a couple of weeks ago, it was revealed that the LCC had lobbied the Minister to block the development of an Irish-medium school in east Belfast. One cannot help but wonder what, if any, similar demands were made of the Communities Minister and, crucially, what his response was.

The public have a right to know what was discussed at last Tuesday's meeting with Gordon Lyons. In the interests of transparency and openness, he has a duty to provide that information. At last week's Communities Committee meeting, I called on the Minister to publish the minutes of the meeting with the LCC along with a list of attendees. I repeat that call today. In addition, I call on the Minister to come to the House as soon as possible to make a statement on the meeting and provide Members with an opportunity to ask questions.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

Saturday 5 October saw the commencement of Northern Ireland's newest parkrun, at Paisley Park on the West Circular Road in Belfast. That is really positive for the community, as it is the first parkrun in the greater Shankill area. We had 112 finishers and a lot of positive feedback. I thank all who made it possible: the volunteer team, the board of Paisley Park Sportsplex, the Department for Communities, Belfast City Council and Matt Shields of parkrun.

We were honoured that, along with the Lord Mayor, Councillor Micky Murray, local athletics legend Derek Graham attended to start the event. That made the connection with a historic achievement on the Paisley Park track in August 1967: the breaking of the four-minute mile for the first time in Northern Ireland, by Kenyan Kip Keino and Derek Graham, the first two finishers in the race. Derek unveiled a plaque marking the inaugural parkrun and his and Kip Keino's historic achievement.

Derek was a phenomenal athlete throughout his running career. He was ranked number one in the UK and Ireland over 2 miles and 3 miles in the 1960s. He finished second in the equivalent of the World Athletics Cross Country Championships in 1966, and he held the world record for half marathon for six years from 1970 to 1976.

The inaugural Paisley Park parkrun took place on the 20th anniversary of the first ever parkrun, which was held at Bushy Park in England in October 2004.

Parkrun is now a global phenomenon, with over 2,500 events taking place each week around the world. As Members will know, parkruns are free, timed 5 kilometre runs in local parks on Saturday mornings. Once you have registered online and received your barcode, you can turn up at any parkrun and take part.

The first parkrun in Northern Ireland and on the island of Ireland took place at the Waterworks in Belfast on 6 November 2010. Today, across Northern Ireland, we have 40 parkruns taking place each week, plus 20 junior parkruns, which cover 2 kilometres. Parkrun continues to expand in Northern Ireland. I am glad to say there are several proposed new ones in the pipeline. There is a small one-off cost to establish each new parkrun of £4,000 plus VAT for all the equipment. After that, there is no ongoing cost either to participants or to the public purse.

In some cases, there has been difficulty pinning down a source for the start-up funding. It is sometimes provided by local councils, such as Belfast City Council. The Public Health Agency and Sport NI should also be supportive, given all the health and community benefits that flow from parkruns. Well done to everyone who supports the parkrun activities, particularly the volunteers who make it all happen. Happy 20th birthday, parkrun, and here is to many more.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

I rise to acknowledge the achievement of young Leon Toase, who has become the youngest person to summit the highest peaks in Ireland's 32 counties. At seven years of age, Leon hails from Mayobridge in South Down. It is one thing to go to the honeypots that are the highest peaks in the provinces: Slieve Donard, Lugnaquilla, Mweelrea and Carrauntoohil, but to go to the lesser-known county highest points is quite the achievement. Indeed, I cannot tell you what province Mullaghmeen, Slieve na Calliagh or Carn Clonhugh are in, never mind what county. It is really impressive.

Undertaken as a challenge, Leon's hiking soon gathered momentum, and donations for charity began to come in, and commendation must also be given for that.

Leon is a pupil of St Colman's in Saval. His classmates, fellow pupils and teachers are all very proud of him. Leon has now stated that his sights are on Everest, and I would not dissuade him of that, although he had best negotiate that with his mother first of all. Much credit must also be given to Leon's father, Andrew, who accompanied him. As any parent will know, the ability to keep children's motivation levels high is no small skill, but giving Leon such an experience — indeed, any parent who gives their child an outdoor adventure time — is something to be encouraged, given the benefits that it entails.

I have offered Leon either a trip to Stormont or a session with a map and compass. I think that he is going to go with the map and compass, so he is a wise man. For climbing the highest peaks: maith thú,

[Translation: well done]

chapeau and kudos, wee man.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

On Friday, I visited a fantastic tourist attraction just outside Banbridge. My colleague might talk about it as well because she also visited. I am talking about the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour, which is probably one of the largest indoor tours and tourist attractions in Ireland. It was brought about by a £48 million investment by a US firm, and it employs about 70 staff, full-time and part-time. It is the only official 'Game of Thrones' tour, although there are many unofficial tours.

Yet this fantastic tourist attraction does not feature in Tourism Ireland or Tourism Northern Ireland's 100 places to visit. It is an incredible site, and it is working to have up to 400,000 visitors a year in the next five years. Sometimes, you can look at that and think, "Are we too Belfast-centric in Northern Ireland?". This tourist attraction is on the link road between Dublin and Belfast. Yet when people jump on the tour buses and leave Dublin, because it is not in the 100 places to go and see, they shoot up to Belfast to go to the Titanic Belfast visitor attraction.

It is first class, and I have been to it as well, but I have to say to anybody who is here or listening that the 'Game of Thrones' studio tour really is world-class. It needs to be on the map. Tourism Ireland, Tourism Northern Ireland and Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council need to do more. I recommend everybody here to give it a wee visit.

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

A short distance from Strabane town centre is a small, quaint village known as Ballymagorry. It is a tight-knit local community in a rural part of my constituency, where people have lived for a long time and where there has been little disruption, antisocial behaviour or serious incident. All of that changed on Sunday 6 October, when a young man, Kyle McDermott, was attacked outside his home. Unfortunately, as a result of that attack, he died a short time later. Kyle was 24 years of age. He had recently moved into a new home with his partner, Chloe, and they were living peacefully in the village without any issue. That all changed in a small moment on that Sunday night.

I attended a public meeting on Friday at which hundreds of people from the wider rural community gathered in solidarity with Kyle McDermott's family and his partner to express their outrage at what had happened in the local community. When we delved further into the incident, we found that there is a hostel or an emergency accommodation at the outskirts of the village to which the Housing Executive has been allocating various people. No risk assessments; no checks; just allocations into towns and villages. As a result, we see spikes in antisocial behaviour and issues emerging in various parts of Northern Ireland. On that Sunday night, the worst possible consequences occurred: a young man lost his life. It is absolutely devastating. The sense of anger in the community is palpable.

I have spoken to the Housing Executive and will continue to engage with it and the Minister on how emergency accommodation is allocated and what checks are put in place to ensure that the person in question, who has been moved from one end of Northern Ireland to the other, is no risk to anyone else or, indeed, to themselves, given that a lot of people are vulnerable. The community is looking for answers from the Housing Executive. I and other elected representatives will seek assurances that a better process will be in place to ensure the safety of the population in those villages and towns, but that does not change what happened. A young man was buried yesterday, and his family are in mourning, grieving the heartbreaking and tremendous loss of a young life. I think on his mother and father, Claire and Stephen; his partner, Chloe; his sister, Stephanie; and his brothers Arden and Sheehan. May he rest in peace.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

There was a lot of Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) activity in County Antrim over the weekend. It was impossible to be everywhere, but I was lucky enough to be in Cushendall yesterday for the senior camogie final between Loughgiel and Dunloy. Both teams served up an exhibition of tough, competitive, skilful and entertaining camogie. Nobody likes losing a county final, and I expect that the team and management of my club, Dunloy, will be disappointed today, but they should also be proud of their performance yesterday. The team is young, and I have no doubt that the girls and women who represent Dunloy will represent the club in many future county finals.

Yesterday, Loughgiel won its eleventh consecutive county senior camogie championship, which is an unbelievable record and achievement. The team has some of the most individually gifted camógs playing the game, and it is undoubtedly one of the best teams in Ireland. I congratulate the Loughgiel team and management on their victory yesterday and their phenomenal record in County Antrim, and I wish them good luck as they focus on capturing further glory and bigger prizes in the time ahead.

I also congratulate all those involved in St Mary's Ahoghill intermediate camogie team, who lifted the title, and wish the players and management success in their Ulster campaign.

Erin's Own GAC, Cargin, is a club outside my constituency of North Antrim, but it is worthy of congratulations in the Chamber for its magnificent achievement yesterday of lifting its third senior county football title in a row. In competitive sport, winning is very important, but, thankfully, the GAA is about much more than just winning, so a special word to all involved with Roger Casement's GAC, Portglenone, a club that does sit within my constituency. I know that the Gaels of Portglenone will have been deeply disappointed this morning, but they should be proud of their efforts this season. I was lucky to participate in the club's recent PG100 community fundraising effort that raised a lot of money to support not just the club's activities but five worthwhile local charities. Like GAA clubs the length and breadth of Ireland, Portglenone's club strives for excellence on and off the pitch, and it provides the heartbeat for the local community. I have no doubt that its day for senior football glory on the pitch will come in the time ahead.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I will talk about the consultation on public health policy. Given the number of emails received on the consultation and the interest shown in it, it is worthwhile putting on record my position and that of my party on the matter. The consultation seeks to update legislation from 1967. We do not argue that legislation that dates so far back should not be in need of renewal and revision, and, as a party, we recognise the need to act swiftly in times of crisis, but we do not believe that the current proposals strike a fair balance between fulfilling public health objectives and defending personal liberty.

We also believe that the bizarre and, indeed, extraordinary measure taken by the Minister of Health during the consultation period of issuing statements that distanced him from his own consultation has undermined public confidence in the consultation and will make the path to agreeing new public health legislation even more challenging. We are absolutely clear that sweeping powers should not be handed to the Minister to impose restrictions that directly impact on a private individual's family life, education, employment and movement, and we will continue to reject mandatory vaccinations or plans to compel citizens to undergo any form of medical treatment. Any future public health framework for Northern Ireland must be underlined in principle and in law by the principle of informed consent.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

I speak as chair of the all-party group on active travel in concern at an announcement last Friday afternoon by the Minister for Infrastructure that he will introduce an experimental scheme to allow class A and class C taxis to use yet-to-be-determined bus lanes in Belfast city centre. Class B and class D taxis are already permitted to use them, meaning that, for some bus lanes in Belfast, we are facing a move from bus lanes to bus/taxi lanes being in operation. That will have four main effects: reduce the safety that we already give cyclists when they use an already limited cycling infrastructure; reduce the ease with which our public transport can complete journeys; reduce the appeal of public transport as a whole; and — this is the elephant in the room — impact on our responsibilities within a declared climate emergency and our need to commit to strategies and policies that we know work to reduce car dependency and the amount of carbon that we release into the air every day.

The pilot scheme to allow taxis in some bus lanes is something that I saw floated many times while a Belfast city councillor, and now I see it floated while an MLA for East Belfast. I am not saying that we should not support taxis or that they do not have an important role to play — we had taxi representatives present to the Infrastructure Committee very recently, and I recognise taxis' importance for tourists, older people and those living with disabilities and reduced mobility — but there has to be a reasonable limitation while we ensure that we have an efficient and supported public transport system in which the public can have confidence.

On Saturday, at around 11.30 am, I took the Glider into Belfast city centre. The journey took around 10 minutes.

During that time, we sailed past car after car that had a driver but no passengers. Obviously, people take their car for different reasons on their journey to different destinations. However, if we extrapolate that to the city centre, it reinforces a point made to me on social media over the weekend: individuals and taxis cannot take priority over a bus carrying significantly more people than that or over cyclists.

I will watch the development of the proposals and work with the active travel stakeholders to see whether it achieves its wildly optimistic aim of reducing congestion by allowing more cars to operate in some of our bus lanes, while ensuring that Translink is supported in its goal of offering sustainable and reliable public transportation in the context of the climate crisis, the impact of which we see across the world today.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I extend my heartfelt congratulations to the Kilcoo senior men's GAA team on its remarkable achievement this weekend in securing its sixth consecutive Down Senior Football Championship. The latest triumph marks a significant milestone for Kilcoo, as it has now won an astonishing 12 Down county titles in just 13 seasons, an unprecedented feat for a club representing a small but proud village in the heart of south Down. The level of dominance and consistency that Kilcoo has shown over the past decade is nothing short of extraordinary. It speaks volumes about the dedication, talent and spirit of the players and the wider Kilcoo community supporting them.

Yesterday's county final between Burren and Kilcoo showcased the talent that lies in our county, with Burren also putting in a commendable performance. Two clubs from south Down competing for the prestigious Frank O'Hare Cup is a testament to the strength and competitiveness of football in that area. While Burren may have fallen short on this occasion, the players can definitely hold their heads high after a valiant effort in a hard-fought contest. I have no doubt that they will come back better and stronger.

As Kilcoo looks ahead to the Ulster Championship, I wish it the very best in the upcoming clash with Cavan in a few weeks' time. I have no doubt that Kilcoo will approach that challenge with the tenacity and determination that has become its trademark. I eagerly await Kilcoo's continued success as it seeks to progress. Furthermore, I hope to be standing here again in the near future, extending my best wishes for its all-Ireland campaign. Comhghairdeas

[Translation: Congratulations]

to Kilcoo, agus ádh mór

[Translation: and good luck]

on the road ahead.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

Maedi visna (MV) is a highly infectious viral disease affecting goats and sheep. It is transmitted through the ingestion of milk from a virus-infected sheep and within flocks through direct contact or contamination. It has no impact on human health. MV is a wasting disease in sheep, similar to lung cancer. The symptoms lie dormant for several years, so it is detected only in older animals. The disease is currently widespread in Great Britain and the Irish Republic. Until recently, Northern Ireland had just nine flocks testing positive for MV, low enough to maintain our MV-free status.

At present, DAERA samples any new arrivals into Northern Ireland from outside the island of Ireland to keep Northern Ireland MV-free. Animals from GB flocks that do not have an MV-free accreditation are sampled in isolation five months after importation. Animals from MV-free accredited flocks from mainland Europe and the Irish Republic are sampled on arrival. It is really disturbing that DAERA plans to stop carrying out that testing. It is proposed that 2025 will be a transition year for the industry to implement its own scheme. The DAERA recommendation is that farmers test their own sheep six months apart to get MV-free accreditation. That places further financial pressure on our farmers. Any potential scheme is likely to be expensive, which may affect buy-in. It would also affect how marts and shows work, with accredited and non-accredited animals needing to be kept apart with separate sheds and classes, as has been seen in Great Britain. Due to the different schemes operating in Northern Ireland and Great Britain, that could have a negative financial and social effect on the industry.

