Northern Ireland Assembly, 10 February 2025

391 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have a few remarks to make this afternoon. I have been informed by the Chief Electoral Officer that Aoife Finnegan has been returned as a Member of the Assembly for the Newry and Armagh constituency following the resignation of Conor Murphy. This morning, Ms Finnegan signed the undertaking and the Roll of Membership and entered a designation in my presence and that of the Clerk to the Assembly. She has now taken her seat. I welcome her to the Assembly and wish her success in her new role.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Last week, we had a statement from the Education Minister. A number of issues arose — there were too many to respond to individually — so I will deal with some broad points today. It was right that, last Monday, the Minister came to the House to make his statement and that Members had the opportunity to question him. Strong views were expressed by different parties, and my Deputy Speaker Steve Aiken dealt with most of the issues at the time. I want to return to two brief points.

First, all Members and Ministers should know that good manners underpin our standards of debate, with Members demonstrating good temper, courtesy, moderation and respect. A good rule of thumb is that Members should focus on the issues rather than on the person. Secondly, points of order are for procedural points to be raised with the Chair. If Members abuse points of order to make political points, as they did, it serves only to delay the Assembly from moving to its next item of business.

I also want to comment on the scope of debate. Over the past few weeks, the Deputy Speakers and I have had to intervene on a number of occasions to ask Members to bring their remarks back to the scope of the debate. The requirement to follow the scope of the debate is important, and it comes in the wider context of our procedure and conventions. For example, the convention is that the House should not debate the same motion within six months, and Standing Order 17(7) provides for the Chair to intervene on a Member who:

"persists in irrelevance or tedious repetition".

We have had a number of occasions recently when Members have come to a debate, determined to make speeches on issues that are, at best, at a tangent to the specific content of a motion, regardless of whether they have previously spoken on that issue.

If Members could just speak about what they want at a given time, there would be no need to have an Order Paper or a Business Committee to agree it. I advise Members to note that it is not enough to seek to make a connection to one or two words that are in a motion without addressing its main thrust, which is commonly defined by the call that is made at the end of the motion.

Some latitude can always be given by the Chair, but it requires Members to have given some effort at least to address the main issues that are set out in the motion. It is for the Speaker, Principal Deputy Speaker or Deputy Speaker who is in the Chair at the time alone to make a judgement on whether a Member's remarks are within the scope of the motion. If the Chair interrupts a Member and asks them to come back to the motion, it should generally be taken as a helpful intervention to avoid the scenario in which a Member would be asked to take their seat. However, the Chair's decision is final; there is no debate to be had with the Chair on that matter. I will not revisit decisions that are made by the Chair of the day during a debate at a particular time.

That leads me to my final point, which is about the requirement for Members to respect the authority of the Chair. Standing Order 1(2) provides that the Chair's decision is final. That applies whether I am in the Chair or whether it is occupied by the Principal Deputy Speaker or a Deputy Speaker. Members should focus on the fact that, when they address the Chair, they are addressing the office of the Speaker, not a particular political personality. As Speaker and Deputy Speakers, we have to set those things aside when we occupy the Chair.

Whether it is the Principal Deputy Speaker, the Deputy Speaker or me, Members should recognise that we deal with matters from a procedural perspective and not the political perspective that we might express if we were participating on the Floor. I make that particular point because I note that, on some occasions, a number of Members and even Ministers in the Chamber, through the media or on social media have sought to play politics in reference to me, the Principal Deputy Speaker or Deputy Speakers and the decisions that we have made in the Chair. I will be very clear: that is out of order, and it is a challenge to the Chair's authority.

I note that, when we are in the Chair, we do not have a right to reply. I am permanently in the Chair, so I never have a right to reply. The Deputy Speakers can participate in debates, and that is a different matter entirely. Wider than that, as Speaker, I cannot engage in wider public debate. On those occasions in debates or on social media when Members or Ministers have sought to involve me on current issues that are in front of the Assembly on the basis of my previous role, that is entirely out of order.

A Member

Hear, hear.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Upholding the impartiality of the office of the Speaker is not just my responsibility or that of the Principal Deputy Speaker and the Deputy Speakers when one of us is in the Chair: it is your responsibility as Members of the Assembly. It will work only when you work with us on those matters. Therefore, Members and Ministers should be very careful in how they seek to involve the Speaker or, indeed, the Deputy Speakers in wider political issues. There are enough Members with whom to debate on the Floor of the Chamber without Members feeling the right to oppose the Chair. No matter which of us is in the Chair, we should all be treated with the same respect that is expected to be shown to the office of the Speaker. If Members cannot do that within and without the Chamber, we will take that into account when calling people to speak.

I hope that Members are clear on those points. Let us move on.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Timothy Gaston has been given leave to make a statement on the Clonoe inquest findings that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. If other Members wish to be called, they should indicate that by rising in their place and continuing to do so. All Members who are called will have up to three minutes in which to speak on the issue.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. The events of 16 February 1992 are exceedingly simple to understand. A stolen car and lorry were driven into the village of Coalisland. Terrorists then fired 30 rounds of armour-piercing ammunition at the local police station from a heavy machine gun that was mounted on the back of the stolen lorry. The other terrorists were armed with assault rifles. They then drove off at speed before arriving at St Patrick's Church at Clonoe where they were engaged by the SAS, with four terrorists being neutralised. It was at 10.45 pm in February. It was, therefore, dark, and the SAS unit was engaging with heavily armed terrorists who were more heavily armed than it was.

One does not go out for a quiet evening drive in a stolen lorry with a heavy machine gun welded to the back while armed with an assortment of assault rifles. When four fully armed terrorists go out on a murder mission, that mission includes their escape plan. If the continued threat posed by such fully armed terrorists is neutralised, that is a service to the public.

There was no warning from the IRA terrorists to those they set out to murder in the Coalisland RUC station.

Last week, we had another illustration of the coroner's system, for which Labour pledged to continue putting the security forces, but never the terrorists, in the dock. We have further evidence of republican double standards. On the one hand, they argue that they engaged in a legitimate war, yet, on the other hand, if anyone fired on republicans, they cried foul. It was OK when they shot an unarmed off-duty UDR man in the back but it was unfair when heavily armed terrorists were taken out by the SAS. What sort of war was that?

I do, however, want to use this opportunity to welcome another legacy judgement. On Friday, the High Court delivered its judgement on the judicial review by the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers Association against the Police Ombudsman. In that judgement, we have had an overdue clipping of the ombudsman's wings. The language of the judgement is emphatic and clear: the ombudsman's role is investigative, not adjudicative. In issues of criminal conduct, or even misconduct, it is not for the ombudsman to act as judge, jury and executioner. Too often, the ombudsman has played to the anti-police gallery by throwing around findings of collusion or such behaviour. The ombudsman needs to take note of that judgement and stop making rulings that she has no power to make.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

On 16 February 1992, an armed IRA terrorist gang set out with the intention of murder when they attacked the RUC station in Coalisland. There is no doubt that they intended to murder. At 10.30 pm, a stolen car and lorry were driven into the centre of Coalisland and, from them, 30 rounds of armour-piercing, tracer ammunition were fired, at close range, into the station. A machine gun was mounted on the back of the stolen lorry. Make no mistake, the intention of the attack was to murder and maim police officers and soldiers. That murderous attack posed an immediate and ongoing threat, not just to security forces but to civilians. After the attack, when the IRA gang was returning to a rendezvous point, it was intercepted by the SAS. The SAS were faced with a heavily armed terrorist gang of approximately 10 and had to act decisively to neutralise the threat. Four IRA men were killed during the operation by the security forces, the others made their escape.

There is no place in any civilised society for terror. Not now. Not then. Not ever. There is always an alternative to terrorism and violence — always. Those four terrorists had an alternative that night, but they went out with the intent of taking lives and destroying property. Make no mistake: that was their intention. They could have been at home with their family or loved ones, like most other people. They could have been out socialising or working, but they made a choice. They made the choice to try to commit murder. The British Army had no alternative that night. How many warnings were issued by the East Tyrone brigade of the Provisional IRA to police, army and UDR personnel over the years of its campaign? My milkman and postman were both assassinated. They got no warning. They got no choice. They were doing a day's work and were assassinated like dogs on the side of the road. The guys who went out that night had a choice. If you engage in a so-called war, be prepared for bullets coming back at you. That is what war is about. Wars are wrong, but bullets will come back. That night, the terrorists chose their alternative, and, on that occasion, it was the wrong choice.

It is easy for some to look at events and come to the conclusion that an easier way could have been found. These people were not out collecting for the Red Cross. They were out to commit murder — murder. It was not an accident. It was not an argument outside an establishment. It was a committed and planned murder. Does the judiciary understand the impact of the ruling on the innocent victims across Northern Ireland? Those who were going about their daily lives — for example, my postman and my milkman — but were assassinated, and they did not deserve it.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Last Thursday, at the High Court in Belfast, the coroner, Mr Justice Michael Humphreys, made a ruling finding that, in each of the killings of the four young men in Clonoe chapel car park on 16 February 1992, the use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified. In simple terms, that means that their actions constituted the murder of Irish citizens by the British state.

"Shoot to kill" was a policy decision taken in Westminster at the highest echelons of the British Government. In response to the hypocrisy of some on these Benches and those who sit in other Parliaments who attempt to convince us that the law does not apply to the very people who are supposed to uphold it, let me be clear: the law applies to us all. The irony of some of the commentary that Peter, Barry, Sean and Patrick were not held accountable for their actions on the night in question is not lost on any of us either. The fact is that there was an opportunity to arrest them and bring them before the courts to face due process under the rule of law, but, as we all know now, all four were shot. Two were shot while they were running away and then executed while they were incapacitated on the ground. The evidence shows that Peter was shot while he was on his knees with his arms in the air. That is not defence; it is execution.

Some have also referred to the fact that the inquest came 33 years after the killings, but what they have failed to acknowledge is that, had it not been for the courageous and difficult fight by the families, there would have been no inquest at all. The families of those four young men have campaigned at a huge personal cost that none of us could ever begin to understand to reveal the truth and debunk the false accusations spread by state agencies. There was no gun battle. Five hundred rounds were fired by the SAS. They shot the men in the back and whilst they were on the ground. They shot two of them in the face. Those are the details that the families have had to endure. They deserved that ruling. They deserve the truth. They will decide with their legal teams whether they want to pursue justice for the murder of their father, sons, brothers and uncles. We on these Benches must support all families — when I say "all", I mean all — to have access to truth and justice.

The British Government must proceed to fully repeal and replace the Legacy Act. That includes the full reinstatement of all inquests. There are so many other families who have never had access to a human rights-compliant inquest, which is the very minimum standard in a civilised and democratic society. These findings lay bare the rationale behind the British Government's determination to subsume all inquests within the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR). The British Secretary of State would decide what findings or information would be released to families: I think that we know what they would get. This ruling will strengthen the resolve of all those families to have their truth.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

What happened in February 1992 was yet another appalling event during the Troubles. The mid-Ulster area, in particular, bore a horrifying toll throughout that dark period in the number of attacks on security forces and civilian deaths and injuries. It must be said that, by 1992, it should have been long evident that there was no future for the type of ambush that the IRA attempted that day. Sadly, it was not the end of IRA activity there; indeed, it was part of an overall cycle of violence in the east Tyrone and north Armagh locality that cost many lives at a time when such loss of life was achieving nothing but another cycle of grief and bitterness. To be clear, I have no sympathy at all for the actions of the IRA in Clonoe 33 years ago this week; no democrat should. They were not creating a new future; they were stealing it.

When we look back at such events during the Troubles, we face two particular challenges. First, we can be inclined to forget that all those who were killed had families and loved ones who were greatly affected by the profound sense of loss and grief. Secondly, while we struggle to define exactly what sort of conflict it was, it should also be evident that the Geneva convention applies to all combatants, including those of the state. We should indeed recognise that it is incumbent on us all, as democrats, to acknowledge that the use of lethal force is specific to well-defined circumstances, even in war and certainly in security operations. We live in a country where those issues are assessed independently, and that will always be important in ensuring that the rule of law is paramount.

Most of all, we must reflect that the ongoing and unnecessary loss of life in that locality over the years brought with it a heavy toll on all those involved and everyone in that community. Democracy and the rule of law must prevail so that we never face such a toll again.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

On 16 February 1992, a heavily armed terrorist unit of up to 10 individuals was engaged by a special military unit under the rules of engagement — the so-called "yellow card" — which state that a challenge must be given unless to do so would increase the risk of death or grave injury to you or any other person. The judge disagreed that the soldiers were under threat, so let us give a little context if we can.

In 1989, a truck similar to the one used in Clonoe, fitted with a 12·7 mm DShK heavy machine gun — the same as the one used in Clonoe — drove into Derryard permanent vehicle checkpoint (PVCP) and engaged the soldiers there. It was commanded by a member of the east Tyrone brigade of the IRA. The result was two dead soldiers and two wounded soldiers. That is the context, and every soldier knew exactly what the context was when they were faced with a terrorist enemy that was armed — and the terrorist unit at Clone was heavily armed.

The patrol was not expecting them to come there. The patrol expected the attack to be mounted from the car park before the DShK was mounted on the vehicle, but they did not come. However, they came back, and the weapon was mounted. The commander at the time on that cold night — it was a cold, dark night — made a split-second decision that he had to engage. It is simple for people sitting in a warm courtroom or in here to say that he made the wrong decision. He made a decision because he thought that he was under threat. Therefore, I disagree with the judgement.

Let us remember that four young men lost their lives. Their lives were taken by other equally young men. However, somebody sent those four young men out to do that — somebody sitting in a warm office — and they have blood on their hands as well. When the families grieve, they must look to those individuals and the party on the opposite Benches, which eulogised, prompted and justified those sorts of actions, and say, "You sent my young man out to die while you sat in your warm office".