Last week, over 100 commercial and pedigree sheep farmers met to voice their concerns. The industry is willing to act responsibly but would prefer Northern Ireland testing to lie with the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) and be administered by Animal Health and Welfare NI (AHWNI). If DAERA does not keep up border checks on the importation of sheep, MV sheep could be imported into Northern Ireland. DAERA has said that it needs to look at the cost of border checks, which need to be funded by industry. Despite the upheaval being based on budget cuts to the DAERA Veterinary Service, when I asked the Minister for the cost of testing for MV in each of the past 10 years, he told me that it was not retained in a readily available format. What financial advice is DAERA basing the cuts on, given the vulnerability being thrust on the sheep sector by this ill-thought-through proposal? Keeping Northern Ireland MV-free is vital for animal health and trading status. One farmer said that MV has the potential to be the bovine TB of the sheep sector. That is something that the House should not allow to happen.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

From just before sunset on Friday to dusk on Saturday marked Yom Kippur. Across the world but particularly in the homes of our many Jewish friends and colleagues, it is by observing their prayers that members of the Jewish faith seek to atone and ask God for his forgiveness. Yom Kippur culminates with Neilah and the sounding of the shofar. During the religious services, one of the most poignant moments is the saying of Yizkor, the memorial prayer for the recently deceased. Anyone with a degree of empathy will share in that with our Jewish community, this year of all years, on Yom Kippur. Equally, the attempts to denigrate that religious observance by some, including university student bodies, left-wing and pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah terrorist supporters or just those who cannot resist joining in with their base antisemitism, need to be roundly condemned.

Last week, memorial services for the victims of 7 October were held in Belfast and Dublin. In the spirit of the Yizkor prayer, large numbers of Gentiles, including me, stood in solidarity with our Jewish friends and colleagues in Israel, the United Kingdom, Ireland and elsewhere. I thank the friends of the Jewish community who organised those events, especially the one in Belfast. I was pleased that the deputy First Minister attended and expressed solidarity on behalf of us to our beleaguered but still proud local Jewish community and to the victims of 7 October.

That was in marked contrast, however, to the event in Dublin, where neither the president nor the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste could find the time to attend the memorial to 1,119 victims of terror, torture and sexual violence, nor did they bother to attend any Yom Kippur memorials. Indeed, a Fine Gael councillor, Councillor Rane, even expressed base antisemitic tropes during a Dublin City Council debate. It seems that some members of society on this island are deemed to be less equal than others. It is also apparent to any dispassionate observer that the Irish Republic is more interested in opening embassies in Tehran and its parties more interested in inviting the Iranian embassy to their conferences than it is in tackling its ingrained and growing institutional antisemitism. While Dublin is happy to cloak itself in intolerance, it is good to see that many others are calling that out, especially in Brussels, Berlin and, above all, Washington. That, at least, gives reason for hope as Yom Kippur for the Hebrew year 5785 passes.

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

I want to touch briefly on some good news, some frustrating news and some more concerning developments. First, train services have begun, with the restarting of full cross-border services, at Grand Central station. One hundred years ago, we had a thriving rail network across the island. One of the tragedies of the 20th century in transport terms was the fact that that rail network was butchered, particularly in the west of what became Northern Ireland and in relation to cross-border lines.

We now have the opportunity, from the base of Grand Central station, which is the biggest transport hub in Ireland, to start to grow and build the future that is set out for us in the all-island strategic rail review. I agree with my DUP colleague across the Chamber that it should have included the county of Fermanagh, and we will stand with anybody in that county who wishes to have rail connections there too.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

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

It is important to mark the opening of Grand Central and the restarting of those cross-border rail services as an example of the connectivity that we can build on the island. I look forward to getting the train to Dublin from the new Grand Central and all of the opportunities that that provides.

I want to touch on the related matter of the disruption that will be caused in Belfast for commuters and other road users. Following on from Mr McReynolds's remarks, I agree with him, and it is vital to say that a strategic priority for the Department for Infrastructure and for the Executive more generally should be to do all that we can to get people out of their cars and on to public transport, using active travel where they can. That said, there will still be people who need to use their cars for various reasons, such as accessibility or a lack of public transport infrastructure where they are. We need to be clear and communicate properly with people who will be affected by the disruption that, where they can, they should avail themselves of public transport or, if they can, avoid making that journey. Also, we should tell people to use as much public transport as they can and to use active transport opportunities. However, there is a particular onus on the Minister and the Department to be clear and to communicate better with people this year on the closure of Durham Street.

Finally, I express some regret and concern — I hope that we do not have to return to this subject — at the appearance of a sign at a point on Durham Street that is also known as "Boyne Bridge", which is due to be deconstructed for the purposes of building access to Grand Central station. I recognise that there are architectural and other historical and cultural reasons why what is called the Boyne Bridge has resonance for people. It cannot be acceptable to put up signs that carry, implicitly or explicitly, a threat to people. We have to move beyond that in this society. We have a debate on a related matter tomorrow on Opposition time, but —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

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

— I have to say that that is completely unacceptable.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank Members for their statements.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On Thursday, at the meeting of the Executive Office Committee, a decision was taken unilaterally by the Chair of the Committee to move the Committee into private session. Standing Orders are clear that that is a decision for the Committee as a whole, not a unilateral act by the Chair. Given that, in breach of Standing Orders, permission was not sought and nor was agreement given for that Committee to move into private session and that the public were denied the ability to scrutinise proceedings, will you advise what action the House can take when a Chair of a Committee breaches the clear Standing Orders that are set down before all Members?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I received a letter as well on this. Further, I understand that the Chair acknowledges that that was not in order and accepts that that is the case. Therefore, I consider the matter closed. Members may wish to raise it at the Committee itself, but there has been an acknowledgement that the Chair did not act according to the rules of the Assembly in that instance.

I thank Members for their statements. Quite a lot of Members did not get called to make a statement today. We appreciate that and will try to facilitate it tomorrow. Members may take their ease for a moment before we move to the next item of business.

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

Executive Committee Business

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The next item of business is a motion to approve a statutory rule (SR).

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I beg to move

That the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Registration of Deaths and Still-Births) (Extension) (No.3) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024 be approved.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Thank you. The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Minister to open the debate.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As Members will be aware, the order would extend powers introduced in the Coronavirus Act 2020 relating to the registration of deaths and stillbirths for a further six months until 24 March 2025.

The specific powers in the order concern the way in which the registrations are conducted. First, they enable individuals to choose to register a death or stillbirth remotely. Although they can opt to come into a registration office in person, the provisions give the next of kin a choice to conduct the registration over the phone if they wish. Secondly, the powers enable participants in the registration process to exchange important documents electronically, rather than requiring the grieving next of kin to take one piece of paper from a doctor to the registrar and another from the registrar to the undertaker. Those exchanges can happen electronically.

It will be clear to the Assembly why the provisions were important in the context of the pandemic. The temporary changes to the registration process reduced the need for face-to-face contact both for grieving and sometimes vulnerable members of the public and for registration staff. They enabled the registration system to continue to operate even when its services were, sadly, under significant pressure. However, in the four years that have passed since the start of the pandemic, those arrangements have become the normal means by which the vast majority of such registrations take place. They have helped the registration process to be more efficient and productive, and they carry the support of stakeholders, ensuring the smooth passing of important documents and enabling registration staff to handle any errors or omissions in advance.

Most importantly, the provisions ease the burden on grieving members of the public. When someone is coming to terms with the death of a loved one, it is right that we should not burden them unnecessarily. While offering them a choice about how to register a death and conducting some of the paperwork electronically may seem like small things, they can make a big difference. In short, although the powers were introduced as the pandemic took hold, they have become the established means by which deaths and stillbirths are registered, and they have helped the registration service to become more modern, efficient and empathetic. Given the positive effect of the provisions and as I set out in the debate on our earlier extension order, it is right that we should look to make the temporary powers permanent, rather than continuing to depend on the Coronavirus Act. We have used the time provided by that earlier extension order to progress the permanent powers.

I had hoped that we would not be in the position of requesting a further extension today. It was our understanding that we could make the required changes through secondary legislation. However, in the final checks, it became apparent that we did not have the powers that we required to effect all the changes that we needed to make to the Births and Deaths Registration Order 1976. The draft regulations had to be set aside and an alternative route found through primary legislation. I thank the Chair and members of the Finance Committee, who carried out the scrutiny of the order.

At my direction, officials from the General Register Office (GRO) have been working with the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) to draw together the primary legislation required to make the powers permanent. The Bill that they are working towards will provide for the electronic transfer of documents between stakeholders and the registration of deaths and stillbirths by phone.

Bringing forward the Bill will also enable me to progress a new baby loss certificate scheme that recognises the suffering of families who endure the pain of loss before 24 weeks of pregnancy. Members will know that losses early in pregnancy are not recognised by existing legislation here. The scheme will provide official recognition to parents who have suffered the tragedy of losing a baby before 24 weeks. Sadly, that loss is often met with silence and stigma, with many parents feeling isolated in their grief. I am determined that those parents' heartache and grief is recognised in a scheme similar to those in Scotland and England. That is why I have directed my officials to include in the Bill provision for the legal basis for that new voluntary scheme. Details of how it will operate and delivery mechanisms are being developed by my officials and officials in the Department of Health. Those arrangements will be in regulations and will be brought to the Assembly for consideration.

Today's extension order will, consequently, provide the time required to finalise primary legislation to make permanent the temporary powers of the Coronavirus Act. It will also afford the space needed to make provision for a baby loss certificate scheme. We hope that, if required, any further extension order from March 2025 would be needed for only a relatively limited period to allow the legislation to complete its passage. In bringing the extension order, I recognise that it is not desirable to continue to depend on the powers of the Coronavirus Act. However, I hope that the Assembly will be reassured by our determination to end the use of those orders by the work that is under way to make the relevant powers permanent and will look favourably on the motion.

Should the extension not be approved, the existing powers will fall, with a return to pre-COVID procedures required. Irrespective of their personal circumstances, relatives would again be required to attend registration offices and to convey paper forms between doctors, registration staff and undertakers. As I set out in a previous debate on these matters, that would be a retrograde step that is not in the interests of the registration service, funeral directors or the public. I hope that the Assembly concurs.

I recommend a further extension of the powers included in the order, which have enabled the provision of a modern, empathetic registration service over the past four years. By extending the provisions today, we will be able to continue to provide the service that has been welcomed by stakeholders and will create space to allow for permanent legislation to be put in place. I commend the order to the Assembly.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Thank you, Minister.

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

The Committee for Finance has had extensive written and oral briefings on these legislative provisions and on the Department's work in this area. The Committee previously agreed statutory rules made under the provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 relating to the recording of deaths and stillbirths.

The most recent of those briefings was at the Committee's meeting of 11 September, when GRO officials briefed Committee members on the work that was being advanced on the proposed death and stillbirths legislation. The Department indicated that it would be bringing forward primary legislation to put on a statutory basis those measures for registering deaths and stillbirths by phone and electronically that had been made temporarily under the Coronavirus Act 2020. At its meeting on 11 September, the Committee agreed that it was content with the proposed statutory rule and with extending the temporary provision made under the Act until the end of March 2025.

During that briefing with GRO officials last month, Committee members raised the issue of whether the deaths and stillbirths Bill could contain provision for baby loss certificates. The Committee discussed that issue again, in closed session, at its meeting of 18 September. That discussion ranged across a number of options in relation to the Bill legislating for baby loss certificates. The Committee agreed to write to the Department to seek further clarification on what is possible within the existing draft Bill, including whether there is any potential to widen the draft Bill to allow for legislative provision for baby loss certificates, as well as to seek any further detail around logistics and resources for making such provision.

The Committee is somewhat frustrated with the time that it has taken for the provision on the registration of deaths and stillbirths online and by phone to be drafted into permanent, stand-alone primary legislation: there have been dead ends and false dawns. However, the Committee very much welcomes the Minister's decision to incorporate baby loss certificates into that legislation, following members' requests that she do so. That news is particularly welcome and poignant coming, as it does, at the end of Baby Loss Awareness Week.

The Committee considered the SR at its meeting on 2 October. While the Examiner of Statutory Rules had not yet reported on the rule at that point, members had no objection to the rule, subject to her report. At its meeting on 9 October, the Committee considered the Examiner's report, which indicated that she had no objection to the rule and recommended that it be approved by the Assembly.

As the Minister knows, the Committee will play an active role in holding her and her officials to account and ensuring that baby loss certificates are included in the Bill, finally making those provisions permanent. Committee members stand ready to work with her to create a change that will make a huge difference to parents who have suffered the tragedy of losing a child during pregnancy. The Committee supports the motion to approve the regulations.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will speak, briefly, in my party capacity. The delay in turning this into stand-alone primary legislation is deeply frustrating, and it is deeply frustrating that we were told that legislation would be delivered more quickly than has been the case. The use of what were effectively emergency provisions from the pandemic is, to put it mildly, not ideal. It is necessary and proper that we move expeditiously to deliver legislation that will put the use of electronic means to register deaths and stillbirths on a proper, permanent statutory basis. That is entirely sensible. It is humane, and it will be welcomed by people who have experienced bereavements and also by doctors and those in the funeral-care world who interact with those processes each day. It is completely sensible, but it is also necessary for us to legislate.

We are doing a lot of debating in the Chamber at the minute on motions, some of which are necessary and vital. Opposition day motions are certainly a critical part of holding the Executive to account, but, when it comes to Executive party time, one might argue that we are doing a lot of going through the motions. The three letters after our names stand for Member of the Legislative Assembly, so we should be here to legislate. We, as yet, have not seen very much primary legislation from the Executive. This should have been an example of bringing something relatively straightforward before the Assembly, so I not-so-gently encourage the Executive and the Minister to bring forward that stand-alone legislation sooner rather than later. I think that, when that happens, it will find a broad base of support in the Assembly.

Finally, I add my party's reflections to the importance of baby loss certificates, which the Minister touched on in her speech. I think that everybody understands, particularly given that we have just come through Baby Loss Awareness Week, how extraordinarily difficult it can be for people who experience that trauma in their life or in the life of their family. This is one small legislative step that, I think, will enable people to feel that that awful, traumatic event is not a burden that they have to carry by themselves, in private. The otherwise stark bureaucracy of the state has found a way of poignantly helping them to mark and remember the very awful loss that they have suffered. I look forward to working with the Minister and the Department to make that legislative change.

Nicola Brogan (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for bringing the motion to the Assembly, and I am happy to speak in support of it. As has been outlined, the legislation was introduced during the pandemic to allow the registration of deaths and stillbirths to take place via telephone and for documents such as death certificates to be sent electronically. That was necessary to allow registrations to continue during the pandemic while minimising face-to-face contact. The height of the COVID pandemic was a difficult time for all of us, but especially for those who lost loved ones. We, as a society, pulled together, adapted and made changes to help to save lives and ease the burden on our incredible healthcare workers. During that time, we learned new and more efficient ways of doing things. For example, we discovered the value in practices such as remote working. We also learned that there was a different way to handle the often traumatic issue of registering deaths and stillbirths. The changes to how deaths and stillbirths were registered made the process more efficient and eased the burden on health workers and infrastructure while maintaining the appropriate checks and balances to ensure that deaths were still properly investigated. Crucially, those changes also eased the burden on grieving loved ones.

The public have widely availed themselves of the option to register deaths via telephone since its introduction. It has reduced the administrative burden on those who deliver the service. To revert to the old system at this stage would only cause stress and confusion, so I am happy to support the motion to ensure that those provisions do not lapse.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I recall the previous extension order, six months ago — the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Registration of Deaths and Still-Births) (Extension) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024 — and the commitments, promises and reassurances that were given to the House at that time. Unfortunately, those commitments and reassurances counted for nothing with regard to the procedures that were adopted and promised at that time. I understand how it took place and why that happened, and I am fully supportive of these measures being contained in primary legislation. They are valid measures that were put in place as a common-sense approach during the pandemic. However, the fact is that those common-sense measures are still wrapped up in coronavirus legislation that has caused massive damage to our people.

In less than two hours' time, in the Long Gallery, there will be about 100 people who have been damaged by the measures of the Coronavirus Act. That time will soon be known forever as a period of shame for the Department of Health and the zombie Assembly at that time. It is good and right that the Minister moves as quickly as possible to disassociate her Department from the Coronavirus Act. I note the commitment from the Minister and the GRO. I know that their destiny has not been their own in this regard, despite the promises that were made six months ago.

The silver lining to the fact that we have to further extend the legislation is that it will bring primary legislation that can be scrutinised by the House in the proper way. There will be a prize at the end of that: the enabling clause for baby loss certificates. The House should and will support that. My party, the DUP, has pushed for that, and I am so glad that the Minister and the Committee for Finance have adopted that position. I thank the Minister and record my gratitude for her activity in that regard. I thank the members of the GRO who came to the Committee when requested to do so and fronted up on all of that. I record my gratitude to them also.

I recognise the work that the Finance Minister and the GRO have put in. I look forward to seeing primary legislation that includes the enabling clause for baby loss certificates. Hopefully, the House can pass a Bill that is of good worth and that will make a real difference to people out there, especially those who lose loved ones.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

The extension to the legislation will hopefully make very difficult, tragic and heartbreaking experiences, such as child deaths and stillbirths, a bit less painful to navigate. I am sure that most people outside the Building will welcome the change or have done so.

The Minister should be aware of a matter that I raised at Committee with the officials, who are in the Chamber. It was about the lack of provision and support for people who do not have English as their first language and how much consideration had been given to that. Obviously, society here predominantly uses English everywhere. Navigating that can be difficult at the best of times for people who might not have been born here or who do not have English as their first language, so I can only imagine how difficult it would be for anybody to navigate the situation of having a stillbirth or the death of a child. It is really awful to think of.

Some translation services are provided by the GRO, about which we were briefed last week or the week before through correspondence, but I am not sure whether those are wide-ranging enough. Given that the legislation has, once again, been delayed, this issue has not been considered as part of the original drafting, so I urge the Minister and her officials to look at that aspect. It might affect only a small number of people, but if we can make a painful and tragic experience much easier to navigate for people who do not have English as their first language, it will be good legislation and in line with the other things mentioned by Members. I urge the Minister and her team to look at that.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call the Minister to conclude and wind up the debate.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.]

I thank the Members who have commented on the order and welcome their remarks about it. I reiterate my thanks to the Chairperson and members of the Finance Committee for their scrutiny. As Members have reflected, our objective with the order is to continue to provide a registration service that meets the public's needs and to allow time to develop the permanent legislation to replace the existing Coronavirus Act provisions.

I will deal with a couple of points that were raised by Members. I acknowledge and recognise the sentiments and frustrations that have been recorded by members of the Finance Committee. Obviously, the issue only came to light when we were doing the final checks on the drafting of the legislation. I am sure that Mr Frew does not doubt the sincerity of my remarks in the previous debate on this. It is something that we want to move on as quickly as possible.

I put on record my thanks to my officials in the GRO for all their work on the order and on the development of the new baby loss certificate scheme and for finding a way in which to progress the scheme through the legislation. As Mr Frew said, it is a silver lining of the slight delay that we now face. It is not ideal to have a temporary scheme. We are therefore absolutely committed to putting it on a permanent statutory footing as soon as possible.

To touch on Mr Carroll's comments, I will discuss with my officials the issue of individuals who do not have English as their first language.

In closing, I say that I hope that the Assembly will support the order. The powers that it contains have enabled us to provide a modern, efficient and empathetic registration service during a critical time. By extending the powers today, we can sustain the service while creating an opportunity to embed the provisions permanently in law. I therefore ask Members to approve the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Registration of Deaths and Still-Births) (Extension) (No.3) Order 2024.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the Coronavirus Act 2020 (Registration of Deaths and Still-Births) (Extension) (No.3) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024 be approved.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That the draft Human Medicines (Amendments Relating to Naloxone and Transfers of Functions) Regulations 2024 be approved.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Minister to open the debate on the motion.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I seek the Assembly's approval for the making of a draft statutory instrument that will amend the Human Medicines Regulations (HMRs) 2012 to lawfully expand access to naloxone, which is a life-saving medication that reverses the effects of an overdose of opioid drugs. In addition, it makes amendments to keep the regulations current by updating references to Public Health England (PHE) and the Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) in Northern Ireland, following the dissolution of those two bodies.

I will start with naloxone. We are all aware of the devastating impact that illicit drugs can have. Drugs destroy lives, tear families apart and make our streets less safe. Drug misuse deaths have doubled since 2012. The impact of synthetic opioids on opioid-related deaths is yet to be fully understood. In 2022, opioids were involved in 60% of drug misuse deaths in Northern Ireland. Such deaths are avoidable.

Through their substance use strategy, 'Preventing Harm, Empowering Recovery', the Northern Ireland Executive have prioritised reducing alcohol- and drug-related deaths. Naloxone is a highly effective antidote to opioid overdose and, in an emergency, can be administered quickly and safely by anyone. It is considered a very safe medicine for the recipient and the person administering the drug, and it is already widely used in the United Kingdom and worldwide.

Currently, however, exemptions in the HMRs allow only drug and alcohol treatment services to supply naloxone to individuals for future use — usually called "take-home naloxone" — which limits the reach of that life-saving medicine. The draft amending statutory instrument that is being debated proposes two key changes. The first is to expand the list of services and professionals named in the regulations that can give out naloxone without a prescription. It means that professionals such as registered nurses and probation officers will be able to provide take-home supplies of naloxone, where appropriate, should they wish to do so. The second proposed change is to establish national registration services across the whole United Kingdom. That will enable all other services and professionals that were unable to be named in the legislation, including housing and homelessness services, to register and to procure naloxone.

That will mean easier access to naloxone for people at risk and for their loved ones. In short, the legislation will save lives.

It will not be a mandatory requirement for services or professionals listed in the legislation to supply naloxone. The powers in the draft legislation are enabling, simply allowing the supply of naloxone without a prescription. The intention is not to create new burdens for services but instead to provide an opportunity for provision based on local need. UK-wide consultations on the proposals have taken place, and the proposals received significant support across the United Kingdom. In Northern Ireland, 100% strongly agreed or agreed with the proposed list of named services and professionals that could supply naloxone without a prescription.

There are safeguards in the proposals, including the establishment of mandatory training requirements for new services and professionals who wish to take on the role. That training would give participants an understanding of appropriate practices around storing and supplying naloxone, and how to support an individual being supplied with the drug.

The Assembly should be assured to note that the infrastructure is already in place in Northern Ireland to deal with an expansion in the number of those who can supply naloxone. Since 2012, the Public Health Agency (PHA) has commissioned and operated a take-home naloxone programme. Naloxone was supplied 1,861 times in the financial year 2022-23. Since the take-home naloxone scheme was put in place in 2012, it has successfully reversed an overdose in over 1,765 cases. PHA has mandatory training in opioid overdose awareness, naloxone administration and supplier training, which all naloxone suppliers must complete initially and refresh every two years. In preparation for expansion of the scheme, PHA will transfer that training to an online option to target larger numbers.

There are technical amendments in the SI in relation to the transfer of functions following the dissolution of Public Health England in 2020 and the regional Health and Social Care Board here in 2022. In Northern Ireland, as part of our programme of work to transform our health and social care system, the regional HSCB closed on the 31 March 2022, and functions migrated to a newly formed strategic planning and performance group in my Department. Many of PHE's functions have been transferred to the United Kingdom Health Security Agency, an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). The proposed amendments will ensure that legislation reflects recent changes in the healthcare systems in England and Northern Ireland.

My officials attended the Health Committee on 12 September to outline the full policy intent of the draft SI and to respond to any questions that the Committee might have had prior to its possibly being debated in the Assembly. I am pleased to confirm that the Committee raised no issues on the policy intent. The Committee also indicated that it was content, following further consideration of the regulations, when the SI was laid in draft form at the Northern Ireland Assembly Business Office on 24 September. It is with the Committee's support, therefore, that I bring the SI before the wider Assembly and its Members. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I welcome the opportunity to confirm the Health Committee's support for the motion. As the Minister outlined, the statutory instrument amends the 2012 Human Medicines Regulations, the set of laws that regulate the licensing, manufacture, wholesale dealing and sale or supply of medicines for human use.

Departmental officials briefed the Committee on 12 September and advised that the instrument would expand access to naloxone products: life-saving medication that can reverse the effects of an overdose caused by natural or synthetic opioids. Officials advised that anyone could administer naloxone hydrochloride in an emergency; that it is considered a very safe medicine for the recipient and the person administering it; but that, although the medicine is widely used, current legislation allows only drug and alcohol treatment services to supply it to individuals for future use, which limits the reach of the life-saving medicine.

The Committee is content with the two key changes that the statutory instrument is intended to bring about. First, it intends to expand the list of services and professionals named in the regulations who are able to give out naloxone without a prescription. The regulations will allow people who work for the police, the Prison Service, probation services and youth justice services, as well as registered healthcare professionals, to supply naloxone products, provided those individuals have undergone appropriate training. Secondly, national registration services may be established to enable other services and professionals not named in the legislation to register and procure naloxone. Allowing a much wider range of services, healthcare professionals and organisations to supply naloxone on a take-home basis for use in a future emergency that involves opioid overdose could significantly reduce the number of deaths from opioid overdoses.

The Committee heard that drug misuse deaths have doubled in the UK since 2012. In 2022, opioids were involved in 60% of drug misuse deaths in the North of Ireland. As the Minister outlined, naloxone was used 1,861 times in 2023-24, reversing an overdose in 1,765 cases. It is sad that we have such high levels of overdose and drug addiction in our society. For families who have, sadly, lost people to overdose, the loss is devastating. The more people in the community who have this medicine, the more lives can be saved.

The Committee supports the powers in the legislation being enabling rather than mandatory. They allow the supply of naloxone without a prescription. The Committee supports the inclusion of safeguards that establish mandatory training requirements for new services and professionals. The Committee sought information from officials at the briefing on 12 September on the model to be used to administer the medicine, and the Committee welcomes the move towards an increasing use of the nasal spray, which is considered to be a harm-reduction model. The Department assured the Committee that the infrastructure is already in place in the North to deal with the expansion of those who can supply naloxone, mainly through work by the Public Health Agency and its take-home naloxone programme, which is a regional scheme that has operated since 2012. The Public Health Agency will have a crucial role in the implementation of the legislation, including the roll-out of training.

The Committee endorsed the policy merits of the statutory instrument as well as the technical amendments that the instrument makes to the regulations regarding the dissolution of Public Health England and the Health and Social Care Board. On 3 October, the Committee agreed to recommend that the statutory instrument be approved by the Assembly.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I rise very briefly to give my support to this move. It appears to us that the UK-wide changes are common sense and that extending the range of professionals and services that can offer take-home naloxone to those at risk of an overdose should be widely supported. The ability for people to save lives, with the extended use and the extended provision of those who can use and administer naloxone, is something that we should all support. Today, we acknowledge the lives that have been lost to overdose and remember that each one is a person with a family and a life that has been lost to drugs. That is deeply regrettable. Approving this measure will help the situation, but we should never forget the people who have lost their lives to drugs and the families that have been left impacted. I simply want to say, Minister, that we support this, and I hope that you manage to enact it.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

On behalf of the Alliance Party, I will speak in favour of the draft Human Medicines (Amendments Relating to Naloxone and Transfers of Functions) Regulations 2024. As the Minister, the Committee Chair and Diane have outlined, we have discussed the regulations at the Health Committee. We took evidence from departmental officials on Thursday 12 September 2024.

Naloxone is a life-saving medication that is used to reverse the effect of an overdose of opioid drugs. As a nurse, I am very aware of the importance of that medication to saving lives. The proposals in the regulations will widen the availability of naloxone by expanding the list of services and professionals who can give out naloxone without a prescription, allowing the appropriate use of take-home naloxone.

The regulations also establish a national registration service to allow relevant services and professionals not outlined in the legislation such as housing and homelessness services to register and procure naloxone.

As the Minister mentioned, tragically, drug misuse deaths have doubled since 2012, and, in 2022, opioids were involved in 60% of drug misuse deaths in Northern Ireland. The evidence in favour of naloxone is clear. It was supplied 1,861 times in 2023-24, and, since the introduction of the Public Health Agency's take-home naloxone scheme in 2012, it has successfully reversed an overdose in over 1,765 cases. The regulations will expand the availability of take-home naloxone and provide essential training for naloxone suppliers. The training is to be completed initially and then refreshed every two years. I was happy to hear from the Minister that it will be expanded with the availability of an online version.