We need to understand that split seconds are exactly that. We could be talking about something different here, as we were in Derryard, which I know well because I have been there. There were two dead soldiers and two wounded soldiers, and there could have been more. On balance, the right decision was taken by the commander on the ground. That decision was to engage, and we got rid of four terrorists.

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

Like others in the Chamber, I have attended far too many unnecessary funerals and wakes brought about by campaigns of violence on our streets that were unnecessary. I am a member of the SDLP, which stood for non-violence and to provide the alternative and the leadership that, hopefully, has brought us to a peaceful new settlement and scenario.

In this instance, the use of lethal force by the SAS was found by Justice Humphreys to be unjustified. I have been with families in other cases who have, time after time, sought recourse and justice through the courts. Innocent people seeking justice through the courts should not be denied, irrespective of their background or whatever route they chose to take. Justice must prevail in any civilised, democratic society. The rule of law and justice must be applied equally and consistently to all, be they paramilitaries, agents of the state — we have seen the havoc that they wreaked — or members of the security forces. I stand by that just as we in the SDLP have done down through many decades of the Troubles and, thankfully now, the peace.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

There is significant hurt in Northern Ireland today as a result of the ruling. On many occasions, Members from all communities have come to the House and highlighted cases of injustice, hurt and pain. This is not one of those. The men who set out that night had one intention: to take innocent life. The east Tyrone brigade was responsible for murder and mayhem across Northern Ireland, across the community that I come from and have lived in all my life.

In 1991, my great-uncle, Lance Corporal Bobby Crozier, went to his place of work, Glenanne army barracks, only to have an IRA bomb put down the side of a hill, killing him and his colleagues in an instant. No inquiries, no inquests, no justice. His loved ones: two young girls were left with no father; a wife with no husband. Those were the callous actions of the Provisional IRA. Those were the callous actions that many Members of Sinn Féin in the House set out to justify not just on this occasion but on many others.

I can say this: I am extremely proud of and believe that our society is fortunate to have had the intervention of the security forces on many occasions; on this occasion, the SAS. Not just at Clonoe but at Loughgall and on many other occasions when terrorists set out to take life, they were met by real soldiers. Every time we come to the lawfare that is being pushed on us by some in the media and some in the judiciary, they fail to mention this simple fact: had the terrorists not set out to take innocent life, they would have their lives today.

We have to set this in context, because this is not justice; this is lawfare. Those were not victims or innocents; they were terrorists. Sinn Féin talks about hypocrisy, but there was no engagement from Sinn Féin with the inquiry into Kingsmills, where men were butchered on the side of the road. Sinn Féin has sat silently in every other sphere. Perhaps it is time that it looked at its own ranks —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— in particular those like Gerry Adams, who sent many of their young men to die — and for what?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

So that they could sit in the Assembly in cosy, warm rooms.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up. We will move on.

Members' Statements

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The next item in the Order Paper is Members' statements. If Members wish to be called, they should indicate that by rising in their place.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I congratulate a school in my constituency — St Patrick's College, Maghera — on its successful attainment of the MacRory Cup yesterday. They came from behind to beat Abbey Vocational School from Donegal by one point. In doing so, they won a seventeenth MacRory — a massive achievement for the school. I offer hearty congratulations to the management, players and everybody involved at St Pat's. I am sure that they will enjoy the celebrations and rightly so.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I wish to speak about the shocking and disgraceful attacks on nine police officers in my constituency and in Strabane over the weekend. PSNI officers responded to ordinary calls only to find themselves being kicked in the head, having blood spat in their face, being charged at with knives and being subjected to other assaults.

As elected representatives, it is important that we send out a strong message to our police officers, who put on the uniform to protect our communities, that we stand firm and four-square behind them. I send my regards to the injured police officers. I have spoken to the PSNI leadership in my district to pass on the DUP's sympathies to those officers and to reassure them that they have our support going forward.

The sad reality is that our Police Service does not receive the respect that other emergency services receive. Our Ambulance Service, our Fire Service and our Health and Social Care workers deserve respect, and, rightly, there is zero tolerance of attacks on them.

Unfortunately, the PSNI does not receive the same respect. We need the Minister of Justice to work with our justice system to ensure that those who perpetrate such crimes against officers receive the maximum penalty possible. There is an onus on all of us in the Chamber to ensure that there is the political leadership not only to condemn those who attack our police officers but to support the men and women — mothers, fathers, sons and daughters — who put on the uniform. They must receive support from elected representatives.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

The failure to secure a settlement on teachers' pay over the past number of days represents a genuine crisis point for our education system. Following the restoration of the institutions and the delivery of a pay deal last year, we should have been building on a platform of trust to restore relations. It is deeply regrettable that trust in this place now seems to be in such short supply. It is clear that teachers simply did not trust management and, by proxy, the Minister. They were required to commit to a period of industrial harmony if the deal was to be accepted. Teachers feel that they have been asked to forfeit rights — to give them up — and to take it on trust that the Department will deliver on long-overdue workload reforms. Concerningly, it seems that the unions have misjudged the strength of feeling among their members on the issue.

There is the potential for a substantial overreach by the Minister in the negotiation. He seems to be insistent that the pay deal must have strings attached. It is not being offered freely. For teachers who hear a lot of words about workload but see little evidence of real change in their day-to-day pressures, that has proved to be a bridge too far. I will be clear: action short of strike has a substantial and negative impact on our school system, and I make no argument on that point. The people who feel its impact most strongly are our children and young people. It is therefore in everybody's interest to avoid that happening. Teachers, school leaders, parents and all other stakeholders in the education system need to do the necessary work to ensure that action short of strike can be avoided. Surely the best and most effective way in which to avoid it is to deal with the issue that drives it, which is workload. The Minister needs to instil confidence that previous recommendations will be delivered on in a timely fashion.

This is not the time to be creating red lines. There should be no barrier on the management side to getting back around the table. Threats of "considering options" for teachers who are not carrying out contractual obligations should be withdrawn, and a resolution should be found. The Minister cannot be allowed to take credit for a pay deal when it is delivered yet take no responsibility when it is not. He cannot have it both ways. I urge all parties to take off the table the language that is causing suspicion and genuine concern among the teaching workforce and to get back around the table to deliver the pay deal and to put the money that has been secured to the purpose for which it should be used, which is to deliver a fair pay settlement.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

On Saturday, Or Levy, Ohad Ben Ami and Eli Sharabi were released as part of the hostages-for-terrorists swap in the latest Middle East peace initiative. The three men were paraded for Hamas social media propaganda, with the despicable spectacle of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) facilitating the terrorists' theatrics despite the clearly known requirement for impartiality and discretion. ICRC officials shaking hands with the terrorists for their propaganda needs is well short of what is expected from the Red Cross, a point that I for one, who has contributed to the charity in the past, duly noted. I will never support it again.

The interview of Eli by the Hamas terrorists was cruel and evil, even by their standards. The fact that Hamas had murdered his wife and two teenage daughters on 7 October 2023 and kept that information from Eli is beyond heartless, yet they made him talk about it in the interview. It is also clear that, unlike their capturers, jailors and torturers, Eli, Ohad and Or, having spent 491 days in captivity, are suffering from severe physical and mental deterioration, including malnutrition, decreased muscle mass, heart disorders and prolonged infection. Comparing their condition with that of the obviously well-fed Hamas members brings sharply to the fore the difference between the reality and the false narratives peddled by so many. The comparison of Or, Ohad and Eli with the victims of the Holocaust is apt. They should also be compared with the victims of ISIS, the Houthis and Hezbollah. They have all been conveniently ignored and forgotten by those who, in their antisemitic myopia, can only chastise Israel.

Quite a few reasonable people have noted the lack of commentary since Saturday to condemn the treatment of those three men. It is more than noteworthy that those Members of the Assembly who regularly chastise Israel for its actions, as well as the Irish president, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the whole body of antisemitism on this island, have remained silent. That speaks volumes about their motives. We should all be worried about that. Or, Ohad and Eli deserve better. I hope that, for once, those naysayers will join me in wishing justice for the victims of 7 October, the release of all the hostages and peace in the Middle East.

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

On 28 September this year, the Pittsburgh Steelers will play the Green Bay Packers at our GAA HQ, Croke Park. The excitement and anticipation surrounding that global sporting contest's taking place in Ireland will reach fever pitch. I met Dan Rooney and former quarterback Kordell Stewart in Newry with Feargal McCormack when the seeds were being sown for the fixture a number of years back. The Rooney family, who are from Derrybeg on the Armagh side of Newry, have had a positive connection with Ireland for many years. The late Dan Rooney was, of course, the US ambassador to Ireland and was a great friend of my predecessor, Séamus Mallon. Dan Jr and Art are now very actively involved in running the Steelers organisation, and it was heart-warming to hear Dan referring to Ireland as his family's motherland.

I want to pay tribute to a number of people who have made the event possible: the Rooney family; Feargal McCormack; the GAA, including the current president, Jarlath Burns, for having the vision; Charlie McConalogue, the Irish Minister for sport; and, most of all, Peter Quinn. A long time ago, Peter Quinn had the vision to build Croke Park and make it a global sporting stadium. What dividends we have reaped since that time. I say that with a degree of sadness, because it is an awful pity that there is nobody here with that leadership, ambition and vision for our stadia in this part of Ireland.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The weekend just past marked one year since England's Patient Safety Commissioner published the Hughes report on options for redress for all those who were harmed by sodium valproate and pelvic mesh. The Hughes report provided a redress blueprint for those who suffered avoidable harm that was caused by systematic failings in the National Health Service provision frameworks. There was a recommendation to provide an initial one-off, lump sum payment of £25,000 to mesh-injured patients to address delay. Subsequent payments were to be subject to a formalised administrative redress scheme that would evaluate individual payments. To date, no payments have been made. Hopes are being raised and dashed by the unimplemented recommendations of the Hughes report and the Cumberlege report.

On 8 July 2020, the then Health Minister, Robin Swann, issued an immediate apology to victims of mesh and sodium valproate. In 2020, Minister Swann acknowledged the findings of the Cumberlege report and the need to explore financial and non-financial redress. In 2024, Minister Swann issued a similar response to the Hughes report recommendations. In December 2024, Health Minister, Mike Nesbitt, met local patient advocacy groups, although no glimmer of hope for change has been detected, unfortunately. To date, the mesh-injured women have not received a penny of financial redress.

The Department's lack of progress on redress is making victims of the scandal feel that the apology in 2020 was insincere. Regrettably, the mesh-injured women and the mothers and children who have been harmed by sodium valproate have very little confidence that there will be change, as they are being told that any progress here will depend on further discussions with counterparts in England.

Health is a devolved matter, and we should be able to reach our own determinations. Our devolved neighbours in Scotland have provided an alternative blueprint to follow for access to surgical treatment that has been commissioned abroad by NHS Scotland. Our local patients' dilemmas are compounded by our healthcare system's unprecedented waiting lists for surgery, the increase in age of the mesh-injured cohort and the decades of impact on their quality of life. The mesh-injured are without hope.

It is not the mark of an equal society nor a compassionate one when a section of our community — the mesh-injured women — feels abandoned. Behind all the headlines, they feel failed and that little has changed. An apology was made to them in 2020. It is now time for redress.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Today marks the commencement of the third week of the Omagh bomb inquiry, a human atrocity that tore the heart out of Omagh, claiming 31 lives, including two unborn children, and injuring over 220 people, leaving many families bereft of their loved ones, a grief and pain that they carry with them to this very day. Over the past two weeks, all those following the inquiry will, no doubt, have been greatly touched by the pain and continuing grief of those families, who have provided testimonials of their children, sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives who tragically lost their lives in that terrible atrocity carried out by the Real IRA.

For many of the families, this is the first time in the past 27 years that they have spoken publicly about the type of person that their loved one was and the great loss that they sustained on that bleak August afternoon. The tears and grief bear testimony to the pain of personal loss that they have carried over the past 27 years and their pursuit of truth and justice. Lives, families and homes were changed forever. Today, this question is still being asked: "For what?". What was the motive for such a vicious act of violent terrorism and cold-blooded murder?

Over the years, the families have fought a courageous battle for truth and justice on what was one of the deadliest atrocities of the Troubles. However, the blatant refusal of the Dublin Government to provide a structure for a parallel inquiry south of the border is totally appalling. The victims deserve truth, accountability and justice on both sides of the border. The Dublin Government cannot ignore the fact that the Omagh bomb was planned, prepared and transported to Omagh from the Republic of Ireland, yet it appears that they still want to provide a safe haven for those murderers. While the Taoiseach, Mr Martin, and his sidekick, Simon Harris, seek to justify their decision by stating that the Irish Government will ensure full cooperation with the inquiry, the fact remains that the UK inquiry has no authority to call witnesses from the Republic or compel them to give evidence. That creates a genuine concern amongst the families of victims that key evidence from the Republic may never be examined.

Today, in the House, I call upon the Taoiseach and Mr Harris, for the sake of the Omagh families, to have done with their hypocrisy and speaking from both sides of their mouth and to do the honourable thing by bringing forward a structure for a parallel inquiry in the South, rather than continuing to harbour and cover up for the perpetrators of that evil act.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

In February, we acknowledge Heart Month, a time to consider the importance of taking care of our heart and to improve our understanding of heart and circulatory conditions. The statistics speak for themselves. Heart disease causes nearly a quarter of deaths in Northern Ireland: around 4,200 deaths every year. Today, around 75,000 people live with coronary heart disease. That will only increase with our ageing and growing population. Heart disease impacts not only on older people. Around 1,100 people under 75 die from heart disease every year.

Northern Ireland has led the way in cardiovascular research, most famously through the work of Professor Frank Pantridge and his team at the Royal Victoria Hospital, who invented the world's first mobile defibrillator, fundamentally changing heart care and saving millions of lives around the world. We must support our research sector and universities here in their continuing to pioneer innovative research and organisations such as the British Heart Foundation, which also plays a vital role in developing and funding essential research into heart and circulatory diseases.

This year, the theme for our Heart Month from the British Heart Foundation is Go Red. It is running a number of fundraising events and encouraging others to organise similar events. Another ask is that people consider learning CPR, an invaluable and life-saving skill. I have used CPR and have taught it to others in my previous role as a nurse. Last year, my constituency office staff completed CPR training. I encourage businesses to consider that, especially those located in busy town centres. In the UK, eight out of 10 cardiac arrests happen at home, and knowing how to do CPR could save a loved one's life. On a more personal level, people can monitor their heart health through ECG and blood pressure monitors, which can easily be purchased.

As MLAs, we have a responsibility to act to protect our population and reduce the risk of heart disease. Shortly, we will discuss one very important action, the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, but we need further action. I welcome any update from the Minister of Health on his priorities for coronary heart disease in the remaining two years of the mandate.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Téann teanga dhúchais amháin in éag i gceann gach aon choicíse. Ar na teangacha a cailleadh cheana féin bhí cuid a bhí á labhairt ar imchian an Artaigh agus cuid ar chósta na hAstráile. Cé go raibh difríochtaí eatarthu ó thaobh suímh, cultúir agus foghraíochta de, tá rud amháin ag nascadh fhormhór na dteangacha dúchais a chuaigh in éag: cailleadh iad de bharr an choilíneachais nó de bharr na dteangacha idirnáisiúnta a tháinig chun cinn de dheasca an choilíneachais. Ar feadh na gcéadta bliain rinneadh ionsaithe ar ár dteanga dhúchais féin lena cur den tsaol. Ach is léir gur sháraigh ar na cumhachtaí coilíneachta an teanga a scriosadh, nó tá sí ag fás léi, agus, leoga, tá an Ghaelscolaíocht ar an earnáil is mó a bhfuil fás fúithi sa Tuaisceart.

Tugann teangacha dúchais léargas ar leith dúinn ar an tír, agus nascann siad muid léi; tá siad fite fuaite inár gcultúr, agus tá ról tábhachtach le himirt acu i bhforbairt ár bhféiniúlachta. Táthar ag tuar go rachaidh idir 50% go 90% de theangacha dúchais ar ceal faoi cheann céad eile bliain.

Is iomaí iarracht a rinne muidne ar an oileán seo ár dteanga dhúchais a athbheochan — iarrachtaí ar éirigh go maith leo. Iarrachtaí ar nós bhunú Chonradh na Gaeilge sa bhliain 1893, iarrachtaí leithéidí Dhúbhghlais de Híde agus Phádraig Mhic Phiarais, go foghlaim na Gaeilge i gcásanna na Ceise Fada. Tá athbheochan úr faoi lán seoil anois i seomraí mar seo, i seomraí ranga, i gclubthithe de chuid Chumann Lúthchleas Gael, agus in amharclanna agus i hallaí ceolchoirme. Go raibh athbheochan na Gaeilge ina réalta eolais ag teangacha eile mionlaigh atá ag streachailt le fanacht beo.

Seo í teachtaireacht shoiléir Lá Idirnáisiúnta na Máthairtheangacha: beatha teanga í a labhairt.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

[Translation: Every fortnight an indigenous languages dies. Among the languages that have already been lost, some were spoken in the far reaches of the Arctic and some on the coast of Australia. While they differed in setting, culture and phonetics, one thing linked most of the indigenous languages that have died out: they perished as a result of colonialism or as a result of the international languages that came to prominence as a result of colonialism. For centuries, our own native language has borne the brunt of attacks in an attempt to destroy it. However, it is clear that the colonial powers have failed to destroy the language, as it is continuing to grow. Indeed, Irish-medium education is the fastest-growing education sector in the North. Indigenous languages give us a unique insight into the land, and they link us to it; they are ingrained in our culture and play an important role in developing our identity. It is predicted that between 50% and 90% of indigenous languages will be lost in the next century. We on this island have made many efforts to revive our native language — efforts that have borne fruit. Efforts such as the founding of Conradh na Gaeilge in 1893, with Douglas Hyde and Patrick Pearse in 1916, to learning Irish in the cages of Long Kesh. The latest revival is in full swing in rooms such as these, in classrooms, in GAA clubhouses and in theatres and concert halls. Let the revival of the Irish language be a guiding light for other minority languages that are struggling for survival. That is the clear message on this International Mother Language Day: a language lives by being spoken.]

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

One of the pillars of a democratic society is freedom of religion. From the Glorious Revolution until now, citizens in this part of the globe have benefited from individual rights and freedoms, not least in the area of faith. Sadly, that is not the case elsewhere, particularly for the global Christian community, which suffers more persecution than other faith groups. Over 380 million Christians face persecution and discrimination — that is one in seven believers worldwide. That figure represents an increase of 15 million since last year and represents one in seven Christians globally, according to Open Doors' worldwide watch list 2025.

At this year's parliamentary launch of the watch list on 15 January, MPs heard speakers from Bangladesh, East Africa and Nigeria. Indeed, North Korea remains number one on the watch list, a position that it has held almost every year since 2002. In early 2024, the North Korean Government announced stricter regulations and increased crackdowns. It has been officially reported that the North Korean authorities publicly executed about 30 young teenagers for watching a South Korean drama on a USB drive, and several 17-year-olds were sentenced to life imprisonment or death for similar reasons in June and July 2024.

I pay tribute to the incredible work of Open Doors and other charities working in that space to raise awareness and support those who are being persecuted by Governments across the globe. I also welcome the recent appointment of David Smith MP as UK special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, and I wish him well in that important role. It is important that, as leaders in our community, we all speak out against persecution internationally and that, as local legislators, we guard against any attempt to dilute freedom of religion and belief here, be it through word or action, however subtle it may appear.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

This year, my constituency is, once again, hosting the British Open, one of the world's most prestigious sporting events. More than just a golf tournament, the Open is a major opportunity to showcase the very best of our local area and Northern Ireland as a whole. I acknowledge the work of the R&A; its commitment to bringing the Open back to Royal Portrush is a testament to the success of the event in 2019 and the quality of our local courses. Its investment and belief in our ability to host a tournament of that scale should not go unrecognised. I also commend Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council and the various statutory agencies that have been working hard to put in place plans on transport infrastructure and event management to ensure that the tournament runs smoothly and that local people are engaged in the process.

I do, however, believe that the Northern Ireland Executive are missing opportunities. Events of this scale do not just bring short-term economic benefits; they have the potential to open up long-term gains in tourism, trade and investment, yet it seems that the Executive are limited in their approach to capitalising on these opportunities. Where is the ambition to secure future major sporting events? Where is the plan to promote Northern Ireland as a global destination off the back of millions of viewers watching this tournament, set in one of the most stunning links courses in the world? Where is the real engagement with businesses to help them to maximise the benefits, not just for the week of the Open but for years to come?

We know from the previous time the Open was here that, although it was a resounding success, there were challenges. Some businesses felt sidelined, transport and accessibility issues caused frustration and the wider economic potential was not fully harnessed. This time, we must and can do better. The Northern Ireland Executive and Tourism NI should work with local businesses and the hospitality sector to ensure that they reap the rewards of increased visitor numbers, both during and after the event. Our Government should be leading the charge in ensuring a lasting legacy, whether through improving sporting infrastructure, supporting small businesses or using this global platform to tell a positive story about Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has proven that it can deliver world-class events, but we must do more than just host them. We must leverage them for long-term success, and the Open in 2025 is not just about golf but about our economy, our communities and our future.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Yesterday, we paused to remember the date, 9 February, when, in 1971, five men travelled to Brougher Mountain in rural County Tyrone to repair buildings at a transmitter compound. On the track to the compound, their Land Rover activated a large explosive device and they were blown up by a Provisional IRA bomb. All five innocent men, going to do their day's work, were instantly killed by that IRA bomb in what can only be described as an evil and harrowing attack. Those in positions of leadership who fail to condemn the murders of innocent people and say that there was no alternative to that violence are disgraceful. History can never be rewritten.

Today, I remember those five men. The two BBC engineers from Great Britain were Malcolm David Henson, aged just 23, the youngest victim that day, and William Alan Thomas, aged 35. Three of the men killed were from a Kilkeel-based firm in my constituency of South Down, and the families firmly uphold their memory in our community today. George Beck, aged 43, was a devoted husband to Isobel and a loving father to Nigel and Gillian. He was a member of Derryogue flute band and of the Orange and the Black. He was an active member of Mourne Presbyterian Church and a singer in the church and male voice choir. John Eakins, aged 52, was husband to Lottie and father of seven children: Billy, Tom, Alex, Jennifer, Linda, Lesley and Rodney. At the time of his death, he had several grandchildren. He was a family man and a hard worker. He was a keen churchgoer and was sexton of Carginagh Church and a member of Derryogue Orange lodge and the local Royal Black Preceptory 208. Harry Edgar, aged 27, was the son of Robert and Thelma and a loving brother to Phyllis. A devoted family man, quiet and unassuming, he loved horses and football, which he enjoyed playing at Ballyardle. The funerals of those three Kilkeel men took place on 11 February, when the entire population of Kilkeel lined the streets.

The South East Fermanagh Foundation (SEFF) has worked with the families of those innocent victims of that terrorist atrocity to dedicate a memorial stone and represent them in a tapestry. Most importantly, it works with the families to provide support and to continue to tell the story of truth from that terrible day: five innocent men, going about their day's work, were brutally and cruelly murdered by the evil actions of the Provisional IRA. The families of those men will never forget them, nor will our community, and neither should anyone.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

You have two minutes, Mr Gaston.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

I will briefly touch on the underhand manner in which the Assembly Commission has progressed the Bill designed to give MLAs a massive pay increase. Why were only the parties that are on the Commission consulted? Why, prior to the debate last week, were MLAs outside Sinn Féin, Alliance, the SDLP, the DUP and the Ulster Unionists totally in the dark about the contents of the Bill? I was aware of the projected £19,000 pay bonanza for MLAs only because I read the Audit Committee's briefing to assist in its scrutiny of the Assembly Commission's budget for 2025-26. I was totally in the dark as to the contents of the Bill prior to its publication on the Assembly website. One suspects that the parties on the Commission hoped that I had not read the Audit Committee's briefing note. It was never sent to me, and I received it only after my office asked the Business Office whether there were any papers that could be studied ahead of the debate to approve the Commission's budget on 9 December last year.

Guidance from the UK Government is clear:

"consultation should take place at a stage when there is scope to influence the policy outcome."

It states that consultation:

"should normally last for at least 12 weeks".

The Executive Office guidance on consultations also sets the standard period for consultation at 12 weeks. Consultation should be an important part of the legislative process, because it permits all parties, organisations and the public to feed into the policymaking process. In this instance, however, the Assembly Commission decided to consult only parties with representation on the Commission and never dared to let the public or other parties even see the proposals, much less have their say. Frankly, the whole process stinks —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— from beginning to end. I look forward to debating the amendments to the Bill when it returns to the House.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I ask Members to take their ease for a moment.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Dr Aiken] in the Chair)

Assembly Business

Executive Committee Business

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I beg to move

That the draft Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 be approved.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

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

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful for the opportunity to propose the motion. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) operates an annual charging policy for its regulatory activities. The charging policy covers eight separate charging schemes, of which the waste management charging scheme is one.

The waste management charging scheme requires legislation to be laid to make it operational. The NIEA charging policy is governed by the principles of 'Managing Public Money Northern Ireland' and operates under a full cost recovery model. That means that NIEA charges operators of regulated activities the full costs of those regulatory activities and that they are not subsidised by the taxpayer.

The fees and charges covered by the charging policy are uplifted annually. They are normally uplifted by the GDP deflator figure, which is issued by His Majesty's Treasury in December in each year. However, the charging policy allows for the Department to apply any other mechanism deemed appropriate to ensure full cost recovery. That prevents the costs of NIEA chargeable activities from having to be paid out of the public purse. After analysis by NIEA finance, it was agreed that fees and charges for 2024-25 should be uplifted by 9·5%. That covers two separate and distinct payroll years, with different rates applied, and it includes associated employers' pay costs. The uplift applies to schemes in the NIEA charging policy 2024-25. Had NIEA used the 2024-25 GDP deflator figure of 0·8% that was issued by Treasury, the agency would have lost an estimated £1 million in fees and charges across all charging schemes, and that would have had to be paid from the public purse.

Normally, the statutory rule (SR) required to bring the waste management charging scheme into operation each year is laid by negative resolution. However, these regulations are made under schedule 4 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which stipulates that they will be subject to draft affirmative resolution procedure, unless they only alter a fee or charge to reflect changes in the value of money. Therefore, because the fees and charges are being uplifted by using a figure that is not a stand-free inflationary measure, the Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 are required to be laid by draft affirmative resolution.

As an executive agency of the Department of Agriculture Environment and Rural Affairs, NIEA is a key contributor to the Department's vision of sustainability at the heart of a living, working and active landscape that is valued by everyone. Its aim is to protect and enhance Northern Ireland's environment and, in doing so, to deliver health and well-being benefits to support economic growth. The uplift to the agency's fees and charges is essential if that work is to continue. Accordingly, I commend the statutory rule to the House.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

The Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs met on 23 January and received an oral briefing from officials from the waste legislation branch and the environmental resources policy division on the SL1 regarding the draft statutory rule.