The levels of overdose and drug addiction in our society are truly tragic, as others have mentioned. Like other MLAs, I have met families who have, sadly, lost relatives to overdose, and their loss remains heartbreaking. As an MLA for East Antrim, I have seen the hard work of organisations dealing with drug addiction, including Extern, Larne YMCA and Carrick Connect. Any support that we can provide to such organisations is essential, and the widening availability of naloxone should assist in the prevention of loss of life as a consequence of drug addiction.

Naloxone is used in overdose prevention centres around the world, which have prevented thousands of deaths, reduced the spread of serious disease and improved communities without increasing drug-related crime in the countries where they operate. I hope that the Minister is considering such a centre for Northern Ireland, as it would undoubtedly save more lives.

This is a welcome step towards a harm-reduction model for issues around drug use in Northern Ireland. I thank the Minister for bringing the regulations today, and I encourage all Members to support the wider availability of this life-saving medication.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call on the Minister to conclude and wind up the debate.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Chair of the Health Committee and the other Members who spoke for their contributions. It was important that the Chair talked about the availability of the nasal spray, an application that is to be welcomed. Diane Dodds made a very important point encouraging us all to acknowledge the lives lost to the use and misuse of illicit drugs and not just the lost lives but the impact on families and communities. I thank Mr Donnelly for highlighting the online training that the Public Health Agency will undertake, which will expand the reach of those who administer naloxone.

I firmly believe that the introduction of the legislative changes will widen access to a life-saving medicine. Any death from an illicit drug is tragic. It is also preventable, and I am pleased that we are taking this significant step forward in helping to reduce drug-related deaths. I often talk about my desire to deliver better outcomes: today, collectively, we are doing just that, Therefore, I commend the regulations to the Assembly.

Question put and agreed to. Resolved:

That the draft Human Medicines (Amendments Relating to Naloxone and Transfers of Functions) Regulations 2024 be approved.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That the draft Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024 be approved.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed that there will be no time limit on the debate. I call the Minister to open the debate.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.]

I am pleased to bring the draft statutory instrument (SI) to the Assembly for approval.

The Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes Order 2023 is secondary legislation made under the Climate Change Act 2008 that created four vehicle emissions trading schemes (VETS) and applies to new cars and vans registered in Britain from 3 January 2024. This statutory instrument, the Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024, will also be made under powers conferred by the Climate Change Act 2008. The amendment will bring the North into alignment with Britain from 1 January 2025.

At present, 63% of our overall transport emissions are from private cars. If we are to meet our collective emissions reduction targets by 2050, as required by our Climate Change Act 2022, we must focus on how we transition from petrol and diesel cars to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). In 2023, electrical vehicle (EV) car sales made up just over 16% of the new car market here, with 11·5% being purely battery electric vehicles (BEVs). That represents a greater percentage of sales in the EV car market here than in Scotland or Wales in 2023.

We now have a network of over 630 charge points, and the availability of rapid chargers has increased by over 300% over the past 18 months. It is estimated that 80% of EV owners are also able to charge from home and generally need to charge their cars only once or twice a week. Due to the increase in battery capacity and in the number of public charge points that are within range, the anxiety of potential owners is being reduced and the availability of new models is attracting new buyers to the market. That is a very encouraging position.

With the introduction of the vehicle emissions trading schemes, we have the opportunity to continue to accelerate the uptake of ZEVs by setting sales quotas for vehicle manufacturers. The introduction of VETS will give confidence to the private sector-led charging infrastructure providers that the number of EVs here will continue to increase.

We have seen evidence of momentum building, with the recent announcements from charge point operators securing further private investment for the expansion of the charging network on forecourts and the installation of charging points at schools and sports clubs in the heartland of our communities. I want to see that strong growth maintained in order to provide the services that EV owners will require to seamlessly move away from petrol and diesel. That will provide the commercial sector with the confidence that it requires to continue to invest in infrastructure in order to align with the targets set out in our climate change plan.

The vehicle emissions trading scheme sets targets requiring an increasing percentage of manufacturers' new car or van sales to be zero-emission vehicles and requiring CO2 emissions from non-zero-emission vehicles to be below their 2021 threshold. Emissions are measured as fleet-wide averages calculated per individual manufacturer.

The aim of VETS is to encourage the sale of an increased number of zero-emission vehicles. It is aligned with the British Government's ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2035. Its introduction here will continue the momentum that we have to accelerate the uptake of zero-emission vehicles as those quotas are achieved. However, the targets are not for the North alone but are taken from sales across Britain and here. That gives manufacturers flexibility in sales across their dealerships and across regions.

The third of three consultations on the zero-emission vehicle mandate and CO2 emissions regulations for new cars and vans in the North and in Britain opened on 30 March 2023 and closed on 24 May 2023. That was a joint consultation led by the Department for Transport (DfT), with the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Department for Infrastructure in the absence of an Executive. The consultation responses were used to finalise the design of the ZEV mandate and CO2 emissions regulations.

In response to the consultations, manufacturers overwhelmingly stated that their desire was for one scheme throughout the North and Britain. That would allow them to freely move their vehicles across these islands. That supplies an annual fleet-wide target to eligible vehicle manufacturers for registering non-zero-emission vehicles across Britain and the North. Every year, manufacturers will need to be compliant in meeting their ZEV and CO2 targets. Compliance is set out by allowances or credits that manufacturers earn meeting targets for sales and CO2 emissions.

Targets can be met in several ways. Manufacturers may meet the target percentage by averaging their sales of zero-emission vehicles in different locations — for example, dealers' sales of zero-emission vehicles in London may be higher and can offset lower zero-emission sales in more rural locations — or by earning excess credits on their CO2 emissions or their ZEV sales and transferring them from one side to the other. Manufacturers with an excess of credits may trade that excess with other manufacturers that may be in deficit and need further credits to be compliant. They can borrow credits from future years, and that will be especially useful for manufacturers that expect to be fully zero-emission in two to three years but are not now. They can bank excess credits for use in future years.

I highlight again that zero-emission vehicle percentages will be targets across Britain and here. Neither single nations nor single dealers will be expected to meet the targets on their own. The vehicle emissions trading schemes are set up to encourage the industry and not to make the targets unachievable, and manufacturers understand that the incentives will allow them to meet their targets.

The draft Order was laid before the Assembly on 9 September 2024 and is subject to the draft affirmative resolution procedure. It will come into operation on 1 January 2025, if passed by the House.

The introduction of the VET scheme is part of the critical pathway for the House to meet its climate change targets. Climate change is a concern for all of us, and the introduction of the legislation will contribute to reducing emissions from the transport sector, cleaning up our air and making our home a greener place to live and work for our families. Other critical pathways are also being explored by my Department and include the development of a suite of transport plans and continued investment in zero-emission vehicles for the public transport fleet, which will build on the legislative arrangements that I have brought to the House today.

I thank the House for its cooperation and assistance in making this major step towards achieving our climate change targets in the transport sector. I also thank the Infrastructure Committee for its scrutiny of the policy and useful feedback; the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO) for its scrutiny of the legislation; and the Department for Transport for the collaborative approach that has been taken in drafting the Order. I commend the motion to the Assembly and ask that it approve the statutory instrument.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Committee for Infrastructure.

The Committee was first briefed by the Department for Infrastructure's transport and decarbonisation officials on 22 May on the proposal to lay legislation that will bring Northern Ireland into the vehicle emissions trading schemes. At the outset, I place on record the Committee's appreciation to the departmental officials, who appeared before the Committee at particularly short notice on one occasion and provided timely responses to the issues in the course of our consideration of the legislation. I also place on record the Committee's thanks to the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA) and the Electric Vehicle Association Northern Ireland (EVANI) for their evidence on the issue.

As the Minister outlined, VETS has been in place in the rest of the UK since 3 January this year. A joint consultation for what was then known as the zero-emission vehicle mandate scheme was undertaken by other legislatures in Great Britain and the Department for Infrastructure in the absence of an Executive in 2023. The Department advised the Committee that manufacturers stated clearly that they wanted to see Northern Ireland included in the scheme. However, the absence of an Assembly meant that the legislation could not have been implemented here at that time in line with other jurisdictions. Northern Ireland is, therefore, under a different regime for CO2 emissions targets. The Department states that those targets are set to become significantly tougher to meet in 2025.

The vehicle emissions trading scheme that is being considered today introduces graduated targets that require manufacturers to increase the percentage of new electric car or van sales each year, setting out a pathway to full net zero emissions by 2035. Targets for zero-emission vehicle sales will be set at 28% for 2025 and increase yearly until 2035, at which point it will be 100%.

The move to 100% zero-emission vehicle sales will not be straightforward. We know, for example, that there are concerns about the availability of public charging infrastructure, and that impacts on consumer confidence. In oral evidence to the Committee on 18 September, EVANI highlighted that Northern Ireland's public charging infrastructure for electric vehicles lags well behind that in England, Scotland and Wales.

It is clear that we need more investment in this area, particularly when we are introducing targets for manufacturers that will impact on our local dealerships and the driving population here. Better charging infrastructure will encourage more motorists to switch to EVs and will help with meeting the targets. I welcome the investment made to date by private charging operators, which has seen an increase in the number of fast chargers available to our motorists, but Northern Ireland's inclusion in VETS would provide certainty and will be a catalyst to attracting and promoting further private investment in our charging infrastructure.

As mentioned, the Committee also heard from representatives of the NFDA. The NFDA highlighted the fact that it wishes to see a grace period for the introduction of VETS in Northern Ireland to allow dealerships time to increase supply and stock. When asked how much of a grace period NFDA wanted to see, the representatives stated that their preference was "as long as possible" but that two to three years would allow the charging infrastructure to be developed to:

"a position where consumers will adopt"

EVs.

The NFDA also proposed what it referred to as "a gentler profile of targets", although 2035 would remain as the target for the achievement of 100% electric new vehicles. The targets in the intervening years would be realigned: for example, instead of the 28% electric vehicle target for new car sales in 2025, in line with the rest of the UK, the Northern Ireland target could be 18%. The NFDA advised that there is serious concern amongst the dealer network that the automotive industry in Northern Ireland could collapse. More widely, it advised:

"Many manufacturers still do not have a clear EV plan"

and:

"Some have even indicated that, without demand stimulation from government, rather than face strict fines, they will pull out of the UK"

entirely.

The NFDA also highlighted concerns on type approval. Without diminishing the seriousness of that issue to the industry, we note that it sits outside the fundamental purpose of the statutory instrument that we are discussing. Whilst it merits wider discussion between the industry and the UK Government, it is outside the remits of the Committee, the Assembly and the Executive.

The Committee received further written evidence from EVANI in response to the NFDA's evidence. Among other things, it questioned how a grace period would align with the proposal to introduce gentler targets for Northern Ireland. EVANI also noted that the aim of achieving 100% electric new vehicle sales by 2035 would remain and argued that a two-to-three-year delay at the start would likely have the effect of creating a much steeper and more challenging path towards the end of the mandate to catch up with the rest of the United Kingdom.

On 2 October, departmental officials attended the Committee and responded to the NFDA's concerns. They highlighted the fact that the target for manufacturers applies across the UK as a whole and that no one location or dealer will specifically be required to reach 28% in 2025. It could therefore be the case that lower sales in one region will balance higher sales in another, with the overall target still being met. The officials also highlighted flexibilities in the scheme by which manufacturers can meet their targets. For example, manufacturers can use CO2 emissions credits to offset zero emission vehicle targets. They can also borrow from future years to meet their targets; trade with other manufacturers by buying or selling targets; or bank excess credits to use in future years.

In its written and oral evidence, the Department indicated that manufacturers are highly supportive of Northern Ireland being included in the scheme, as it will simplify their operations and mean that they will not have to adhere to different regimes across the jurisdictions. Officials highlighted the fact that manufacturers participate in the vehicle emissions trading schemes operational user group and are overwhelmingly keen for our inclusion to allow a more seamless flow of vehicles in the UK market.

The statutory instrument will ensure that the four UK jurisdictions operate under one scheme. The Committee questioned officials to understand the impact of diverging from the requirements of the scheme, as suggested by the NFDA. In response, officials said that, if the statutory instrument was not approved here, simultaneous consideration of the amendment to include Northern Ireland in the scheme could not be progressed in England, Scotland or Wales, as is required, and different legislation would have to be drafted for the other jurisdictions, leaving Northern Ireland out. Importantly, it would also mean that DFI would have to assume the administrative duties for the CO2 regulations that are currently undertaken by the Department for Transport. The cost for that would be around £500,000 per year.

The Committee notes from the evidence that it has received that Northern Ireland represents 2% of the total of new vehicle sales in the UK. Therefore I am not persuaded that Northern Ireland not joining the scheme would, in itself, be the determining factor for manufacturers to consider withdrawing from Northern Ireland or, indeed, the wider UK market. In their evidence to the Committee, DFI officials advised that no other body has raised concerns similar to those of the NFDA. They indicated that they were due to meet NFDA representatives at some point after their attendance at Committee. It would be helpful if the Minister was able to provide an update of any meeting that may have taken place between his officials and the NFDA. It is fair to say that members felt some reassurance about the legislation after hearing from departmental officials on 2 October, and it would be interesting to know whether officials were similarly able to provide the NFDA with clarity regarding its concerns.

All Members will be aware that the commitments contained within the Climate Change Act are statutory obligations that will require decisive and timely decisions to afford the Executive the best opportunity to meet them. Whilst this order may be only one of a number of steps needed to help us achieve these goals, it is nonetheless a significant step. However, it must be recognised that significant work is required to get us to 100% zero-emissions vehicles by 2035, including developing our charging infrastructure and increasing the connectivity of our public transport network.

To conclude my remarks as Chairperson, I can advise that, having considered the evidence received, the Committee agreed at its meeting on 2 October to recommend that the statutory instrument be approved by the Assembly.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Sinn Féin fully supports the target for net zero by 2050 for the entire island of Ireland and is therefore supportive of the Minister's plans for the vehicle emissions trading schemes as part of delivering a zero-carbon economy. Until now, there has been confusion within the industry around the issue, given that the North has been in a different position from other places across these islands. However, this legislation will bring the North into the vehicle emissions trading scheme, which is already in place across these islands. Therefore the legislation, as stated by car manufacturers, will provide clarity to give support to the overwhelming call for the North to be a part of VETS. That will ensure that they are operating under one scheme, rather than two different schemes.