The Committee heard that the Northern Ireland Environment Agency operates an annual charging policy for its regulatory activities, covering eight separate charging schemes, one of which is the waste management charging scheme. We heard that legislation was needed to bring the scheme into operation each year. The Committee noted that the NIEA charging policy is a model of full cost recovery, meaning that those activities are not subsidised by the taxpayer and that the fees and charges are uplifted annually. The Committee heard that they are normally uplifted by the GDP deflator figure that the Treasury issues in December but that, after analysis by the NIEA finance branch, it was agreed that the fees and charges for 2024-25 should be uplifted by 9·5%. The uplift applies to the schemes in the NIEA charging policy for 2024-25, covering two distinct payroll years with different rates applied and includes associated employer pay costs. The Committee heard that, if the NIEA had used the 2024-25 GDP deflator figure of 0·8%, it would have lost an estimated £1 million in fees and charges across all the charging schemes.

The officials advised that the SR to bring the waste management charging scheme into operation each year is usually laid by negative resolution. These regulations, however, are made under schedule 4 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which means that they are subject to the draft affirmative resolution procedure, unless they are only altering a fee or charge to reflect changes in the value of money. The Committee noted that, as the fees and charges are being uplifted beyond a statutory inflationary measure, the SR was required to be laid by draft affirmative resolution.

The Committee then asked a series of questions, two of which I will bring to the House's attention. First, we were interested in the fees and fines applied in the rest of the UK, and the officials highlighted the fact that the guidance that insists on full cost recovery is statutory and applies throughout the UK. Secondly, we asked whether the agencies in other jurisdictions also based their cost recovery on running costs and whether their model for cost recovery was the same as the NIEA's. The officials confirmed that that was indeed the case. The Committee then agreed that it was content to support the SR as drafted.

More recently, at its meeting on 6 February, the Committee considered the SL5 letter and the draft SR. The Committee noted that no changes had been made since the SL1 was submitted to the Committee and that the Examiner of Statutory Rules (ESR) had advised that the SR was to be included in the next ESR report and would not be drawn to the special attention of the Assembly. Since then, the ESR report has indeed been issued.

The Committee agrees to recommend that the draft Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 be approved by the Assembly.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

While the increases are higher than usual, they are a result of increased NIEA staff costs and a further projected increase in those staff costs. Inherent in 'Managing Public Money', which sets out the main principles for dealing with resources that public-sector organisations use, is the need for the NIEA to seek full cost recovery for its services. Not introducing the increases would result in a £1 million shortfall for the NIEA, affecting its ability to carry out its vital environment role. Apart from being slightly higher than usual, the increases are regular and routine, and we have no issue with supporting them.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Members who have contributed to the debate. In summary, the Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 will bring into operation the waste management charging scheme for 2024-25. That is required for the NIEA to charge for its waste management regulatory activities and includes an annual uplift to fees and charges, allowing the NIEA to operate under full cost recovery, as is required by the principles of 'Managing Public Money Northern Ireland'. I accordingly commend the statutory rule to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 be approved.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I beg to introduce the Sign Language Bill [NIA 10/22-27], which is a Bill to make provision about the status of and for the advancement of British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That this Assembly endorses the principle of Northern Ireland's inclusion in the UK Tobacco and Vapes Bill to introduce a progressive smoking ban across the UK and to stop vapes and other nicotine products being branded and advertised to appeal to children, insofar as the provisions of that Bill relate to matters falling within the legislative competence of the Northern Ireland Assembly and agrees to the Bill's extension to Northern Ireland.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

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

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Among the many and varied challenges that I accept as Minister of Health, addressing health inequalities is perhaps the most difficult, as nobody has shifted the dial on healthy life expectancy since devolution in 1998-99. I repeat: that challenge is an Executive-wide one. The international standard that we are working to indicates that clinical health initiatives contribute 20% of the solution; socio-economic initiatives contribute 40%; environmental initiatives contribute 10%; and the remaining 30% are down to individual behaviours, such as alcohol consumption, drug use and smoking. It is in that context that I seek the support of the House for the legislative consent motion (LCM).

Last year, the House voted to support Northern Ireland's inclusion in the previous Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which, unfortunately, fell on the dissolution of Parliament. The new Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which was introduced last November, is broadly the same as the previous Bill. It will create a smoke-free generation, making it an offence for anybody born on or after 1 January 2009 to be sold tobacco products. Going further than the previous Bill, it seeks to address the deliberate marketing of nicotine vapes and non-nicotine vapes to children. Consequently, the Bill will ban the sale of vapes and other nicotine products to under-18s, including from vending machines. It will ban advertising and sponsorship as well as free distribution. The tobacco retailers' register will be extended to include retailers who sell vapes or other nicotine products. The Bill will also provide a power to introduce a licensing scheme. Each of the four nations will have powers to extend smoke-free places and to designate them vape- and heated tobacco-free.

Why do we need those measures? It is because smoking kills. It is the number-one cause of preventable illness and premature death. Each year, 2,200 people in Northern Ireland die from smoking-related conditions. It increases the risk of over 50 serious health conditions. As I said, smoking is also a major cause of health inequality. Smoking rates in the areas in which deprivation is highest are three times those in the least deprived areas. The Bill's generational approach to eliminating tobacco use offers a groundbreaking way in which to address that public health threat. Smoking also impacts on non-smokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke and on families who have to deal with the illness or death of loved ones. Smoking affects us all.

Members will be all too aware of the financial pressures facing our health service. In 2019-2020, Northern Ireland hospitals spent £218 million treating smoking-attributable conditions, and there were 38,617 smoking-attributable hospital admissions. There are growing concerns about the harms of vaping. Recent data shows that, among year 12 pupils, vape use doubled from 11·7% in 2019 to 23·6% in 2022. The Institute of Public Health found evidence of a gateway effect between e-cigarette and subsequent tobacco use, so robust measures are needed to address the appeal of the products to children.

In respect of costs arising, the smoking measures are not entirely new, so we are not starting from scratch. While the exact costs will need further analysis, in the long term, some expenditure is justified, given the huge personal and economic costs of smoking. Some may be concerned that there are different legislative frameworks on either side of the border. However, the fact remains that we have a common goal of reducing smoking prevalence and tobacco harm. The case for consent remains as when the Assembly gave consent to the previous Bill. This UK-wide Bill offers the best opportunity to introduce the measures in this mandate and allow us to keep pace with the other UK nations. The Bill offers a huge opportunity to save lives and enable people to stay well for longer.

The response to the public consultation showed overwhelming public support for the measures. The Executive Office and Health Committees were briefed, and they agreed that we should be included in the UK-wide legislation. It is the right thing to do, and we would face considerable public criticism if we were to reject this once-in-a-generation opportunity. I am grateful to Professor Sir Michael McBride for his support for the Bill; indeed, the Bill is supported by all four UK Chief Medical Officers (CMOs).

I ask Members to support the motion in order to best serve our families, our friends and future generations.

The Bill is an opportunity to save lives. I urge Members to take that opportunity.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

I welcome the opportunity to confirm the Health Committee's support for the motion that the Minister of Health has introduced. We are all too aware of the harm that is caused by smoking. Smoking remains the number-one preventable cause of death, disability and ill health here. It kills over 2,000 people in the North every year, and there are many more people living with the debilitating effects of smoke-related illnesses, such as heart disease and stroke, as well as many other life-limiting conditions.

Evidence shows that tobacco use is the leading cause of health inequalities, with smoking prevalence rates higher among people living in areas of social and economic deprivation. The lung cancer rate in areas where deprivation is highest is around two and a half times the rate seen in the least-deprived areas, while the smoking death rate is twice as high in areas where deprivation is the highest. Evidence also shows that children of smokers are often more likely to become smokers, creating a cycle of health inequalities. We, therefore, need to try to find a way to break that cycle and improve the health of all our communities.

The legislative consent motion is one of the tools that we can use to drive forward change. The Committee, therefore, welcomes the extension of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, as the measures contained in it will, unquestionably, provide significant health benefits here, particularly for our young people. As the Minister outlined, by prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to people born on or after 1 January 2009, the Tobacco and Vapes Bill will introduce measures to stop people starting smoking and becoming addicted to tobacco products. The Committee wholeheartedly endorses that measure, which will surely go a considerable way towards realising the ambition of achieving a smoke-free generation in the future.

The Committee recognises that this is the second such LCM that it has considered and was disappointed that it was unable to be progressed by the previous British Government. However, the Committee welcomes the additional changes in this legislation, including the extension of existing tobacco advertising, sponsorship and brand-sharing rules to cigarette papers, herbal smoking products, vaping products and other nicotine products; the powers to allow regulation to be made to extend smoke-free provisions in public-sector spaces; and the extension of the NI tobacco retailers' register to include vapes and other nicotine products. It also welcomes the planned introduction of retail licensing provisions that will be commenced in the longer term.

The Health Committee looks forward to engaging with the Department of Health as the legislation is implemented over the coming period and in its development of a new tobacco strategy. The strategy must contain specific measures that will support existing smokers to quit and, in particular, measures that will target the groups in which smoking rates are highest.

I thank the Youth Assembly for taking the time to engage with the Committee, on a second occasion, on this legislation. Its input was valuable as the Committee considered the impact of the legislation. It is important that we, as a parliamentary institution, engage with those who will be most affected by legislation when it is brought forward. I encourage the Minister and the Department to ensure that, when legislation is brought to the Assembly, there is significant engagement with those who will be impacted on the most. I thank the organisations, including the Institute of Public Health and Cancer UK, that engaged with the Committee on the subject. I also thank the Minister and his departmental officials for their early briefing on the LCM, which allowed the Committee to be fully informed when making its decision on whether it would support the motion.

I highlight that the Committee's report requests that the Department engages with the Committee at the earliest opportunity on the development of local regulations for which the Minister of Health has responsibility and the wider regulations for which the British Secretary of State has responsibility. In recognition of the particular interest that the Youth Assembly expressed in relation to vaping, the Committee recommends that the Department of Health engages with young people, particularly the Youth Assembly, on the future regulation of vaping products and vapes.

From the Committee's point of view, I confirm the Committee's support for the Minister's motion that asks the Assembly to support the extension of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. The Committee agrees with the Minister's view that the measures contained in the Bill offer a huge public health opportunity that cannot be missed and will go a considerable way towards achieving the ambition of creating a smoke-free generation. The Health Committee endorses and supports that ambition.

I will say a few words in my capacity as an MLA and Sinn Féin's health spokesperson. Some studies have indicated that nicotine is as addictive as heroin and cocaine. From my personal experience, as someone who used to smoke and who did so for over 20 years, I know just how difficult breaking free from that drug is. Given the addictive nature and proven detrimental health impacts, we must do all that we can to protect all our citizens, particularly children and young people, from its impact. Over 200,000 people still smoke in the North and are at risk of 16 types of cancer, heart disease, stroke and other related illnesses. The LCM is a worthwhile first step, Minister, but we can and need to do more. For example, we need a renewed tobacco control strategy urgently, more funded tobacco cessation services and a lung screening programme in the North.

Parents, teachers and health organisations have all raised concerns about the current availability of vaping products to minors. The rise in youth vaping is a major cause for concern, and immediate steps are needed to inform children and young people of the long-term harm that can be caused by it. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health called the use of vaporised nicotine products by children "an epidemic" and stated that the products not only cause more damage to children's lungs but:

"can be just as addictive, if not more so than traditional cigarettes."

Asthma + Lung UK stated:

"Vaping, despite its relative harm reduction potential, is increasingly being used recreationally by young people rather than solely as a cessation tool."

The British Heart Foundation said that increasing the age of sale will:

"protect future generations from the devastating impact of smoking."

Reducing the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, such as smoking, is also crucial to alleviating further strain on our overstretched health and social care services.

Despite the law stating that those products cannot be sold to anyone who is under 18, it is clear that children are consuming them. Teachers have raised the issue of underage vaping with me, and I am certain that that is the case for other MLAs in the Chamber. The use of those products has, unfortunately, become commonplace in our schools. We absolutely need to do more. We need to stop vapes and other nicotine products from being branded and advertised to appeal to our children. The array of colourful vapes that are flavoured like sweets is an obvious draw to children. They usually come with colourful packaging, and some even light up. Disposable e-cigarettes are relatively inexpensive, costing around £4 to £5. Therefore, they are affordable to many children.

Sinn Féin welcomes the efforts being made in schools to inform and educate young people about the dangers of tobacco use, its addictive components and the long-term effects that it can have on health. We welcome the proposals to make it illegal for anyone who is born after January 2009 to buy cigarettes. We also recognise that there is a question around enforcement and how that might work. In particular, we live on the island of Ireland, so we need to see good cooperation between the North and South and the implementation of changes to ensure that it is not as simple as people crossing the border to buy products.

Before I finish, I thank the health organisations that made contact and provided helpful briefing papers in advance of the debate, such as the British Heart Foundation, Asthma + Lung UK, the BMA and Cancer Research UK, and recognise their work. I met representatives of Cancer Research this morning, and some of its members are in the Public Gallery. Sinn Féin believes that all efforts should be made to reduce the prevalence of smoking in society, and the Bill goes some way towards realising that.

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

I endorse all the remarks that have been made. We discussed the issue in Committee. It is pretty much a no-brainer. Smoking kills, and it kills lots and lots of people. It is not killing as many people now as it used to. Why? Because not as many people smoke. If we do everything that we can to provide the necessary leadership and guidance, it will, hopefully, help future generations to completely eradicate smoking one day so that nobody does it. That will help.

Like the Chair of the Health Committee, I was a smoker. I have been off cigarettes for over 20 years at this stage, although my current cold makes it sound as though I am back on them again. It is really difficult to give up smoking. I started smoking because, where I lived as a young person, we could get access to a vending machine. We were able to sneak in and pool our money to purchase a packet of cigarettes. The inclusion of elements that deal with removing vending machines as points of sale is really important. If the product has to be sold, it must be sold to people of an appropriate age and in an appropriate way.

There is also the issue of health inequalities. We know that smoking is more prevalent in areas of deprivation, and we know that the sheer cost of cigarettes nowadays means that it is putting a substantial drain on some families' income. Trying to eradicate smoking for future generations might take away a massive cost from some households. As matters continue, it will be incredibly difficult to police it — to have two people who are maybe just one year apart, and one can smoke and the other cannot. There may be some ways that cigarettes will be passed around. Of course, everyone knows that, in every town across the North, there are places that sell cigarettes at knock-off prices. If that continues to be the case in the future, it will provide that additional access. I hope that something can be done to try to clamp down on the access so that those who can get cigarettes do not avail themselves of that opportunity.

I welcome the fact that the legislation is being debated here today.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Like other Members, as a former 30-a-day smoker, I can stand in the House and say that quitting over 15 years ago was the most positive, health-defining decision that I have made. I fell into the category of the almost nine out of 10 people in the UK who took up smoking before the age of 21. Millions of our citizens, I am sure, will look back with regret about why they have not taken the decision not just to stop but to never have started a habit that kills up to two thirds of its users. It is the largest cause of preventable illness and premature death.

My smoking habit took many, many attempts to crack. I often wonder whether, if vaping had been freely available back then as it is today, it would have made the process of quitting easier. Smoking damages the heart and the lungs and is the key cause of many cancers. It has been linked to diabetes and dementia as well as stillbirths and miscarriages, and it damages teeth and gums. Quite simply, there are no good uses for tobacco. No one can argue against the significant harms caused by smoking.

During the recent debate in Westminster, it was noted that smoking costs the average smoker £2,500 a year, which is money that those people could spend on other goods and services. The Health Committee has had a number of presentations, all supporting moves to address smoking and vaping in the young, and has had written representation from Diabetes UK, Asthma + Lung UK, the British Medical Association (BMA) and Northern Ireland Chest Heart & Stroke, which kindly provided briefing materials. The Youth Assembly broadly welcomed the Bill and was supportive of attempts to create a smoke-free generation. The Committee did not, however, hear from the smoking or vaping industry, other than series of emails from Japan Tobacco International (JTI) warning that, under the UK's withdrawal agreement from the EU, the Bill may not apply here. We need to know whether the Bill can apply in the Province. We need to know whether all four corners of the UK will have a generational smoking ban. We encourage the Minister to detail his discussions in that regard and seek out a definitive response.

I can only surmise that the outworkings of the Bill, if enacted, will see the closure of a raft of vape shops on our high streets. I will, however, say that vapes being used by adult smokers to try to quit smoking is no bad thing. We would not want the offer of legal vapes to be lost, therefore pushing the smoker who is trying to quit back to the dreaded fag. The unintended consequences of the Bill concern me a little. What are the views of shopkeepers and their thoughts on the Bill, especially about trying, in the future, to say to a grown adult, for example, in their thirties or forties, that they need to produce identification and telling them that they are too young to purchase tobacco? What will be the implications for shopkeepers when violence against businesses is at an all-time high?

Vapes are disgracefully marketed in such a way that they are appealing to young people, with brightly coloured packaging, branded with cartoon characters and flavours that make them as appealing as sweets. All evidence points to the increase in children, in primary and secondary school, using vapes, with further emerging evidence that their usage is affecting children's ability to learn. Nicotine dependence can cause problems with attention and mood, and also sleep issues. There are simply no benefits for non-smokers who vape. Illegal vape products have been found to contain lead and nickel within the soldering of the pipe, pushing those substances into the lungs of young people. We must always remember that the demand for tobacco products is fuelled by addiction. When you reduce the availability of these products, you reduce potential addiction and demand.

Sensible, evidence-based and well-thought-out moves to address the outworkings of smoking, including the cost to our hospitals — over £200 million per year — and the deaths of 2,000 of our people each year, are to be welcomed. That has been borne out in the UK-wide consultation, in which 79% of respondents were in favour. Yes, my party welcomes sensible approaches that aim to stop addiction before it starts, especially in young people. Legislating to prevent dangers to our young people is no bad thing. Yes, we need to educate and raise awareness among children and adults, and not just on tobacco; we could start into the dangers of alcohol and unhealthy food. That will be for another day.

New Zealand brought forward a similar Bill under a previous Prime Minister, but that has been reversed under the new Government, who have opted to up awareness and offer practical tools to help people stop smoking. Some might say that we should follow that course. However, New Zealand's Minister of Health has cited that its smoking rates are around half of those of the UK and that it is already well on the way to achieving its smoke-free goals with less than 5% of its population being daily smokers. Many will also say that the big tobacco industry influenced the decision to go into reverse gear. Either way, we cannot allow that to happen. While the Bill may have unintended consequences, saving tens of thousands of lives, deterring any young person from taking up the habit, as I did, and reducing tobacco-related cancers and heart disease, while shifting healthcare from sickness to prevention, are the reasons that my party will support the LCM and its broad principle.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I rise in favour of the LCM and would welcome Northern Ireland's inclusion in the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. I thank the Minister for bringing the LCM to the Assembly. Like other Members, I know how hard it is to quit smoking. It is certainly very addictive.

The main purpose of the Bill is to introduce a new offence to prohibit the selling of tobacco products, as well as herbal smoking products and cigarette papers, to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009. Clause 68 would introduce the provision into Northern Ireland law. If passed, the Bill would lead to Northern Ireland and the UK as a whole becoming a world leader in tackling the dangers that are posed by smoking, and moving towards a smoke-free society. It should be said that the Bill will not ban smoking for anyone who can buy cigarettes today, but increasing the age of sale will protect future generations from the devastating impacts of smoking and tobacco and prevent the cycle of addiction that has damaged our society for too long.

It is estimated that approximately 13% of Northern Ireland's population smoke. That is around 200,000 people. Every year, there are around 2,300 deaths from heart and circulatory diseases that are directly linked to smoking. Smoking is more prevalent in more deprived areas, where people are two to three times more likely to smoke than those in less deprived areas. That exacerbates the existing socio-economic divide in our society, which is already worse than in other parts of the UK as a consequence of our recent conflict.

Smoking causes huge damage to our economy. It is estimated to cost the Northern Ireland economy £0·4 billion each year; specifically, £0·2 billion to the Department of Health. The massive strain on our health service is worsened by smoking, with around 18,000 annual hospital admissions in Northern Ireland being attributable to smoking. A generational smoking ban would greatly alleviate the social and economic damage that smoking causes regularly. We would see both the immediate and more long-term benefits through passing the draft legislation.

We know from experience that the use of regulation against smoking works and that, in recent decades, the situation was much worse. Fifty years ago, 45% of the UK population smoked. The figure is now less than a third of that. One of the main reasons for that substantial decline is the use of regulation to remove smoking from places where people are vulnerable and to increase public awareness of the dangers of smoking. The Smoking (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 came into operation on 30 April 2007, nearly 20 years ago. It introduced measures to ban smoking in workplaces and enclosed public spaces. That has largely removed indoor smoking, which is particularly dangerous due to the risk of second-hand smoking. In 2021, second-hand smoke exposure was responsible for around 3,000 deaths in the UK. Without the 2006 Order and its equivalents in England, Scotland and Wales, that number would have been much higher.

There have been attempts to reduce the number starting smoking at a young age. Two thirds of smokers start smoking regularly before the age of 18, and most of those people will continue to smoke for the rest of their lives. Until 31 August 2008, the minimum age to purchase and consume tobacco products was 16. That was changed by the Children and Young Persons (Sale of Tobacco etc.) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2008, which brought the minimum age up to 18.

The Bill represents a more significant step towards preventing those who currently cannot buy tobacco products from ever buying them, thereby ending the early exposure to tobacco that has been so prevalent in our society for so long. The UK Government could have considered increasing the age of sale again — for example, to 21, as the Republic of Ireland has been considering, or higher, to 25 — but there is a risk that that would only raise the age at which people start smoking, as opposed to stopping people ever beginning smoking.

It is also important that the Bill includes a wide range of tobacco products, all of which carry a risk to health and can cause cancer. We cannot achieve a truly smoke-free society unless all such products are included. That is especially relevant following a study by Cancer Research UK that revealed that there has been a significant rise in the number of people who use non-cigarette tobacco products in the last decade, particularly young people.

The enforcement of the progressive smoking ban will be crucial. The Bill adopts what I believe to be a reasonable approach. The Bill criminalises not smoking but specifically the sale of tobacco to those born in or after 2009. It will also criminalise proxy purchasing, which is purchasing on behalf of someone below the legal age. Children and others covered by the Bill will not be punished; instead, enforcement officers will have the power to impose on-the-spot fines of £200 and to uphold the law and clamp down on underage sales. I am sure that other MLAs will be as aware as I am of young people, sometimes even in school uniforms, being sold cigarettes and vapes.

I also want to discuss the new regulations that will be introduced by the Bill around vaping and e-cigarettes. Vapes are relatively new and their long-term impacts unclear, but they cannot be considered risk-free. The evidence that we have shows that vapes are less harmful than smoking and can be useful in helping people to quit smoking. They have become the most popular smoking cessation tool. That should be welcomed and encouraged for adults who are looking to quit smoking, but we must be clear that children should not be vaping and should not be able to buy vapes. That is why we welcome the provisions in clause 76 that will make it an offence to sell a vaping or nicotine product to a person under the age of 18.

As previously mentioned, the flavours, names and branding of some of the products would suggest that they are being marketed directly at young people. The Bill introduces new enforcement powers for the Department of Health, and I would appreciate more detail from the Minister of Health on the steps that his Department will take to ensure that those provisions are fully implemented and enacted.

We also need district councils to ensure that they carry out a programme of enforcement action in their areas if appropriate, as under clause 81. That is important in relation to vapes. Although we welcome adults using vapes as an alternative to smoking, there is a risk of the opposite occurring: young people trying vapes and then escalating to smoking. There is a growing body of evidence that that is the case.

In conclusion, I welcome the LCM and particularly the urgency with which the new Labour Government have brought it to Parliament, along with the previous efforts of the former Conservative Government. It is welcome that there exists a broad, cross-party consensus on the issue in Westminster, with 415 MPs voting for the Bill at its Second Stage in November and only 47 against. I hope that we will see similar consensus in the Assembly.

I thank the Department of Health officials who attended the Health Committee, particularly for their useful updates and for outlining the differences between the Labour Bill and the former Conservative one, as well as the Members of the Youth Assembly for their valuable engagement on the issue. I also thank the organisations that have been in touch about the Bill, particularly Asthma and Lung UK, the British Heart Foundation and the BMA, all of which provided useful briefing papers.

I look forward to continued engagement with the Department and the UK Government on how Northern Ireland can become a world leader in tackling the huge damage caused by smoking. Our goal must be a smoke-free society, which is defined as less than 5% of our population smoking. The Bill is a key step towards getting there, and I encourage all Members to support it today.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Today's vote and the Tobacco and Vapes Bill more generally are undoubtedly the right thing to do. That is what I have written down, but, inside, I feel so much better about what is happening today than what is typed up at the top of my page. Unlike probably all the Members who have spoken so far, I have no declaration to make. I have not been a smoker at any stage in my life. I am really not saying that in a pious way. In my family, I was surrounded by smokers. My paternal granny and granda smoked. My granda on my mum's side smoked quite heavily, as did most of my aunts and uncles, and my dad smoked. I am grateful that, for reasons unknown to me, I just did not like it. I did not like the look of it. I did not think that anybody looked cool when they were doing it. I certainly did not like the smell of cigarettes, and I grew up with an individualised aversion to smoking.

As a young person, I often wondered when the day would come when we would have an honest discussion on the subject. Yes, that discussion started around 20 years ago when some of the first legislation came in. If you remember, you will know that the discussion was primarily led by the health bodies outlining the impact of smoking on people. There was also the counter-lobby, which included those who had restaurants, bars and other places where people smoked while congregating and socialising and said that a ban would have a detrimental impact on them; in fact, the statistics show that it did not. The statistics also bear out the fact that we are in a better place because of the changes that were made. We see reduced hospital admissions, improved health among hospitality workers and reduced exposure to second-hand smoke.

We need to return to the issue of vapes every time that we talk about tobacco. When I was 11 years old and had just started secondary school, I remember getting an Ulsterbus to school. It used to pull up outside a shop to pick us up. It was my first day, and I was in my wee school uniform. I am not tall now, but I was even smaller then. The Minister said that 23·6% of year 12s, which is fifth year — I have to convert it into old money — vape and that vaping is potentially a gateway to smoking. I remember getting on to the bus, and, no word of a lie, you could not see the back of it. The layer of smoke was down to about 2 or 3 feet off the floor, and just about everybody whom I could see who was under 16 was smoking. All right, that was 35, 36, 37 years ago, but, if we fail to look at evidence from the past, we cannot combat the wickedness of the future. In tackling vape use, we have to encourage young people not to start vaping because it smells nice, looks nice or whatever: it does not. It hurts me when I am in my own town or anywhere and see young people in school uniform doing what, they think, looks cool and probably smells OK — it smells a lot better than cigarette smoke, to be fair — but, if vaping is a gateway to smoking, we need to look at it very seriously.

Many Members who have spoken have said that tobacco use is the biggest cause of cancer in Northern Ireland. Shockingly, it accounts for over 2,000 deaths here every year. My family has been impacted on. My grandfather died from a respiratory illness, and he was a regular smoker of Park Drives, a particularly harsh type of cigarette, I think. There have been instances of lung cancer in my family and in my wife's family that were almost certainly down to smoking.