I welcome the recent roll-out of the 100 new electric buses as part of a £64 million investment by the Minister to help decarbonise our public transport. While it is important that we commit ourselves to delivering carbon savings through the vehicles that we drive, we must also note that much more work needs to be done to increase and improve the infrastructure to make it viable to drive an electric or zero-emissions vehicle. The Minister will know this: we also need to continue to improve the availability and reliability of charge points and other pieces of infrastructure across the North, particularly in our rural communities, to ensure that people have the confidence and the opportunity to decarbonise their own transport. It is imperative that the transition to net zero is fair and just, and we must work to tackle emissions and develop more opportunities for sustainable travel.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

I welcome the Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024. Earlier today, during Members' statements, I mentioned the climate emergency and the need for us all to think and act differently and to challenge and stretch ourselves with ambitious targets. Joining the vehicle emissions trading scheme does just that. It will deliver significant carbon savings; mean that Northern Ireland will play its part in the UK transitioning to a zero-carbon economy; and support the industry within that transition by increasing the share of new vehicle sales made by zero-emissions vehicles, reducing carbon input and improving our air quality.

The Committee recently heard from the National Franchised Dealers Association, the Electric Vehicle Association NI and departmental officials, and we scrutinised the proposals significantly. I put on record my thanks to officials for their recent input on and clarification of concerns that were raised with us before we reached consensus in Committee.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Part 4 of the legislation references some assimilated EU law, which, unlike three other areas of law, we thankfully will now have control over. That having been said, I note that there is a cross reference to the Windsor framework, because emissions relate to product approval, which is a matter of EU law. Although the product approval provisions in the Windsor framework are not changed by the draft Order, they do relate to it. There could therefore in future be an issue with moving vehicles for sale from Great Britain to Northern Ireland if the EU emissions regime is different from that of the UK, because, notwithstanding UK emissions legislation applying, if one can sell only vehicles that meet EU emissions standards, it becomes debatable to what extent Northern Ireland's emissions regime is different from that of the EU. I would be grateful to the Minister if he can pick up on that point and address it in his response.

I also note that the Northern Ireland consultation that preceded that on the draft Order makes no reference to the UK Climate Change Act 2008. That Act is supposedly the basis on which the Order was drafted. It rather suggests, however, that the lead is being taken from the EU. The consultation document noted that the European Commission recently recommended a diesel emissions particulate number (PN) test for younger vehicles as an alternative to the current diesel smoke test.

Had there been a proper Northern Ireland consultation on the draft Order, it would have had to be done using the powers in the 2008 Act to create a UK-wide approach to zero-emissions vehicles. No reference was made to that in the consultation that was undertaken prior to validating the Order. That seems very odd, unless the Order was made on the basis of a UK-wide consultation, but why then validate it by reference to the two Northern Ireland consultations? Again, I would welcome the Minister's comments on that point when he makes his winding-up speech.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call the Minister for Infrastructure, John O'Dowd, to conclude and make a winding-up speech on the motion.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank all Members who contributed to the debate on the motion. As has been stated, the legislation will not address every element of the climate emergency actions. It will also need to be taken to other sectors. It is, however, a significant step in helping us move forward collectively to meet our ambitious climate targets. It will bring benefits each and every day to all of us through improving air quality and reducing pollution.

I will address some of the comments that Members made. The Chair outlined the NFDA's concerns, to which my officials adequately responded at the Committee. It is only right and proper that the Committee question and challenge us on those matters, which have now been clarified. I was asked when there will be a meeting with the NFDA. It is scheduled for next week, and we will answer any further questions that it may have about the draft Order. The crucial point to make is that the targets are not simply targets set for this jurisdiction. They are targets set for England, Scotland, Wales and here, so that is the basis of the legislation.

Mr Gaston commented on the Windsor framework. This is stand-alone legislation and is not impacted on by the Windsor framework.

The consultation was carried out jurisdictionally by England, Scotland, Wales and us, and the Order was drafted based on the information garnered from that consultation. There have been two consultations in that regard, so the legislation has been well tested and, in the format in which it is set out, will be proven to be beneficial to local car dealers, local consumers and our climate. I commend the statutory instrument to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (Amendment) Order 2024 be approved.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

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

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Committee Business

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The next item in the Order Paper is a prayer of annulment from the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move

That the Hops Certification (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024 [SR 2024/171] be annulled.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you, Robbie. The Business Committee has agreed that there will be no time limit on this debate. I call the Chair of the Committee to open the debate on the motion.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. This is my first speech as Chair of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. It is not the speech that I would have wished for, as I was not in the Chair for the scrutiny of these regulations; that was, in fact, my predecessor, Lord Elliott. My Committee colleagues, who are more knowledgeable on the matter, may shed more light in their speeches, and I look forward to listening to the debate.

Scrutiny of the Hops Certification (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024 began at the Committee meeting on 9 May 2024, when members considered correspondence from the Department advising of the eight-week consultation and the information that went out to stakeholders. It was noted that new European Commission-delegated and implementing regulations for hops certification came into force on 27 March, and new regulations for the import of hops, rice, cereal and sugar from third countries came into force on 20 December 2023. It was noted that EU hops legislation relating to certification and third country imports is directly applicable here under the annex of the Windsor framework.

The Committee felt that it needed a fuller oral briefing from officials, which took place on 20 June 2024, when the following points were explained in more detail. The amending statutory rule (SR) is required to provide enforcement powers for the updated EU rules. It seeks to replicate the current UK hops regulations as far as possible, with no change to underlying policy. The EU regulations for hops certification have introduced several changes, however. First, the cost of certification is to be carried by operators except where member states decide otherwise. The Rural Payments Agency, which is the certification authority for GB and Northern Ireland, does not charge operators for hops-related certificates or services. The regulations would allow that derogation to continue. Secondly, brewers must declare the particulars of hops harvested on their land to the competent certification authority by 15 November each year. Currently, that date is 31 October, so it is a two-week extension. Thirdly, the regulations increase the maximum weight where certification rules do not apply for sales to individuals for their own use. Lastly, the regulations allow for electronic documentation: digital attestations of equivalence that must accompany hops that are imported from third countries. In addition, officials stated that, in the rest of the UK, the relevant hops certification legislation remains the UK-wide Hops Certification Regulations 1979.

I understand that some members highlighted a number of concerns regarding the need for the regulations, given that there are no hop growers in Northern Ireland. Some members also highlighted the involvement of the Windsor framework and potential divergence from the United Kingdom. The next time the Committee considered the proposed SR was on 12 September, when it had before it the Department's SL1. The Committee noted that the SR was to be laid before the Assembly under the negative resolution procedure and that it was anticipated that it would come into operation on 18 October.

Members again considered the amendments to the 1979 regulations as they apply here to, first, update references to the new EU legislation for hops certification and, secondly, reflect the changes that have been introduced by the new EU legislation. A number of members again expressed concern regarding the need for separate regulations and divergence from the United Kingdom. The Committee agreed to write to the Department to request an oral briefing to get more information on the extent of that divergence.

That second oral briefing took place on 19 September. Again, some members queried the need for the specific regulations. Officials explained that DAERA could not carry out certain checks on imported hops without them and that documentary checks would continue at the point of entry. Officials went on to highlight the future-proofing elements for potential hop growers here. At that juncture, some members flagged the potential for seeking a prayer of annulment, but the Committee agreed that the Department should proceed to make the SR in the meantime.

The SR came before the Committee at its meeting of 26 September. My predecessor, Lord Elliott, reminded the Committee that it had taken a second oral briefing to attempt to address any concerns. He then put the following motion to the Committee:

"The Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs has considered SR 2024/171 Hops Certification (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024, pending the report by the Examiner of Statutory Rules, and has no objection to the rule."

The Committee then divided on the motion. There was a quorum — five members — and the Committee divided, with two Ayes and three Noes.

In conclusion, the majority of the members present at that meeting when the vote was taken agreed to put down a prayer of annulment. Members also considered the twenty-third report of the Examiner of Statutory Rules at its meeting on 10 October, which included this SR. The Committee noted that the Examiner of Statutory Rules did not draw special attention to it.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

The regulations relate to EU law that covers the certification and import of hops. As a result of the protocol, Northern Ireland is expected to stay in lockstep with changes that have been imposed by Brussels in this aspect of our economy despite those provisions continuing to treat Great Britain as a third country. Under the regime, EU attestations of equivalence are mandatory for any business that is looking to move to Northern Ireland hops or hop products that are grown or processed in Great Britain. The latest regulations would provide a digital route to demonstrating that equivalence. Ultimately, however, they do nothing to deal with the root of the problem: the fact that there are different and more stringent requirements for moving goods to Northern Ireland compared with other parts of the United Kingdom.

For producers, it is notable that the regulations bring the potential for certification, and brewers in Northern Ireland will have to declare information about hops harvested on their land by a different date in the year than brewers in Great Britain. It may well be the case that the practical impact of that divergence will be limited right now as there are no hop producers in Northern Ireland. However, that cannot be guaranteed moving forward.

The Democratic Unionist Party will continue to fight to fully restore Northern Ireland's place within the United Kingdom. That, in our view, means removing the application of EU law in our country, and the internal Irish Sea border that it creates. We cannot reconcile our commitment to that cause with support for legislation — however technical it may be — that maintains and, potentially, deepens regulatory divergence between different regions of our United Kingdom. We will not endorse regulations that continue to treat our largest and most valuable market as a foreign country. For those reasons, we will vote in favour of the prayer of annulment and encourage other parties to join with us.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am going to call John Blair. At the minute, we are sitting on six minutes left, so will you be able to —?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I will try my best; thank you.

Members of the Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, including me, have, as was made clear, been fully briefed on this issue. Before I go any further, it is vital to stress that the regulations are purely technical. As was pointed out, there are no hop growers in Northern Ireland, and there is only one, as far as I know, in Ireland. Ultimately, if the regulations are blocked, a hop grower who wishes to set up in Northern will be unable to sell their goods to market. Moreover, an eight-week consultation was launched and received not a single response.

If we allow these regulations to fall, it will lead to "trivergence" — the scenario where Northern Ireland deviates from EU and GB regulations, thereby creating three separate sets of rules, given that the laws in the EU and GB have continued to move at pace. All the while, we continue to drag the issue out. As a result, Northern Ireland would be governed by legacy EU laws, leading to a loss of enforcement powers. We also risk facing infraction proceedings from the EU, which could lead to financial penalties being imposed on the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs; penalties that the Department cannot afford. We hardly need to be reminded of current budgetary pressures and constraints.

The DUP initiated the prayer of annulment because it believes that the regulations will lead to regulatory differences with Great Britain. However, it is evident that those differences are minimal and, in fact, one could argue, beneficial and that they do not deviate from the underlying policy position in GB. A few benefits of the regulations are as follows. First, in GB, only hard copy documentation is currently accepted. The regulations would allow for the acceptance of hard copy and digital documentation. Secondly, in GB, brewers are required to report to the Rural Payments Agency, the certification and enforcing authority, by 31 October. Under the regulations, the deadline is extended to 15 November, providing an additional two weeks for compliance and, of course, preparation. Lastly, the certification requirement is increased under the regulations from 1 kg to 5 kg, thereby excluding smaller quantities and making the process easier.

The issue before us is simply an outworking of a Brexit journey that was supported by some in the Assembly but not by my party. It was never going to be easy, and some of us said so, but we must work as best we can to ensure that there is certainty for trade and the economy.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Timothy, you are next. Will your speech take longer than five minutes?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Probably.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It will, OK.

[Laughter.]

On that basis, if you do not mind, we will go to the next item of business in the Order Paper, which is Question Time. I, therefore, propose, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 1.57 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Education

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

1. Mr Beattie asked the Minister of Education what discussions he has had with the Minister for Infrastructure in relation to ensuring there is sufficient school provision in the catchment area of new builds in central Craigavon. (AQO 944/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I have not had discussions with the Minister for Infrastructure in relation to sufficient school provision in central Craigavon. An examination of the Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon local government district, where central Craigavon is located, shows that 3,368 places were available at primary schools and 1,161 places were available at post-primary schools. The Education Authority (EA) has statutory responsibility for planning education provision that is sufficient and efficient in meeting the needs of all children and young people in an area. The EA area planning team has examined the area and has reported that, for primary schools overall, there are available places in all sectors with the exception of the grant-maintained integrated sector. There are limited places available at post-primary level. However, the demand for year 8 places within the time frame of the strategic area plan covering the period 2022-27 will decline.

Where pressure on school places arises, my Department is able to respond to it by using the temporary variation procedure. Any school that is oversubscribed can request additional places through a temporary variation, and, if there is a shortfall of provision in that sector and that area, additional places will be allocated. That ensures that the school admissions system can flex and respond to demand as and when it arises.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister, and I thank the Minister's team for winkling out the answer to that question, which I did not word very well. The point that I am making is that an awful lot of private houses are being built in central Craigavon. There is a real concern that, if that building continues at the rate that it is going, we will not have the school provision to support it. If you look at Portadown College, which is getting a new build, Portadown Integrated Primary School and Craigavon Senior High School —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question, Mr Beattie.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

— you will see that they need extra space. Will the Minister review those builds to give them that extra space?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The siting of housing developments is an area on which schools will make a case for a change in enrolment figures. That is often the case for change that comes through. If there is a new housing development, any reports that come to me will reflect what that might mean for an increase in the birth rate and potential pressures on schools. Housing developments do not necessarily, in and of themselves, translate into evidence of a need for schools, but I have outlined the flexibility with which we approach such matters as need arises.

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

Off the back of Mr Beattie's question, what role do the Minister's Department and the EA play in discussing with councils the formation of local development plans (LDPs)? I ask that because a fantastic new school — Mill Strand Integrated School and Nursery — has been built in Portrush, but there are ongoing road safety concerns due to its being in a built-up area.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Department does not engage with other Departments to determine which schools will be announced, but, when it comes to taking into account local development plans, the council can certainly engage with the EA and the Department on those, and, where a request comes forward, it is expected that the EA will participate.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

This is an important issue. So far, we have discussed only new builds and the capacity of schools. One issue that the Minister's Department has taken up and is doing well on is the school enhancement programme (SEP), which not only creates capacity but enhances facilities. Will the Minister try to ensure that the EA responds to the business cases for school enhancement programmes in a more appropriate manner than it has done? I think in particular of Carrick Primary School in Lurgan, where the process of getting the school enhancement programme has gone on for many years.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

OK, we get the gist.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member raises a valid point about the processes involved in the school enhancement programme. There are minor works schemes, the school enhancement programme and new capital builds. I have raised concerns about the time that it can take to go through that process. The Department is actively engaging with the EA to establish whether there is a better way of taking forward school enhancement programme processes.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

2. Mr Harvey asked the Minister of Education to outline how schools are assessed for eligibility for refurbishment projects. (AQO 945/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Major refurbishment projects are assessed through the school enhancement programme, which targets investment to address immediate and pressing accommodation needs in schools. The second call to the school enhancement programme closed for applications from school managing authorities in February 2017. The applications were assessed against key criteria, such as rationalisation, suitability, condition and the percentage of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) and allocated free school meals. The selection criteria will be reviewed in advance of any future calls for the SEP.