Lives will be saved because of this legislation. That is why today is such a good day. It has long been proven that the vast majority of people who smoke became addicted as children, and that needs to remain a focus for us. I am not so naive as to think that, of itself, legislation will stop every young person taking up smoking, but it will do enough to prevent many, and we can help in that effort.

Tobacco use is a leading cause of health inequality in Northern Ireland. Everybody seemed to touch on that, and I will expand on the point a little. There are those in our communities — not just in shops — who are selling illegal, smuggled, counterfeit products, and they do so predominantly in areas of social deprivation. They are leaning on and squeezing the most vulnerable in our society. A multi-pronged approach is required, and there are other areas that we need to look at. It is a tragedy, although an avoidable one, that lung cancer incidence rates in the most deprived areas are about two and a half times those in the least deprived areas. That is why the focus needs to be on looking beyond health and even beyond the economy. There are people out there who are pushing counterfeit and illegal products into the hands of people.

I know that the Minister has a particular interest in and focus on tackling health inequalities, so the legislation is a step along that path. The previous public consultation showed that what the UK Bill and today's LCM will do has strong public support. It is greater here, in fact, than in the rest of the United Kingdom.

I bring Members' minds back to legislation that was passed in 2016 or 2017. It used to be a real bugbear of mine that, when you sat in traffic and looked at a car, you could see car seats with babies and children in the back of the car while one or two people were puffing away in the front. Thankfully, we do not see that so much now.

I congratulate my party colleagues Mike Nesbitt and Robin Swann, who moved at pace and worked closely with the UK Government last February to ensure that the Bill's provisions would extend to Northern Ireland. That did not happen by accident; it was done on purpose. I fully support the motion, and I pay tribute to all the departmental staff, clinicians and community and voluntary organisations that have been so critical in getting the Bill to this point.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I support the idea behind the legislative consent motion. I imagine that I am not alone in receiving a briefing paper from the British Heart Foundation that highlighted startling stats. From its helpful paper, we learn that smoking increases the risk of developing diseases such as heart disease, cancer and lung disease. We have heard during the debate that around 2,300 people die each year from diseases that can be attributed to smoking.

The human cost is staggering, but so are the financial costs. I will put them on record once again. According to the BMA, smoking is estimated to cost the Northern Ireland economy £0·4 billion and the Department of Health an estimated £0·2 billion annually. With around 18,000 admissions to hospitals in our Province each year due to smoking-related problems, action needs to be taken to relieve the stress that that puts on our NHS.

However, I fear that the laudable intent of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill will not result in "Northern Ireland's inclusion", as the motion states, regardless of the decision of the House. I say that because we in Northern Ireland, uniquely in the UK, remain subject to the EU's tobacco directive. We are subject to it because it is one of the 289 EU laws listed in annex 2 of the protocol that remain in force in a part of this United Kingdom. Article 24 of the tobacco directive states:

"Member States may not ... prohibit or restrict the placing on the market of tobacco or related products".

The legislative consent motion seems, on the face of it, to run counter to that. Indeed, there is an interesting precedent. In 2022, Denmark tried to do something similar. The legislation had to be withdrawn, because, as the Health Minister told the Danish Parliament on 6 April 2022:

"The ministry ... considers that a ban on the sale of tobacco and nicotine products to people born in 2010 or later would require an amendment of the European Tobacco Products Directive".

What assurances can the Minister give the House that, after today's vote, MLAs will not simply find the democratic will of the elected representatives of Northern Ireland overruled by our EU colonial masters? I have no doubt that there are those with powerful voices in the industry who will seek to challenge the application of the law to Northern Ireland. We know what happened when similar issues arose with the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 and the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024. In both cases, the High Court ruled that laws that are not made by our sovereign parliament at Westminster or, indeed, this House are supreme. Rather, the court decided that EU law is supreme in Northern Ireland. If, as I suspect, that proves to be the case with this law, it will be scandalous, because, within our United Kingdom, only the people in Northern Ireland will be denied the protections that the Bill offers. I trust that the Minister will address that when he responds to the debate.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

The Bill features a few welcome provisions, including those aimed at tackling the unacceptable marketing of vapes and other nicotine products to children. However, the Bill's key proposal of a progressive smoking ban is, essentially, a prohibitionist approach to a public health issue, and that is a recipe for disaster.

The most glaring example of the failure of a prohibitionist approach is the ban of alcohol in the US at the start of the 20th century. From the outset, there was no widespread acceptance of that policy. People wanted alcohol for various reasons and found ways to get it. Criminal organisations thrived in the black market. The things that the state was trying to prevent — organised crime and corruption —.

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

I thank the Member for giving way. I am attracted to the question about prohibition. In some of these things, I am fundamentally a bit more libertarian, certainly when it comes to certain substances, but it is also the case that smoking does not have some of the social or community upsides that are seen from, for example, the consumption of alcohol. Would the Member take my offer of a comparison with the smoking ban in pubs? That came in 20 years ago, when I was still working in pubs. At that time, that ban was thought of as an example of prohibition that would not work and that was very negative, but it has probably saved lives.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I do not think that it is like for like. The comparison to alcohol is quite apt.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I will make some progress and then, hopefully, will give way.

The things that the state was tying to prevent — organised crime and corruption — ended up thriving during the Prohibition era. I am concerned that the same will be the case with vapes and other products when it comes to the people who will be affected by the LCM. The lesson is clear: prohibition does not work. It is a draconian policy that forces the sale of products underground, where there is no regulation whatsoever.

There is no doubt that smoking causes serious harm to human health. As we have heard, smoking is the leading cause of preventable death. It is responsible for one in four deaths from cancer. As the Health Committee member — I will give way to him in a second — stated, the Bill does not ban anyone from smoking; it only bans shops from selling cigarettes to an ever-expanding group of people.

I will give way to Mr Donnelly.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you. I go back to the Member's previous point about the comparison of alcohol and tobacco. Does the Member agree that alcohol is regulated? We can buy alcohol only in certain places, and we can buy it only above a certain age limit. As with tobacco, regulation of alcohol has made a dangerous product safer for people, reducing hospital admissions and diseases.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Exactly. The point that I am making is that, although smoking is regulated, to ban it would force it underground where there will be no regulation whatsoever, as happened with alcohol in America in the 1920s and 1930s. That is the point that I am making.

It is worth looking at the data. I do not believe that this has been said in the debate, but I may have just missed it: 50 years ago, 45% of the population smoked; today, around 12% of the population smokes. That is a huge drop. Unusually for the House, the current approach is working, leading to a dramatic fall in smoking. That has been achieved by adopting a public health approach to tobacco, including banning smoking indoors, which has been mentioned, and smoking around children as well as banning advertising and vending machine products. I commend those in the PHA, the trusts and the various organisations who advocate a public health approach to this very serious and important issue.

The age at which a person can legally smoke was raised from 16 to 18, which saw a 30% reduction in smoking in that age group. Many would suggest that the next logical step in an effective public health approach would be to increase the minimum age from 18 to 21 — there is data that shows that that could work — and to further develop prevention and education programmes. Instead, the Labour Government and now, seemingly, the Assembly are barrelling blindly ahead with a new, untested approach that was originally proposed by the Tories.

The Bill is a regrettable move away from treating smoking as a public health challenge towards treating it as a new chapter in the war on drugs. The global war on drugs has totally failed, largely because efforts are focused on a hard-line, law and order approach to reducing the supply of drugs. In the North, attempts to curb the supply of drugs via criminalisation have actually seen paramilitaries thrive and grow, jails filled and families absolutely destroyed. A public health approach would, instead, focus on the demand for a drug such as tobacco — the demands and the pressures of everyday life. A focus on demand, rather than supply, would involve measures such as licensing, taxation, product and advertising regulation and education. That is what has been proven to work. That is a public health approach.

The Bill represents a dangerous move away from what has worked — a public health approach to tackling smoking — towards a prohibitionist approach with untold negative consequences. Whilst I may be in a minority of one, I do not give my consent to it.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Question Time will begin at 2.00 pm, I suggest therefore that the Assembly takes its ease until then. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the next Member to speak will be Claire Sugden.

The debate stood suspended.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

1. Mrs Mason asked the Minister for Communities to outline what support he will provide to grassroots sports clubs. (AQO 1495/22-27)

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

4. Mr Martin asked the Minister for Communities to outline any support available for football clubs, at junior level, seeking facilities for additional evening training during the season. (AQO 1498/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Mr Speaker, with your permission, I wish to group questions 1 and 4 and request an additional minute for the answer.

Regrettably, neither my Department nor Sport NI has any funding opportunities open to which grassroots sports clubs could apply. However, I can announce that Sport NI will reopen its popular crowdfunding programme in March. I recognise the important role that grassroots sports play across our communities, including in junior football. The physical health and well-being that sport and physical activity provide cannot be overestimated. Promoting the active living strategy, opening up participation opportunities for sport and physical activity and developing and improving sporting facilities are key areas for my Department. Grassroots sports are the first step in the lifelong journey to more people being more active, more often.

In 2024-25, my Department secured £500,000 for the Your School Your Club initiative to enable school sports facilities to be opened for community use outside of normal school hours. I hope that that funding opportunity will continue in future years. Despite the challenging budget position, I will continue to make the case for funding to support clubs across all disciplines of grassroots sport, including junior football. I encourage my officials to meet any grassroots sports clubs to understand the sector's needs, either for funding opportunities or for additional facilities to meet demand.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Minister for the answer. Is the Minister aware of the current project taking place in the Ballykinler camp? The Down GAA county board is undertaking a project to develop a centre of excellence for sport and a community facility. What support can the Minister give to that? Will he engage with those involved in the project?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am more than happy to engage with the project. My understanding is that funding has been secured for the project through PEACE PLUS funding. Certainly, I am more than happy to engage and, if there are any specific issues that the project is facing, I am happy to discuss them.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. My interest is particularly in junior-level football. There are increasing numbers of players in the North Down primary schools. Is the Minister willing to come to North Down to see the level of enthusiasm at the junior level, perhaps kick a ball around and hear some of the coaches talk about the developments?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am always happy to visit North Down and join the Member wherever it is that he wants to show me around. In many ways, the additional need that he is experiencing is a good problem. However, we know that it exists right across Northern Ireland, and I am keen to better understand the issues and see what my Department can do to help in that situation.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Minister, where a school and a sports club share facilities that require an upgrade, do you routinely direct them to the Education Authority's minor works funds?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

There are a number of ways in which we can help when it comes to improving sports facilities at schools. Often, it is the case that the Education Authority has a role to play. As I previously outlined, we have the Your School Your Club programme, which helps us make the best use of the facilities that we have. Much of our sporting estate is found within the school estate, and I am keen that we can open that up, where possible, to make sure that as many people as possible have access to facilities that are funded with public money.

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

Does the Minister have any opportunities in the future for hardship funds, such as those that the Department previously ran up to a value of £0·5 million, for small grassroots groups? The difference between those organisations folding and staying open can often be a couple of hundred pounds. It is not a big amount of money, but it gives them the lifeline to survive and grow in the future.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am always happy to work with clubs that are in need and looking for some support, either to direct them to funding or to make use of the funding streams that may become available in the Department. I am a big advocate for all sports. I want to make sure that as many people as possible have the opportunity to play and take part, because that brings benefits that go way beyond my Department — we can think of the health and educational outcomes. Certainly, I will always look for additional investment in that way. The Member will understand the limited budgets with which we are operating, but it is an investment and, therefore, a good use of money. I will always be an advocate for that.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

2. Mr Robinson asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the roll-out of the £100 pension-age winter fuel support payment. (AQO 1496/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My officials are working at pace to put in place the IT and other logistical arrangements necessary to make the one-off £100 pension-age fuel support payment. That payment remains on schedule to be paid before the end of March 2025.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his response. What longer-term support will there be, Minister, for those in the greatest need to get what they need?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I hope that the whole House will be behind me on this: we want to see the UK Government change course. They have made a mistake: they have decided to take £1·4 billion off those who need help to heat their homes. That, overall, is a small amount that the Government should have kept in place. It is small compared with the additional costs that will come to the Government because of that decision. There will be additional costs to the health service and from the additional number of people who have applied for pension credit, which is also a passport to other benefits. It is nonsensical. It will not end up saving the Government money, so I hope that they will change course.

However, I recognise that that may not happen, which is why we are taking the action that we can to help those who are in need. That is what we are doing through the fuel poverty strategy, which is out to consultation. It will be out to consultation until 6 March, and I hope that people will respond to it. I hope that, through that, we will have a strategy in place that provides support to give immediate relief to those in need and a longer-term strategy to make sure that we put in place measures that can help — for example, investment in energy efficiency to make sure that people in Northern Ireland have to spend less money to heat their homes.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, the £100 scheme is very welcome. Will those who receive money from the scheme, who live in residential settings, maybe where multiple people live, be expected to pay an additional charge to the residential setting that they live in?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

No, it is not my understanding that any additional charge will have to be paid. There is, importantly, no application process either.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

Minister, have you explored the opportunity to create a Northern Ireland version of the warm homes discount scheme?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

All those issues can be considered through the development of the fuel poverty strategy.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

What engagement have you or your Department had with your DWP counterparts to ensure that our unique circumstances are taken into account in the UK Government's pending Green Paper on welfare reform?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I have met Liz Kendall and others in the DWP ministerial team. My officials have continued engagement at that level to make sure that our particular circumstances are taken into consideration. I have to say that, although there are similarities between what the UK Government are trying to do and what we are trying to do, it is to everybody's benefit that more people get into work and that we break down the barriers that prevent people who are not in work from getting into work. We have common cause, and I want to make sure that we work closely together to get the maximum benefit. Ultimately, our aim should be to protect those who need help and to ensure that we give the assistance necessary to get those who are not in work into work.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

3. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister for Communities to outline when the Housing Executive’s (NIHE) review of primary social needs criteria and points for all victims of violence, abuse and trauma will be completed. (AQO 1497/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

That will be part of the ongoing fundamental review of allocations. My officials will work with the Housing Executive as it carries out modelling, stakeholder engagement and appropriate consultation to inform its considerations. It is anticipated that the fundamental review, including consideration of primary social needs points, which is a new addition to the review, will be completed by autumn 2026, if not sooner.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

It is clear that the current system is not fit for purpose and that the review is necessary and urgent. Is the current timetable sufficient to address the challenges quickly enough?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I want it to be done right now, but I also want it to be done right. There is a balance to be struck. I have full confidence in officials in the Department and the Housing Executive to make sure that we have in place a system that is, as the Member describes it, "fit for purpose".