Minor refurbishment projects, which are typically up to £1 million, are considered through the minor works scheme. Unfortunately, the demand for investment far exceeds the budget available, so difficult decisions have been required to prioritise works to keep schools open, keep pupils safe and provide education access for the most vulnerable. Many schools across the estate are in urgent need of investment, and I am delighted to have progressed seven SEP projects to procurement earlier this year. Unfortunately, the number of projects that I am able to progress is restricted due to the challenging budget position and SEN placements. I assure you that I will continue to make the case for increased investment in the education estate to allow much-needed projects to be delivered.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Thank you, Minister. How does a school apply for minor works for refurbishment?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A number of schools that I have visited have highlighted minor works schemes that are necessary. Presently, we are trying to meet the need around inescapable statutory requirements, such as health and safety, fire protection and other statutory obligations around the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. A school approaches the EA for an unavoidable minor works application in that regard, and the EA then takes the school through that process.

I very much want to get to a place where we deliver so much more by way of the refurbishment and enhancement of our school estate. That is why I continue to put forward comprehensive bids as part of the Executive's financial monitoring round process. I trust that all colleagues in the Assembly will support me in the case that is being made for further investment in education.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I declare an interest as a school governor for Kilbride Central Primary School. Minister, is there any advice that you can give to governors of schools that are stuck on the SEP? How do we navigate our way through the Kafkaesque approach that the EA seems to develop every time that we try to have a conversation with it about a business case?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Once a school has been successful in the SEP, it advances to the integrated design process, which is when an architect is appointed and professional support is put around that team to advance the project. I understand the frustration of the schools that were announced as part of the SEP but have not been able to advance. Once a school is able to advance to the next phase, progress can be made. I want those schools to get to at least pre-tender stage, where the design work has been completed, the feasibility studies have been carried out and a business case has been approved. The Member is right: the process takes too long, which, obviously, leads to frustration. I want the Department and EA to look at that process to see how it can be improved.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

The Minister mentioned that the key criteria will be reviewed before the next round of projects. When was the last review of the eligibility criteria?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I think that my answer referred to 2017, when there was a scheme. As things stand, I am not in a position to make another call on schools to come forward for either a school enhancement programme or a new capital build. Billions of pounds would be needed to deal with those that already have approval for a new build or a school enhancement programme. As things stand, I have no intention to open up a call for SEPs or new capital builds in the near future. If that changes, I will look at the criteria that will be used in carrying out any assessment for the schools that may come forward. There are no immediate plans to make a call in those areas.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

3. Mr McAleer asked the Minister of Education for an update on the progress of delivering the Strule Shared Education Campus. (AQO 946/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On 18 July 2024, the Northern Ireland Executive agreed that the Strule Shared Education Campus should proceed immediately to contract award and agreed the investment of £375 million on the programme. The main works construction contract was signed on 7 August 2024. I am delighted to confirm that the programme is progressing at pace and that my officials are fully engaging with all the stakeholders around every aspect of delivery. On the current programme timetable, following the pre-construction design period, campus construction is due to begin on the site in early 2025, with the full campus opening planned for September 2028.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his reply and welcome the timeline. The Minister will be aware that, when the schools relocate to the campus, there will be a number of vacated sites in the town centre that could be strategically important to the development of Omagh. Has the Department engaged with fellow stakeholders about how to maximise the opportunities presented by those sites?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The matter of any vacant sites that come about as a result of the campus opening will be one for the people and bodies that own them to discuss as to whether there are any alternative uses for them in education or, indeed, wider public service or whether they should be disposed of. The process of deciding whether the sites can be repurposed in any way or disposed of is for those who legally own them. At this stage, my Department and I have not been involved in any of those conversations.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

What is the latest position for the schools announced under the Fresh Start Agreement scheme?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Of the announced Fresh Start projects, eight have now been completed, and a further six are currently in construction. The Member will know that, unfortunately, earmarked Fresh Start funding was removed by the Labour Government and the previous Conservative Government. Ring-fenced funding is, therefore, no longer in place for the planning and construction of any of the remaining 10 Fresh Start projects that are not currently in construction contract. I have been able to place those remaining unfunded Fresh Start projects in my Department's Executive-funded major capital works programme. That will allow the projects to continue to advance in planning and design.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

4. Mr Delargy asked the Minister of Education for an update on funding from the school enhancement programme for Holy Child Primary School, Foyle. (AQO 947/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I have made funding available to progress the school enhancement programme project for Holy Child Primary School through the design stages to pre-tender stage. A decision to release to tender will be taken on a case-by-case basis, dependent on budget availability at that time. I will continue to make the case for additional capital funding for Education through the Executive.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Minister, thank you for your answer. I appreciate that you have already dealt with the SEP in quite a lot of detail. I declare an interest as a member of the board of governors and a former teacher at Holy Child Primary School.

The board of governors condemned several huts this summer and previously because of black mould. Many of your colleagues touched on the point about how quickly the EA reacts to that. If you could provide me with any more detail on that, I would greatly appreciate it.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I commend the Member for continuing to serve on the board of governors. It is important that elected reps do that, where they can, because they can add value to the school that they serve.

The Member highlighted the SEP process for that school. The tender process to appoint an integrated consultancy team (ICT) has begun. That team will take the project through its design and construction phases. The ICT will be appointed before the end of the financial year.

The Member highlighted areas in which they continue to work with EA to address some of the issues. If there is anything in particular, I would be happy to look at it directly with the EA on his behalf.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

That sounds like progress on something that was initially announced in January 2020. Of course, that was one of the first announcements post a three-year collapse, and we have had a subsequent two-year collapse. Given that delay is the biggest driver of cost, will the Minister acknowledge that the political paralysis that has become all too familiar here has cost our public services, our education system and our children dear?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I very much want to make sure that the Executive are able to deliver on all the key issues facing the citizens whom we serve. Over the past eight months, there has been clear evidence that we have been able to do that. I cite, for the Member's benefit, the early learning and childcare strategy. After a full month of implementation, over £2 million has gone into the pockets of hard-working families. That is a sign that the Executive are delivering. I brought the scheme forward, and the Finance Minister and colleagues supported me in that. We are taking action. I also announced major capital spend for a new special educational needs strategy and new capital build projects. We are making progress on a whole range of areas, and I trust that that will be the case in the future. I say to the Member that, in the past, the Assembly did not operate in the way that it should have, and there were multiple occasions under the SDLP and the Ulster Unionist Party when the Assembly collapsed.

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

5. Mr O'Toole asked the Minister of Education how many organisations he has declined to meet since taking office. (AQO 948/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Since taking up office, I have received invitations to meet schools, individuals and many organisations. I have accepted 324 invitations and fulfilled hundreds of them, including visits to many schools and community facilities that represent every part of our society. Given the significant demands on my diary, it would not be possible to accommodate every request.

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

Minister, in response — you did not say this in your answer — to a colleague of mine, Councillor de Faoite, you indicated the large number of organisations that have been declined meetings. What do you say to those organisations, many of which are charities and which are legally registered with the Charity Commission, Companies House and all sorts of other legal routes, that are startled to see you decline meetings with them but accept meetings with an umbrella group linked to paramilitary organisations?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I highlighted in the response to the question that I have accepted 324 invitations. I have discharged hundreds of those requests. I have been in countless schools and community facilities that represent every section of our society and every sector in education. If Members were to put that question to every other Minister, I would be interested to hear how many invites they have accepted and meetings they have attended and to compare my record with theirs. That is maybe something that colleagues will do.

I will not make any apology for making sure that we seek to move every part of our society forward. Unlike the Member's previous leader, the late John Hume, I do have concern and share some of the concerns that people have expressed. When John Hume embraced Gerry Adams and Sinn Féin, while the IRA was up to its neck in murdering the people of our country, his response was:

"I don't give two balls of roasted snow ... what you think."

I, however, do have concern, and I share those concerns, but I will continue to work in every community to bring them forward.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Will the Minister provide an assessment of the extent to which he considers that the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC) represents the views of proscribed, unlawful paramilitary organisations and, on that basis, explain the rationale as to why it was appropriate to hear its views on education policy?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Every part of our society has to be able to move forward. I have often said that, just because you have a past, that does not mean that you should not have a future. My family locked up, day after day, in the Maze prison some of the very people whom I have been criticised for meeting. Members of my family served in the H-blocks and were shot at going to work. My uncle took 13 bullets as he drove down the motorway. My father served in the loyalist and republican wings. The Alliance Party and others here campaigned vociferously to get all the prisoners released. I campaigned against the Belfast Agreement. Now the Alliance Party and others who championed the early release of mass murderers into our society have the cheek to criticise me for wanting to move our society forward. I will not be lectured by those who are acting in a very hypocritical fashion on the issue.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

There are Members in the Chamber who believe that, just because they are now elected representatives, their heinous terrorist acts and convictions are in some way justified. History records that the Nazis had a similar ideology.

To get back to the substance of the issue, I ask the Minister what work is being done to support working-class Protestant boys who continue to feel the worst impact of social deprivation and educational underachievement in Northern Ireland.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. I was shocked when I heard Pat Sheehan justify the heinous acts of the Provisional IRA on the basis that he now has an electoral mandate. His mandate does not change the fact that he was a convicted terrorist for a proscribed organisation. Those who participated, just because they managed to get votes to get elected to the House, will not be viewed differently from loyalists whom they now criticise me for meeting.

A significant amount of support is already available to help address underachievement among working-class Protestant boys. I refer the Member to targeting social need, which accounts for approximately £75 million. I also safeguarded the extended schools programme budget this year to maintain funding of £8 million, and that assists 450 eligible schools. We then have 'A Fair Start' programmes, many of which benefit everybody, irrespective of religious background, which is the right thing to do. Later this week, I will officially announce the RAISE programme, which, again, is about trying to address the educational underachievement that exists in many of our working-class communities but is particularly acute among those from a Protestant/loyalist background.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

6. Mr Brett asked the Minister of Education for an update on his work to create a management authority to support the controlled schools' sector. (AQO 949/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A task force has been commissioned to progress that important work in the pursuit of consistency and equity of support. The task force held its first meeting on Friday 27 September. It is chaired by the chief executive of the Controlled Schools' Support Council (CSSC) and includes senior representation from the Department of Education and the Education Authority.

The task force will develop a proposed model for controlled schools support, including a dedicated body to include managing authority responsibility. It is due to report to me by December 2024. I will be in a position to provide a further update to the House in due course.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his update on that really important work. Does he agree that it shows his commitment and that of our party to ensuring that all education sectors in Northern Ireland are treated equally and have the same representation across the board, which they rightly deserve?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his comments. It is not just my view that there needs to be that support for the controlled sector; it comes from the independent review of education report, which made that recommendation. There is an evidence base for doing so, and one of the comments that were highlighted in the report is:

"The managing authority role has always been a challenge because the EA also provides a wide range of services to all other schools. This results in complicated systems for school management, which are, in particular, suboptimal for the Controlled sector."

The independent review of education also referenced what was then a recent landscape review of the EA. That landscape review produced similar findings and highlighted many of the same failings for the controlled sector that the independent review of education had highlighted and on which it made recommendations.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Does the Minister acknowledge that he is going against the recommendation of the independent review of education by establishing yet another management authority in Northern Ireland rather than setting up a single management authority?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

No, I do not. It is interesting that the Alliance Party now seems to be positioning itself against the controlled sector, yet that party brought through the Integrated Education Act to give preferential treatment to one sector. What I am after is equity for all sectors. That is why I support the proposal and ask that the task force report to me by the end of the year.

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

7. Mr McGrath asked the Minister of Education what measures he can take to improve the management of school transport provision at the start of the school year. (AQO 950/22-27)

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

Sorry. I did not realise that I had a question.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is for the Education Authority to determine what measures can be taken to improve the management of school transport at the start of the year. My Department is, however, committed to supporting the EA in delivering those improvements. The EA is developing a smart transport project that will digitise key transport functions, such as route planning, and introduce other digital solutions, enabling it to have visibility of all services travelling to a school. That will allow the EA to optimise the school transport network, deliver efficiencies and improve the information available to parents about transport arrangements.

Transport assistance is provided to over 90,000 pupils travelling to and from school each day, of whom around 10,000 have an additional transport requirement detailed in their statement of special educational need. The number of children with a statement of SEN requiring bespoke transport arrangements continues to increase. The EA can only start arranging transport once a school placement has been confirmed. That can present operational challenges in the management of transport provision at the start of the school year, especially in relation to taxi transport. As a potential enhancement of the current model, the EA is piloting a seven-seater vehicle in its fleet to determine whether that affords flexibility in the delivery of transport for pupils who need more bespoke arrangements and would help minimise disruption and delays at the start of the school year.

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

I thank the Minister for working so diligently and quickly through his questions.

Does the Minister agree that school principals know pretty much from the beginning of one year what they will require in the following year and that there should be a procedure for EA to interact with school principals much earlier to determine what needs there are, rather than waiting until the beginning of September to see problems?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I like to facilitate everybody in asking their questions and engaging with me.

The Member is right about the sharing of information. That is why the digital scheme will be helpful. It will help to capture that data and make it more readily available to those who are involved in taking the decisions. Part of the end-to-end review of special educational needs is about looking at the processes that are involved. Streamlining those processes, sharing information and all that should help decisions to be made more speedily and effectively. I recognise that, in some cases, that was not what it should have been in September. That is partly a result of the process whereby you secure a placement and then seek to put in the transport arrangements. In some cases, that has required new provision and Access NI checks, all of which has led to delay. That is regrettable, and we need to find better ways to improve the process.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his update and the news of a new digital solution, but I do not think that the digital solution will reach into the policy failures here. It is a draconian transport policy. We see failures every year, particularly around the transfer test, with parents having to opt for schools that do not comply with the policy. There are also bullying issues where young people —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question, Mr Butler.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

— have to attend schools other than the one closest to them. Will the Minister commit to a full and fundamental review and reform of the transport policy?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The policy is underpinned by legislation in many respects. A full review, which some Members have advocated, may require legislative change. I am keen to look at transport in its totality. The Department spends approximately £120 million a year on transport, which is a significant amount of funding. Some colleagues advocate that the current two-mile distance for primary schools and three-mile distance for secondary schools is too restrictive and would like to see it made more accessible. That would present a clear funding challenge. Our transport policy underpins the plurality of choice of type of school. If we were to look at the policy comprehensively, that may lead to changes that require legislation. However, we have to look at it. It is about providing the service in the right place for pupils, but there is also an issue as regards the increased expenditure. From the public's perspective, we need to be satisfied that the money is being well spent and can be justified.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

8. Ms Sheerin asked the Minister of Education for an update on the review of the home to school transport policy. (AQO 951/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A review of the home to school transport policy commenced in 2018, However it was paused by the then Minister due to the pandemic and further suspended pending the outcome of the independent review of education. It is important to note that the transport policy supports other policies in the Department, such as parental preference and special educational needs. Work progresses on the end-to-end review of SEN. Work is already under way on an action plan arising from the EA's landscape review to include detailed consideration of the operational delivery of services such as school transport. Any review of the home to school transport policy should complement and build on the outcomes from all those work streams. It is in that context that I will consider the utility and timing of a new separate review of the transport policy.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up for listed questions. I commend the Minister for learning to speed-read since becoming Education Minister. It is good that he is learning something. We move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Ms Hunter asked the Minister of Education, after stating that it has been great to see parents availing of the NI childcare subsidy scheme announced in May this year, whether, as indicated in a recent answer, work on the childcare strategy was paused while that scheme was being developed and whether there has been any work since then on a longer-term strategy. (AQT 631/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I assure the Member that there has been no pause in the development of the childcare strategy. We prioritised the establishment of the Northern Ireland childcare subsidy scheme. It was important that we set that up, and it has been rolled out across Northern Ireland incredibly well. Early Years is the organisation that the Department commissioned to carry out that work, and the uptake demonstrates the efficient manner in which the childcare subsidy scheme has been delivered. The 15%, in addition to the 20% tax-free childcare allowance, has proven to be the right model on which to base the scheme.

We have also been taking forward other work, including identifying what preschool provision could move to be standardised as full time as opposed to part-time. We are developing that, and I hope to be in a position in due course to announce which 100 settings can move to that full-time provision. We are also using the information that has been gathered from the childcare subsidy scheme to inform all of the work that will take place to develop a comprehensive strategy.

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

Thank you, Minister, for your detailed answer. We know that parents across our constituencies pay what is almost a second mortgage for childcare. Do you have a rough timeline for when we will see the childcare strategy?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It will take a number of years to get the final comprehensive childcare strategy in place. My engagement with the stakeholders has indicated that they want it to be comprehensive and detailed. That has not prevented us, as an Executive, from taking forward measures around the childcare subsidy scheme, including the standardisation of preschool provision towards full-time places. I want to do more where I can, but we need to get the development of the strategy right and engage with as many different organisations as we can to shape the totality of the comprehensive scheme when it comes forward by way of the strategy.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Questions 2 and 5 have been withdrawn.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

T3. Mr Clarke asked the Minister of Education, after commending him for its roll-out, how much of the £25 million childcare package is still to be rolled out. (AQT 633/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Executive agreed that £25 million be allocated towards that, and we have been drawing that down since September and October of this year. If you applied that to the full financial year, you would need in the ballpark of £50 million to do what we currently do. We need to build on that, which is why, as we develop the scheme, I will continue to put proposals to the Executive on what further funding will be necessary to build on the work that we have started.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that answer. Minister, I appreciate that you have a family-centred approach to the roll-out of the programme: how many families have benefited from it?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

As of 7 October, 12,966 children and 1,524 providers had registered for the scheme, and the first payments were made just last month. In September, the scheme alone saved parents almost £1 million on their childcare bills, along with the additional £1·1 million of savings through the tax-free childcare allowance from Westminster. That is a demonstration of how the Executive and the Department are making an impact. From speaking to families, I know that they have greatly appreciated the support because they are finding it difficult. I have also had feedback to indicate that some of those families have been able to increase the number of hours that they work.

That is a key component underpinning the scheme. It is not just about helping to meet the costs of childcare but enabling women, in most cases, to re-engage in the workforce or to do more through their employment. I have some evidence that suggests that that is happening.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

T4. Ms Egan asked the Minister of Education, further to the commitment that he previously made at Question Time, to provide an update on his engagement with the Health Minister on nursing provision in special schools. (AQT 634/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I had a very helpful meeting, organised by Michelle Guy and Nick Mathison, with a number of principals. We talked through all the issues that are impacting on our special schools, particularly the concern about the potential withdrawal of nurses but also changes that have resulted from allied health professionals withdrawing from those settings. On the back of that meeting, I have corresponded with the Health Minister, and I believe that we have a date for another meeting with Nick, Michelle and the principals to go through the issues with the Health Minister.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Minister. Will you commit to work with the Health Minister to instigate a review of the level of nursing provision in special schools in order to ensure that all students receive safe and appropriate medical care?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member rightly highlights the collaborative way in which Departments need to operate in order to meet the needs of the children and young people in our special schools. We will not be able to provide an education for those children and young people if we do not have the appropriate professional support from the Department of Health and the trusts. It is critical that that support is put in place. Clear concern is being raised by teaching professionals and principals that the withdrawal of services is already having an impact on the educational potential of those children and young people. I was particularly struck by the fact that, in one of the schools that I visited, the only way in which one child was able to be at school was to have her parent or grandparent stay in an annex beside her classroom for three to four hours a day. Otherwise, because of her complex medical needs and provision not being made by the health trust, she would not be allowed to be in the school. That is not satisfactory — far from it — but I need the Department of Health to step up and help me on that.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

T6. Mr K Buchanan asked the Minister of Education what contact he has had with His Majesty's Treasury about VAT on independent schools. (AQT 636/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A number of months ago, the Treasury Minister James Murray MP asked to engage with me as a result of the Labour Party's election manifesto commitment to apply VAT to private schools. We had that engagement, I outlined my opposition to what was proposed, and we have continued, with our officials, to engage. I met James Murray again on 7 October to highlight my concerns. We have made some progress on VAT exemption in the case of group A voluntary grammar schools, but we continue to have issues with group B voluntary grammar schools and grammar schools that have prep departments. The proposal also has a negative impact on independent schools in Northern Ireland, and we continue to make the case on their behalf.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. What is the position today, and how many schools in Northern Ireland will that affect?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Treasury has advised that a change to the definition of a private school that is set out in the draft legislation is not required for grammar schools that charge a capital fee of up to £140. Nine voluntary grammar schools charge that capital fee, and they will not be within the scope of the legislation. A further 12 schools with prep or boarding departments may be within the scope of the legislation, and my officials continue to present evidence that, we believe, should justify their exemption. We await clarification from the Treasury on that matter.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

T7. Ms Kimmins asked the Minister of Education for an update on plans to fund the Scoil Spreagtha scheme in primary schools, given that it is a fantastic opportunity for children to learn Irish at the earliest possible stage and that there is growing demand for it across the North. (AQT 637/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Any funding is subject to the allocation that I receive in the Department. Education is not funded to the level that we all want it to be. That has implications for resources, but I am happy to write to the Member on the case that she has raised in order to provide specific details for that organisation.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Early engagement with a second language has benefits educationally and psychologically, as well as for employment prospects for children and young people. If the budget allows this in the future, will the Minister consider reviewing the funding for that?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am happy to look at any proposals. I have visited a number of Irish-medium schools, and I have been particularly impressed by the cognitive impact of learning another language. It has a clear educational benefit for those who immerse themselves in the Irish-medium system and those who learn other languages. There is a clear correlation between that cognitive ability and abilities in other parts of those children's education. I am more than happy to support proposals that will have a positive impact. I come back to the point that the financial resources that my Department needs are significant and that it is underfunded.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

T8. Mr Harvey asked the Minister for an update on the consultation on the school uniform policy. (AQT 638/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The consultation was launched in June to gather stakeholders' views on matters such as the need for statutory guidance on school uniforms, particularly on the cost and affordability of uniforms, the use of branded items and sole-supplier arrangements. The consultation closed on 27 September, and there was a large response to it. I am pleased to say that many people shared their views with us. There were just under 7,500 responses overall, and approximately 4,000 of those were from children and young people.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister. Minister, when do you hope to be in a position to introduce legislation on school uniforms?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Once we have analysed the consultation responses, I would be keen to bring forward legislation in the coming months so that the Committee can carry out its scrutiny role and the Assembly can give due consideration to it. I hope to bring legislation to my Executive colleagues for their consideration in the next number of months.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

T9. Mr McHugh asked the Minister of Education, who will be aware of the challenges that many families face in securing an autism assessment and diagnosis for their child, whether he will outline any work that he is doing with his counterpart in the Department of Health on new strategies or plans so that those families can access services more quickly and get a vital diagnosis in order that proper educational support can be provided for the young person. (AQT 639/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Last week, I met the independent autism reviewer, and we discussed those very issues, including support for families and young people in particular, especially in early intervention. All the evidence shows that the sooner that you can intervene and provide that support, the better your outcome. Part of the special educational needs end-to-end review has been about looking at all those issues. That review is coming to a conclusion. I hope to be able to provide an update to the House about how we will take forward special educational needs transformation across all the issues, including autism.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.

[Translation: I thank the Minister for his answer.]

The Minister almost read out my second question about early intervention. Will the Minister commit to making early intervention a priority in the Department's approach to special educational needs?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

One of the key outworkings of the review is to identify how you can move those interventions to a much earlier stage. I assure the Member that I very much believe in early intervention. The challenge has always been about meeting the current need whilst investing further upstream in earlier intervention. We need to be able to do what we currently do, but we need the additional investment. That is why a significant bid has been put forward as part of the transformation, and the transformation board will assess the Department's bid in due course, but a key component of the bid is how we can transform our approach to special educational needs provision.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We do not have time for further questions to the Minister of Education, so we will move to questions to the Minister of Finance.

Oral Answers to Questions — Finance

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

1. Mr Mathison asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the interim public-sector transformation board. (AQO 959/22-27)

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

3. Mr Durkan asked the Minister of Finance how many bids from the Minister of Health have been progressed by the interim public-sector transformation board. (AQO 961/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will group questions 1 and 3.

I established and appointed members to the interim public-sector transformation board earlier this year. A call for proposals was issued to Departments, and the interim board has been working to assess the proposals to determine which ones are transformative. It has now completed the first stage of its assessment process. Forty-seven proposals were received in total, 29 of which continue to move forward. Eleven of those have progressed to a stage two assessment, whereby, having received feedback from the interim board, Departments will submit a revised proposal by 18 October for a final assessment. The remaining 18 proposals have been included in a digital landscape review, allowing the interim board to consider them collectively and to take a more strategic, system-wide approach to digital transformation.

The Department of Health has four proposals that continue to progress. One of them has moved to the stage two assessment, and three are included in the digital landscape review. In due course, the interim board will provide advice to me on what proposals it considers to be transformational. I will then bring recommendations to the Executive for agreement.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for her answer. We understand that the £235 million will be delivered in tranches of £47 million over five years. Will the Minister outline whether the flexibility and profile of that funding have been agreed with Treasury to ensure that we maximise the investment over that timescale?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. Obviously, we are getting quite the way through the financial year. The timescale was always going to be challenging, given that we had to set up the board this year. I have raised that point in my engagement with the Chancellor and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury in order to seek some flexibility on it, should we need it. I anticipate that we will not spend the full £47 million this year. We want to get the best bang for our buck from the money that we have. We have to make sure that the money that is spent is spent on projects that are actually transformational.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Is it acceptable to her that the NIO permanent secretary sits on the public-sector transformation board, giving the UK Government a de facto say on key devolved spending priorities and, some might argue, even more of a say than it gives the Executive?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I do not accept the latter point. Obviously, the interim board is working under the Executive's direction. They agreed to my transformation programme proposal at our meeting on 9 May. The British Government's role is primarily through having representation on the interim board. As I outlined to Mr Mathison, the board's role is to determine what proposals are transformational. Ultimately, it will still be for the Executive to make the decisions on proposals that are recommended for funding. The British Government's role was set out in the financial package, in correspondence from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and in the interim fiscal framework. Assessing proposals as transformative is part of their role on the transformation board.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Will the Minister expand on the expected outcome of the digital landscape review that she mentioned? Will projects go ahead in the same way after it is completed?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Given the number of departmental proposals that were digital in nature, the interim board saw an opportunity to consider them collectively, allowing for a more strategic, system-wide approach to digital transformation. It therefore recommended undertaking a digital landscape review to facilitate that. I agreed to the development of terms of reference for the digital landscape review in my letter of 30 August to the head of the Civil Service. The Executive Office is taking the lead in developing the terms of reference on behalf of the interim board and will be taking the work forward with the support of my Department. Obviously, we are not able to pre-empt the outcome of the review or what the interim board will advise based on its findings, and it will also need to go through a procurement process. The review is expected to be commissioned and concluded by the end of this year.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Further to my friend Mr Durkan's comments, are we envisaging Julie Harrison becoming a member of the permanent public-sector transformation board? Is that enshrining the Northern Ireland Office at the centre of our Government?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As has been set out, we appointed members to an interim board. We are working through the development of terms of reference, and everything will have to come back to the Executive for decision-making. I am clear in my mind that the public-sector transformation board, as it is constituted, relates only to the £235 million of transformation funding that was in the financial package. The terms of the financial package required the setting up of a transformation board, with membership to have representation from the British Government as well as the Executive, to enable access to that pot of funding, but I am clear that the decision-making in relation to the allocation of that funding rests solely with the Executive. I expect that that will be set out in the terms of reference.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

2. Mr Bradley asked the Minister of Finance to outline how many businesses have benefited from the 50% rate discount since the launch of the back in business scheme in May 2024. (AQO 960/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

All of us want to see our town centres and shopping areas thriving. The back in business scheme aims to bring vibrancy, footfall and investment back to our high streets, while providing businesses with a boost at the start of their business journey, helping to support jobs and bringing long-term vacant units back into use.