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As an MLA, I receive reports of intimidation, antisocial behaviour and, sadly, domestic violence in social homes. It is important that we are able to support the people who are affected. How common is intimidation, in comparison with domestic violence?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

In the 10-year period from 2014 to 2024, the number of cases of intimidation fell from 380 to 226. The number of domestic abuse cases rose from 721 in 2014 to 1,146 in 2024. It is a damning indictment of our society that, in the social housing sector alone, the total number of reported cases was 1,146. It is clear that there is wider work for the Executive and society as a whole to do to tackle the issue.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Minister, now that we know that the review of primary social needs criteria and points will report around October 2016, will you confirm whether it will include co-production with victims or be based on the current framework and add something to that?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

For clarity, it will be 2026, not 2016. I can do many things, but I cannot travel back in time. I want to make sure that the review is comprehensive and that we consult as many people as possible. As I said in my answer to Sinéad McLaughlin, I want to make sure that we do this right. That means that we have to speak to as many people as possible and make sure that we have all the information at our disposal.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

5. Mr Beattie asked the Minister for Communities to outline any advice he is giving to applicants to the Northern Ireland Football Fund (NIFF) in relation to the impact of the EU regulation preventing the sale of polymeric infill materials from 2031 on 3G and 4G football pitches. (AQO 1499/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My Department has issued guidance notes to all eligible applicants to the performance programme of the Northern Ireland Football Fund. The guidance notes are also available on the Department's website. Applicants will need to satisfy the Department that investment in artificial grass pitches with rubber infill will offer value for money.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. I understand that this is not just about your Department. I know that you will agree with me that we should not follow EU regulations on this matter but should get rid of microplastics. With eight out of 12 top-flight team pitches going plastic, this is becoming a real issue. I ask the Minister to look at it in the long term, as we must. Will he, working with other Departments, set up a fund to support clubs and other institutions once the regulation comes in?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Of course, we might have wanted to consider that. We could have debated it in this place. We could have decided whether it was the right move to make and whether the perceived benefits would have outweighed the additional cost, but we did not have the opportunity to do that in the House. We did not have the opportunity to decide whether it would work for us. I cannot commit to allocating additional funding at this time, but we will keep that and all such issues under review.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

In keeping with the Minister's comments, is this not yet another example of the blind allegiance of some in the Assembly to EU regulation, with zero scrutiny and zero representation, leaving local people at a disadvantage?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Of course it is. All the evidence that we have is that the regulation will drive up costs. In the current system, we can ensure that the pitches have what is needed in them. That is being taken from us, and the alternatives are more expensive. This might have been a route that we wanted to go down. We may have decided that it would be right on the basis that the environmental benefits outweighed the additional costs, but we should have been able to make that decision in the House. It is a decision that we should have had the opportunity to debate and scrutinise in order to make sure that it was right for us. That has been taken from us.

It is right that we highlight the fact that there will be additional costs for people across Northern Ireland involved in various sports because of the implications of the regulation.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

What assurances can the Minister give to clubs with existing 3G pitches about support and advice when the pitches' surfaces reach the end of their lifespan and require replacement post 2031?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We can certainly give advice. I am aware that trials are being conducted on additional organic materials that may be able to be used. I hope that the Member agrees that, instead of needing guidance in the first place, it would have been better for us to have had those discussions in the House to work out whether we could keep what we currently have. The regulation will add costs. As someone who believes that we need additional pitch provision across Northern Ireland, I am concerned that this will add costs to our ability to deal with that issue. I hope that that is something that Members will take on board.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome the impending and long-overdue opening of the Northern Ireland Football Fund. Its terms and conditions refer to the fact that match funding of 5% will be expected from successful clubs. In the case of a publicly owned ground, that increases to 40%. Given recent investment of somewhere in the region of £2 million by Derry City Football Club in the Brandywell — there is ongoing construction of the north stand — will the Minister give favourable consideration to including that as an example of match funding from a club?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I hope that the Member will read all the documentation that has been put out. Previous investment contributes towards higher points in the matrix, not just investment throughout the process. It is important that those who have been willing to invest already in their facilities benefit from having done so. I encourage the Member to read all the documentation, because he will see that the scoring matrix that we have put in place is very fair. That has been the response from most clubs so far.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

6. Mr Kingston asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the Clifton Gateway public realm scheme. (AQO 1500/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My Department's plans for the Clifton Gateway public realm scheme have been significantly impacted on by the work being undertaken by the Department for Infrastructure to develop the eastern transport plan 2035 and the proposals for the next phase of the Belfast Rapid Transit programme. Donegall Street, Clifton Street and Carlisle Circus, which represent major sections of the proposed Clifton Gateway public realm scheme, are vital parts of the infrastructure network, are integral to proposals in the eastern transport plan 2035 and form part of the proposed route of Belfast Rapid Transit 2. For those reasons, my Department is unable to develop further its plans for the Clifton Gateway public realm scheme, and progress will not be possible until there is more clarity about the Department for Infrastructure's proposals for the area in the eastern transport plan 2035 and its delivery programme for Belfast Rapid Transit 2.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his answer. It reiterates what we have heard previously, which is that the uncertainty over the rapid transit scheme is holding up the progress of the Clifton Street public realm scheme.

Will the Minister update me on two nearby schemes: the lower Oldpark Road public realm scheme and the lower Shankill/Peter's Hill Gateway scheme? Is there any progress to be reported there?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

For Peter's Hill, which is phase 1 of the Shankill Gateway scheme, work is ongoing to procure the works contractor. It is anticipated that the contract will be awarded in April of this year. Site works are expected to commence in spring or early summer and to take 12 months to be completed. That represents an investment in the Shankill of £3·6 million.

The lower Oldpark Road public realm scheme area commences just beyond the junction with the Crumlin Road and proceeds along the Oldpark Road, finishing at Deanby Gardens. Since the plans were developed, the Department for Infrastructure has identified the lower Oldpark Road as a route in the Belfast cycling network delivery plan. Officials from my Department and DFI are working together to explore any opportunities for collaboration on delivering improved pedestrian and cycling infrastructure within the public realm project in a way that avoids nugatory works, minimises the impact on the local community, maximises the benefits gained from public investment in the area and achieves value for money. That has had a significant impact on the planned DFC Lower Oldpark Road public realm scheme design in, for example, planning permission, budget and programme.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Clifton Gateway area is key in the delivery of phase 2 of the Belfast Rapid Transit scheme. That will, hopefully, serve not only North Belfast, of course, but some areas of my South Antrim constituency. Can the Minister give any further information on snag issues that might have arisen in the Clifton Gateway scheme that could be impacting on the delivery of that transport scheme?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Prior to the Clifton Gateway public realm scheme's being paused, design proposals had been developed, including engagement with key stakeholders. I suppose that the snag is that the design programmes will need to be reviewed and updated to take account of the eastern transport plan and Belfast Rapid Transit outcomes when the scheme is progressed.

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

Minister, just down the hill from the Clifton Gateway, what is called the "Tribeca Quarter" is falling into dereliction, which is shameful. In response to a question for written answer from me in spring last year, you said that your officials were meeting Belfast City Council to discuss the vesting of that site. That was in July. What has happened since then, and what is your Department doing?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That is a bit off-topic, Minister, but it is up to you.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Mr Speaker, as you point out, that is not related to the question, but it is a good attempt by the Member to connect it, so perhaps I could write to him with that detail. Dereliction is an issue that needs to be addressed, and I look forward to seeing the dilapidation Bill coming forward from the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

7. Mr McAleer asked the Minister for Communities to outline any plans his Department has to support the regeneration of rural villages and small towns. (AQO 1501/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Department for Communities' regeneration policy focus is on urban settlements with a population of 5,000 or more. As rural villages and small towns have populations of under 5,000, they sit outside DFC's urban regeneration policy remit. Those smaller settlements fall within the remit of the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. However, my Department has led on the delivery of the COVID recovery small settlements scheme, which was jointly funded by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Department for Infrastructure. In total, almost £29 million worth of projects are being delivered to smaller settlements across Northern Ireland. My officials are also working with officials from DAERA and DFI, as well as local councils, to develop a long-term, community-led approach to regenerating our cities and towns that would also include rural villages and smaller towns. I intend to make a joint announcement on that programme later in the year.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his response. The Minister may not want to reveal details of his proposals, but will they likely encompass a successor to the small settlements scheme?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member is right: I do not want to give too much away on that. However, I hope that he recognises my commitment to making sure that we lead on the regeneration of cities, towns and villages of all sizes. Obviously, different responsibilities fall within the remits of different Departments, but I am pleased with what we were able to do under the COVID recovery small settlements scheme, and I will continue to make sure that we deliver.

We have already delivered in the West Tyrone constituency. We are providing funding of over £6 million towards the planned public realm scheme in Strabane, and significant city deal investment of £102 million is planned for Strabane that will include the canal basin and neighbouring sites. That will make a real difference in the Member's constituency.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I am sure that the Minister will agree that the best small town in the North Belfast constituency is Glengormley. Just before Christmas, the Minister kindly listened to representations to award £2·5 million to Glengormley town centre for a public realm scheme. Does the Minister stand over that important commitment to regeneration in that part of North Belfast?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes, of course, absolutely. I know that that area is dear to the Member's heart, and I thank him for the continual, constant lobbying that he has been involved in up to this point. The commitment from the Department certainly stands.

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

Minister, in 2023, your Department funded a £110,000 scheme to explore regeneration projects in 10 rural villages. Will you give us an update on those specific locations, please?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I do not have that detail with me, but, of course, I am happy to write to the Member outlining what we have done in that regard.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

I have also communicated with the Minister on this subject. The village catalyst programme was welcomed; it concentrated on historic buildings. Will the Minister confirm whether there are plans in the rest of the mandate to support bringing empty buildings back into use in rural villages and towns?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Absolutely. That is an important part of what we are trying to do through the housing supply strategy. We need to make sure that we do everything that we can to make use of the buildings that we have. Sometimes, that involves extra cost, but it is still beneficial for us to make sure that we use the buildings that we already have. I have engaged with the historic environment division (HED) in that regard, as well as other interested stakeholders who have experience of converting and reusing existing buildings. I hope that we see more of that not only to tackle the issues that we have in Northern Ireland in regard to housing but to see other ways in which we can reuse existing buildings for the benefit of our economy and people more widely.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

8. Ms Forsythe asked the Minister for Communities, in advance of increases to employers' National Insurance contributions in April 2025, whether he has any plans to consider a reduction in contractual targets with the voluntary and community sector. (AQO 1502/22-27)

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

11. Mrs Dodds asked the Minister for Communities to outline any conversations that he has had with the Minister of Finance for additional money to offset the rise in employers' National Insurance contributions for the voluntary and community sector. (AQO 1505/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Mr Speaker, with your permission, I will group questions 8 and 11 for answer.

I understand and acknowledge the sector's concerns about the impacts of recent UK Government Budget decisions, including the increase to employers' National Insurance contributions. My Department currently has two contracts with voluntary and community sector organisations. Both contracts provide demand-led services; therefore, contractual targets are not suitable for those contract types. My Department also provides grant funding to a number of voluntary and community organisations. Those funding relationships do not involve contractual targets; instead, organisations are funded to deliver agreed objectives in line with an outcomes-based accountability approach.

My Department adopts a flexible approach to grant-making. Where delivery partners working with my Department are facing significant unexpected cost pressures, my officials are willing to consider all reasonable requests for changes to agreed objectives. Organisations grant-funded by my Department can retain the full amount of any employers' allowance received, which offsets some of the employers' National Insurance contributions burden for small organisations. The substantial increase to employers' allowance included in the Chancellor's recent Budget announcement is expected to offset some of the increase. My Department encourages all eligible organisations to claim that allowance.