The scheme offers businesses a 50% rates discount for up to two years if they move into premises that were previously used for retail purposes and have been unoccupied for 12 months or more. Since the launch of the back in business scheme in May 2024, 18 businesses have benefited from the 50% rates discount, which has provided almost £41,000 in rate support.

I was pleased to visit Coleraine recently, in the Member's constituency, and meet two businesses that have received support from the scheme. One of those businesses occupied a building in the heart of the town that had been vacant for 10 years prior to its use under the scheme. It was encouraging to hear how the scheme is supporting new businesses, while giving premises, which had been vacant for a long time, a new lease of life. I urge anyone who is planning to start a business or expand their existing business to consider setting up in an empty unit and availing themselves of the rates support on offer through the back in business scheme.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for her answer. What other Departments is the Department of Finance working with to promote town centres? Are those collaborations proving to be successful in establishing a broader strategy to create vibrant, sustainable and economically thriving town centres?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The Member will be aware that the high street task force was set up back in the previous mandate. Its report and recommendations were published in March 2022, I think. The reinstatement of the back in business scheme and the extension of the small business rate relief scheme were the recommendations from my Department. Both of those measures have been implemented. I am always happy to engage with other Departments. Obviously, they have particular remits: the regeneration and promotion of towns, cities and villages is with the Department for Communities, and the Department for the Economy has a role in supporting businesses. I am happy to engage with colleagues in relation to those.

Nicola Brogan (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Will the Minister outline what other support is available to existing businesses?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Around 75% of non-domestic ratepayers get some form of rates support. Over 63% of retailers get some form of support, with 80% of that provided to small retailers through the small business rate relief scheme because they have a net annual value (NAV) of £15,000 or less; around 30,000 businesses from our tax base of just under 75,000 businesses get small business rate relief; and 4,474 manufacturers here pay the lowest business rates on these islands. They get 70% off their rates by virtue of industrial derating, which is a tax relief that is unique to this jurisdiction.

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

The small business rate relief scheme, which did have to close for a period because this place was collapsed, should never have done so. It is a valuable source of assistance to businesses on our high streets, including in my constituency of South Down, where many were impacted on by flooding. Will the Minister advise how much money was paid into the Department from the time the scheme closed in March 2023 until it reopened in May of this year?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I do not have that information in front of me, but I am happy to write to the Member in relation to that.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

4. Ms Kimmins asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the baby loss certificate scheme. (AQO 962/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I am keen to see a baby loss certificate scheme taken forward as quickly as possible. The scheme would provide official recognition to parents who have suffered the tragedy of losing a baby before 24 weeks. Losses of this kind affect many families, causing very real pain and heartache. Sadly, this is often met with silence and stigma, with many parents feeling isolated in their grief. I am determined that parents' heartache and grief be recognised, and I want to give people an opportunity to acknowledge these losses, perhaps for the first time for some, to bring some comfort to their suffering. I met the Health Minister in September to receive an update on progress from the General Register Office (GRO) officials in my Department, who are working closely with Department of Health officials on how the baby loss certificate scheme might be developed, learning from the equivalent schemes in England and Scotland. That work is continuing at pace. I have instructed my officials to put the required legislation in place to provide a statutory footing for a scheme here. They are working to include a baby loss certificate scheme in the deaths and stillbirths registration Bill, which is under development.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Acknowledging baby loss in legislation is crucial, so I am grateful for that. Minister, will the scheme go out to public consultation?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

It is important to me that the baby loss certificate scheme meets the needs of families, charities and third-sector organisations. I am sure that, like me, the Member has had a lot of correspondence in relation to the issue. It has touched many people already that we are keen to develop and progress a baby loss certificate scheme, so, as that legislation is developed, we will consider how best to shape the proposed scheme around the needs and expectations of those who will access it.

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

Minister, last week was Baby Loss Awareness Week, a painful reminder that parents who lose their babies during pregnancy will feel every year. Can you guarantee that, by the time of Baby Loss Awareness Week next year, the baby loss certificate scheme and any accompanying legislation will have been introduced?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I have directed GRO officials who are drafting the deaths and stillbirths registrations legislation to include the ability to register deaths and stillbirths online and by phone. We will include in that legislation provision for a baby loss certificate scheme. We may have to go to public consultation. That might be the right thing to do to get the views of people who will access the scheme. The intention would be to bring forward secondary regulations. I want to do that as quickly as possible. It is my commitment to do that as quickly as possible. I do not want to nail my colours to the mast by saying that we will definitely have it by next October, but that is certainly my intention. It is something that, as an Assembly, we are all committed to and want to see delivered as quickly as possible. Obviously, however, we have to go through the appropriate processes and allow the legislation and any consultation that might have to be carried out to proceed. I am committed to delivering it as quickly as I can.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

5. Ms Ennis asked the Minister of Finance for an update on her plans to bring forward proposals to update the rating policy. (AQO 963/22-27)

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

11. Mr Donnelly asked the Minister of Finance when she intends to bring proposals to the Executive on changes to the rating policy. (AQO 969/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 5 and 11 together.

Over 1,400 responses were received from ratepayers, businesses and a range of other stakeholders.

It is for that reason that I wanted to ensure that, with my officials, I took the time to examine carefully all the views from those who responded.

I will be engaging with Executive colleagues on the next steps and will continue my engagement with business bodies, organisations and wider society to work together to build a progressive rates system that grows our tax base and stimulates our economy. As part of that work, I have now presented short-, medium- and long-term rating policy proposals, including a more strategic, longer-term policy approach to the Executive for consideration. It is my intention to make a statement to the Assembly after the Executive have agreed the way forward.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Minister for her response and for her efforts in that regard. More specifically, is she able to give an update on industrial derating?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I have spoken on that issue a number of times in the Assembly, because I recognise the role that industrial derating has played in supporting 4,400-plus manufacturers and its contribution to our having a strong manufacturing sector here. The measure supports indigenous businesses, with over 50% of the recipients being eligible for a small business rate relief valuation at a threshold of £15,000 net annual value (NAV). Anything that I and the Executive do on our rating policy has to align very much with what we are trying to achieve with our economic vision of creating good jobs and improving productivity, decarbonisation and regional balance.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Despite the hard-working businesses in our town centres, there is a proliferation of vacant premises in my constituency of East Antrim. Does the Minister agree that high street businesses are getting an unfair deal from the current rating system? What can be done to make competition from online shopping, where rent and rates are much less, fairer in order to protect town centre businesses?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

There are a number of factors at play that have had an impact on our village, town and city centres over recent years, not least the proliferation of online shopping. It is just so handy for many people to choose that option. The Executive need to take a collective approach to supporting our towns and our high streets. When I engage with businesses and business organisations, they outline a number of pressures that they are facing on a lot of fronts and tell me that general costs have increased very significantly. Their rates bill is one of the many bills that they receive.

Furthermore, it is important to recognise that rates are our major source of income generation. When we want to do anything to give support or rate relief, we have to recognise that that is money either that is not there to be spent on public services or that will increase everybody else's rates bill. That is the balance that we have to strike with the rating system. We want to stimulate our economy, but we also need to be able to fund our public services.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

The Budget sustainability plan explores raising rates this year from 2·5% to 4%. Ratepayers have seen increases in the regional rate and the district rate. As you indicated in your response to a previous question, rates are increasing and services are decreasing. Given that previous answer, will you commit to not putting the burden on ratepayers for the rest of the mandate?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The Budget sustainability plan reflects the amounts that will have to be raised through the regional rate to meet our obligation to raise the £113 million that needs to be raised over two years. The decision that the Executive took last year to keep the increase in the regional rate in line with inflation was taken to do exactly as the Member outlined, which was to mitigate the impact that would be felt by households and businesses. That was despite the pressure that we were getting from the Treasury as a result of its revenue-raising demands. There is a good, strong argument for that Executive decision, and, as I said to Mr Donnelly, we have to get right the balance between being able to fund public services and ensuring that the burden does not fall too hard on too many people.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

6. Ms Á Murphy asked the Minister of Finance to outline her next steps in relation to the Budget sustainability plan. (AQO 964/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The Budget sustainability plan is a first step on the Executive's journey towards fulfilling our longer-term ambition of integrating sustainability discussions into the heart of our processes and decision-making. As part of the plan, the Executive have agreed to a work plan that includes the development and implementation of five-year departmental financial sustainability plans. Work is ongoing to finalise the full content of the work plan. However, it is envisaged that the five-year plans will become a rolling programme of work with Departments. In parallel, my officials will look to take forward the development and implementation of a Budget improvement plan.

The Budget sustainability plan, in and of itself, will not address all the fiscal problems that the Executive face. It provides the Executive with a strategic framework to work together to develop and introduce fiscally sustainable policies to deliver the level of public services that our citizens deserve. Individual Ministers must now begin to address the overcommitments in the current year and take steps to live within budget. However, that work needs to be underpinned by a new approach from the British Government that sees proper investment in public services and infrastructure. The Budget at the end of October is the opportunity for them to signal that intention.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, how does the Budget sustainability plan address some of the issues that the Executive face?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The Budget sustainability plan is not, and was never intended to be, a panacea for addressing all the fiscal issues that the Executive face. Rather, it is the first step in a financial sustainability journey, providing a strategic framework that will allow Departments to consider how they can deliver long-term, sustainable public services and everything that is required for them to be able to do that.

I hope that people will take confidence from the work that has already taken place, and that the strategic framework will enable further work on longer-term departmental plans and a strategic Budget improvement plan. Those will contribute to the delivery of efficient and effective public services, and the long-term fiscal stability that our citizens and those who access public services so rightly expect.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

The Budget sustainability plan is based on the plan to have a balanced Budget for 2024-25. Given the Minister's recent announcement of £769 million of overcommitment for the year, and the fact that we are still waiting to hear the outcome of the monitoring round, is she confident that the 2024-25 Budget can be balanced?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I have certainly made no secret of how difficult the financial situation is, particularly for this year. It will still be a challenge for Departments to live within budget. As we have already outlined in contributions to the Assembly, we anticipate a significant amount of Barnett consequentials for the rest of this year, which will help to offset the overcommitments that Departments have projected. However, individual Departments still need to work to address those.

The problems that the Executive face this year, and faced in previous years, are the consequences of the chronic underfunding of our public services by successive British Governments. We got the interim fiscal framework agreed and, because of that, we had a 24% increase to the needs-based factor codified. That provided us with some additional funding this year, but it is still going to be a challenge to live within Budget.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Minister, do you agree that any Department that is reporting an overcommitment should not be committing to additional discretionary spend? What steps can you take to ensure that that situation does not arise again?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I agree with the Member that addressing overcommitments and living within the budget should be the top priority for any Minister. All Ministers are autonomous within their Departments and have to take decisions to live responsibly, but the consequences of any Department overspending this year would be dire for the Executive as a whole, given the fact that the overcommitted funding would come out of next year's Budget. It would also call into question the write-off of the £559 million of what the Treasury called "debt" from previous years. It is incumbent on all Ministers to take the decisions that are necessary to live within their budgets and not put the Executive in that position.

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

Minister, with the greatest respect, the Budget sustainability plan is waffle. Most of the text simply summarises actions that were obvious anyway, such as seeking multi-year Budgets. Honestly, I say that with the greatest respect. At appendix D, however, there are some interesting tables on the options for revenue-raising some £113 million. One of those options is to raise £6 million through car parking charges. It points out that delaying the implementation of the Hospital Parking Charges Act 2022 will realise £6 million of savings and, therefore, revenue. Is it the position of you and your Department to count, as a revenue-raising measure, delaying the implementation of a piece of private Member's legislation that one of your colleagues introduced?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Are you making a speech, Mr O'Toole, or are you going to ask a question? Minister.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Obviously, I do not agree with the Member's interpretation of the Budget sustainability plan. Appendix D is a list of proposals from Departments. The Executive will take a decision, and Ministers will take decisions in each of their Departments on which of those they will take forward.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

7. Mrs Erskine asked the Minister of Finance for an update on discussions with Treasury regarding the pause in funding for the Mid South West and Causeway Coast and Glens growth deals. (AQO 965/22-27)

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

12. Mrs Dodds asked the Minister of Finance for an update on her negotiations with the UK Government on the Mid South West and Causeway Coast and Glens growth deals. (AQO 970/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 7 and 12 together.

I am continuing to push for the reversal of the British Government's pause on growth deal funding. My officials are working closely with the two growth deal teams to provide the necessary evidence for Treasury to consider as part of the spending review. During the Finance: Interministerial Standing Committee meeting on 3 October, I raised with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury the importance of the growth deals to our economic development and reiterated the need for funding to be reinstated for the Causeway Coast and Glens and Mid South West growth deals.

I am pleased to advise that, at their meeting on 2 October, the Executive agreed to recommendations that I brought forward, asking them to reaffirm their funding commitments to the two growth deals and the £100 million complementary fund. While we continue to collectively press the Treasury to reverse its decision to pause the £162 million British Government funding contribution to the growth deals, the Executive's agreement to reaffirm their funding commitment should help to provide clarity amidst the confusion that has been caused by Treasury, especially — I know that the Member will be pleased about this — on the A4 Enniskillen bypass, which is currently out to tender.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister and the Executive for what they have been doing on the Mid South West growth deal and, indeed, the Causeway Coast and Glens growth deal. They are an economic game changer and catalyst. I appreciate that the Minister will have some vested interest in the issue for her area. What is her assessment of the NIO's willingness and ability to lobby effectively on the issue to ensure that the money is drawn down and the pause is lifted? It is vital for the two affected council areas. We have a situation in which two council areas are missing out. What is her assessment of the NIO's —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you. Minister.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— ability to do that?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The strong collective message that we have been able to send, as an Executive and as parties across the board, on the need to unpause the funding commitment to the growth deals has been a real strength. The deal partners have been engaging directly with the NIO — I think that they met the British Secretary of State last week — and have been reassured by that engagement. That is some of the feedback that I have received. Other Members may have had similar feedback.

There is still work to do. Certainly, I have been encouraging the deal partners. Later this week, I will meet the Mid South West growth deal partners again. We will continue to put that pressure on and use whatever avenue we have. I have continued to press the issue with Treasury, in particular, to ensure that the commitment is reinstated.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister. We appreciate the work that has gone into trying to get the deals back on track. The Mid South West deal was due to be signed with heads of agreement on Wednesday. That shows how far we were along the line with that.

Will you accompany the councils to London next weekend to lobby parliamentarians on the issues around the deal? What other suggestions have you for keeping the deal alive so that the Government know precisely how important it is?