In recognition of the impact of the announcement, alongside the Minister of Finance and the Minister for the Economy, I have met the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action (NICVA) chief executive and voluntary and community sector representatives to discuss this issue and the wider financial challenges faced by the sector. The Finance Minister subsequently wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, outlining the pressures that will be faced as a result of the policy decision. The correspondence requested that His Majesty's Treasury (HMT) consider providing support to those outside the central government sector who provide vital public services and receive funding from central government.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer and his ongoing engagement with the voluntary and community sector, particularly for coming to the all-party group meeting recently to hear the sector's voice directly. Is the Department providing any additional support to the sector, given the challenging environment?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We are committed to the principle of full cost recovery in brokering funding arrangements with sector providers. Where delivery partners face significant unexpected cost pressures, we will consider all reasonable requests. I have demonstrated my commitment to the sector by providing a 5% uplift to key DFC funding programmes in this year's budget. That additional funding was provided as a contribution towards the pressures that organisations face from rising costs.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister. I know that you will agree that the voluntary and community sector directly helps those who are most in need at their point of need. We listened with interest to the Secretary of State's speech last week. Do you think that he has any idea of the impact that his Government's Budget decisions will have on the voluntary and community sector in Northern Ireland, particularly on the most vulnerable people in Northern Ireland?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I do not think that this Government have any idea about the implications that their decisions are having for people across Northern Ireland, be they farmers, pensioners or the voluntary and community sector, which is doing key work in making sure that we tackle some of the most pressing issues in society. All that they are doing is making things much more difficult, including for the voluntary and community sector. That is why I will continue to make the case against the increases.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move now to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr McCrossan asked the Minister for Communities whether, given the huge role played by men's sheds in tackling isolation for men, especially in rural communities, and improving their mental health and well-being, he will meet the Men's Sheds Association, representatives of which are in the Building today, to discuss providing it with modest funding, as, unlike their counterparts in the South, where the Government fund their important work, they receive no central support or funding. (AQT 991/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member will be aware of the very tight budgetary conditions in which we find ourselves and the significant cost savings that I have had to make in the past 12 months in order to deliver a balanced budget. However, I am always willing to meet those who are making requests of the Government, especially if they are in line with the objectives that we are trying to achieve as an Executive.

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

I thank the Minister for the answer. I also welcome the fact that he will meet the Men's Sheds Association, should it seek a meeting. In fact, it would be great if he could see its representatives today, briefly, as they are in the Building. As I am sure the Minister will understand, it will take a small amount to fund that important organisation and the work that it does, even considering the budget constraints. Will the Minister and the Health Minister work together to see whether they can find some funding, no matter how modest, to at least assist the Men's Sheds Association in its important work that will have considerable benefits for the health and well-being of those involved?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am happy to look at any proposal that comes from the organisation that the Member mentioned. If appropriate, I will be more than happy to write to the Health Minister to see what can be done jointly, if the objectives that it outlines align with the Programme for Government.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

T2. Mr Buckley asked the Minister for Communities what assurances he will give women's sport in Northern Ireland that its participants will be protected in a way that ensures fairness, safety and integrity, following the huge victory for common sense that has been seen in the United States of America in the past week, with President Trump signing an executive order protecting women from biological males competing in their sports, when they have had their dignity taken, records stolen and safety compromised in the advancement of cultural, woke ideologies. (AQT 992/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Let me make this very clear: I do not believe that there is any room for men in women's sport.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

There are two reasons for that. First, fairness, and secondly, safety. Sport is inherently physical. The physiology of the sexes matters. Everyone should be getting behind the notion that women's sports are reserved for women. Most people will agree with that. In fact, it is regressive to think anything else.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Those same woke ideologies are being advanced and made available through Libraries NI to underage children. What will the Minister do to ensure that children are safeguarded and protected from inappropriate and dangerous content?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I have made my position on that very clear. Libraries NI should offer a safe place. Parents should and must have confidence in the books that are available, and we need to make sure that we do everything that we can to protect children. I have made my views clear to the board of Libraries NI — to the chairman and the chief executive. I hope that the people who agree with where the Member and I are coming from make sure that their views are made known, because I do not believe that the majority of parents would agree with some of the literature and books that have been made available in our libraries. It is right that we stand up and speak out against it.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

T3. Mr Clarke asked the Minister for Communities what his office is doing to address regional balance in respect of Arts Council of Northern Ireland funding. (AQT 993/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member for raising that question, because it is really important. We must have regional balance when it comes to funding for the arts. Everyone deserves to have access to the arts, and that will be a central theme of the work that I am undertaking to develop a new arts policy, which I announced in July 2024. That policy will fill the long-standing vacuum, and it will be an important step forward in articulating and realising the benefits that the arts currently deliver and our potential to do more and go further. It will be based on several core principles and priorities that I set out in my written ministerial statement in July last year.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that answer and the importance that he places on the issue. Minister, I am sure that you will be forgiven for believing, like me, that the arts seem to focus only on a very small number of places. What can you do to assure all those other groups that deserve equal funding and balance that what you are introducing now will address that?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I want to find new ways to support the arts and maximise the contribution that it can make by driving equality of access and opportunity across socio-economic groupings, age, geography and so on. I want to encourage greater participation, particularly from people and communities that might feel that the arts are not quite for them or that their cultural or artistic activities and traditions do not quite fit.

I have written a letter about my expectations to the chair and chief executive of the Arts Council of Northern Ireland. We cannot maintain the status quo and simply hope for change. The arts should be enjoyed and experienced by every community equally in Northern Ireland, but that is not always the case. I recognise that some realignment of funding will need to accompany a realignment of priorities, and I also realise that that realignment will have implications for some existing plans and programmes. For that reason, I thought that it was reasonable to give the Arts Council timely notice in the form of that letter of expectations. In all that work, I will continue to advocate for the arts and to make the case for more investment but, importantly, investment that is well targeted as well.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

T4. Mr Brett asked the Minister for Communities, in light of the out-of-court settlement in the religious discrimination case brought by one of the Minister's constituents, boxer Daryl Clarke, whether the Minister shares his concerns that, 12 years after the Duncan Morrow report on amateur boxing in Northern Ireland, sectarianism and discrimination against Protestants seems to continue. (AQT 994/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, Mr Speaker, I hope that you will let me record my sympathies and, I am sure, those of the House on the passing of John Cooney.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My thoughts are with John's family and friends and all those in the boxing world who knew and loved him. It was a tragic event. I commend the medical team at the Ulster Hall and all staff at the Royal Victoria Hospital for their work.

I thank Mr Brett for raising this issue. I noted with interest the recent case that was settled between Daryl Clarke and the Ulster Boxing Council. I record the fact that I know Daryl in a personal capacity. I have heard his story. As part of the settlement agreement, the Ulster Boxing Council committed to a comprehensive review by the Equality Commission of the governance, practices and procedures applicable to it to ensure that they comply with the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 and any relevant codes of practice. It is important that that work is carried out by the Equality Commission urgently, because no matter who you are or where you are from, you should be able to progress in your sport if you have the talent and ability. No one should feel as though they do not belong.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Amateur boxing is vital to my constituency of North Belfast, but I speak to representatives of the clubs daily, and their confidence in the leadership of those organisations is completely shot. Once again, we have a case concerning religious discrimination against a Protestant. What proactive steps will you take, Minister, to ensure that, regardless of class or creed, all young people in Northern Ireland have access to the same opportunities?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I completely agree with the Member. Following a meeting with Sport NI and officials from the sports branch in my Department, I have made clear the urgent need to progress that work and make sure that the report's recommendations are implemented. I am also considering what implications that may have for current and future funding arrangements. Sporting bodies should only receive taxpayers' money if they meet their equality obligations.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

T5. Mr Mathison asked the Minister for Communities to outline what support his Department provides to housing associations in Northern Ireland to deal with the impact of paramilitarism on their housing schemes. (AQT 995/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member will know that we have been working on that issue lately. I do not know whether the Member is referring to financial support. I can certainly provide that information. Through the Housing Executive and housing associations, there are a number of programmes in place to deal with that. I can get him the specific information that I do not have at hand right now.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his answer. The Minister will be aware of certain housing schemes where the influence of paramilitarism is really significant, such as Weavers Grange in Newtownards. Clanmil Housing has long been dealing with ongoing issues and managing the influence of paramilitarism there. Will the Minister provide an assessment of the level of data-sharing between housing associations and the PSNI to help effectively tackle the impacts of paramilitarism and paramilitary influence on housing schemes?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I certainly hope that any information that is required is passed on. If it is not, I will always make sure that it is. Let me make one thing very clear: there should be no role whatsoever for paramilitaries in any housing issue. If there is, it should absolutely come to an end. Housing should be allocated based on need and in accordance with the housing selection scheme.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

T6. Mr Brooks asked the Minister for Communities what the cost of temporary accommodation has been to his Department over the past five years. (AQT 996/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

For each of the past five years, the total non-COVID expenditure on temporary accommodation was £12·6 million, £13·7 million, £14·8 million, £26·4 million and £33·2 million. The provisional cost for 2024-25 is £35·4 million.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Minister, at a time of budgetary constraint and housing crisis in Northern Ireland, those figures will be concerning to anyone who hears them. What measures is the Minister taking to counteract that cost?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We live in times of unprecedented housing stress. That means that we must do things differently. The Housing Executive has a task and finish working group, which has started to curb the trend of spend on temporary accommodation. However, we need to do much more. For that reason, I will be making a significant announcement in the coming weeks, which will see us make more provision for temporary accommodation and significantly reduce the long-term cost.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T7. Mr Gildernew asked the Minister for Communities for an update, following the Grenfell Tower inquiry report, on the work to ensure the safety of disabled residents of high-rise towers. (AQT 997/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

That is an area of concern. The Member will be aware of the work that my Department has carried out on the overall safety of high-rise buildings and, specifically, with regard to making sure that those with a disability have access. If there are particular issues that he wants me to address, I will be happy to do that.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome the introduction of the Sign Language Bill today. What engagement has the Minister had on a range of disabilities to ensure everyone's safety?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We want to make sure that we have a clear plan for that. I will be bringing forward a wider disability strategy, which will mean that we have in place the support to ensure that the public sector and others know the actions that are required of them, so that those with a disability are fully included in our society and safe.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

T8. Mr McReynolds asked the Minister for Communities to confirm whether the funding provided to housing associations to build new homes will include the amount required to meet developer contribution costs. (AQT 998/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

That is under review. I look forward to making a further announcement on it soon.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

On that basis, Minister, have you encouraged the Department for Infrastructure to update Northern Ireland Water's priorities to include housebuilding in order to meet the needs of the growing number of people living in homelessness across Northern Ireland?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I have raised that issue frequently with the now former Minister for Infrastructure at the Executive table and in correspondence and meetings with him. If we are serious about housebuilding in Northern Ireland and ensuring that we have the homes that people need, we need to address the waste water infrastructure issues. That means that we need to look at alternative solutions, because simply doing what we have always done will not cut it. It will not build the homes that we need.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members may take their ease while we change the Chair.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Economy

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

1. Dr Aiken asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any proposals his Department has to safeguard aerospace jobs. (AQO 1510/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

My predecessor identified the aerospace sector as a strategic subsector in the 'Advanced Manufacturing, Materials and Engineering Sectoral Action Plan', which was published last year. That sector offers strong growth potential. The action plan sets out a range of activities including investment in people and skills, innovation, trade and investment and collaboration that aim to support the growth of the sector and help to provide high-quality, high-productivity jobs across the region.

Invest NI's dedicated aerospace team works closely with the sector. The team provides advice, guidance and support to companies to help them to create good jobs, improve productivity, increase export growth and support net zero ambitions. Invest NI also partners with the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) and the sector trade body, ADS, to showcase the sector's capability internationally and help companies to explore export opportunities in new markets.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her remarks so far. I declare an interest as chair of the all-party group on aerospace, defence, security and space.

Minister, you will be aware of the importance of apprenticeships. Indeed, last week, in the Assembly, we had a meeting on apprenticeships in aerospace, defence, security and space. However, there are real issues with apprenticeship training schemes and the ability of the further education sector to support them. One reason for that is the lack of support coming through from organisations such as Invest NI to enable the sector to remove those bottlenecks. What will the Minister do to sort out those bottlenecks and ensure that apprenticeships are capable of delivery?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for that. One issue that cuts across all of what we are trying to achieve economically is skills and people's ability to access appropriate skills and training. That is certainly a priority for me. Just this morning, I attended the launch of the Ulster University Economic Policy Centre's update of the skills barometer, which sets out the trajectory for the next 10 years. Certainly, I am happy to engage with the Member, Invest NI and further education colleges on that.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Can the Minister provide an assurance that Invest NI does not support projects that help to arm Israel?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

First of all, it is important to say that no Government should arm Israel. Invest NI has assured me that it does not support projects that arm Israel, and no evidence has been presented to the contrary. However, I have asked Invest NI to review its investments to make absolutely sure that that is the case. It is important that I, as Economy Minister, and the general public are reassured on that matter.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

The Minister will be aware that Spirit AeroSystems is a major employer in Northern Ireland and that there is potential interest from other companies. Will the Minister do all that she can to ensure that the entire operation here will have a viable future?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. My predecessor engaged with senior representatives from Boeing and Airbus on the sale of Spirit's local operation. My officials and I will continue to engage with all interested parties including TEO, the British Government, the business and other stakeholders to ensure the best possible outcome for the operation in the North. Obviously, commercial negotiations are ongoing, so it is inappropriate for me to comment further on them at this point.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

2. Mr Kelly asked the Minister for the Economy for an assessment of his Department's proposed allocation in the draft Budget 2025-26. (AQO 1511/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

All Departments' budgets are extremely challenging, as, I am sure, the Member will be aware. The Executive's fiscal position is extremely difficult owing to years of underfunding from the British Government. Indeed, my Department's resource baseline for 2025-26 is 5% less than it was for 2020-21. DFE has £83 million of resource pressures after the additional allocation of £24·9 million, which leaves a funding shortfall of £58 million. DFE was allocated £150 million capital for general allocation, and bids of £145·7 million could not be met as a result. Nevertheless, I will work within the budget available to deliver the best outcomes for the economy and for our citizens.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

[Translation: I thank the Minister.]

More specifically, what impact will the Budget settlement have on the Magee expansion?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As the Member will know, Magee is one of my top priorities, and it is an Executive priority. While the Budget settlement is extremely challenging, Magee is an area that I have prioritised.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

With the ongoing reviews of further education and higher education student support, how is the Department planning to build in the potential budget that will be required to fund any uplifts to loans, grants or any other support?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

As I said in my response to Dr Aiken, skills and access to education are key priorities for me. When I look at the draft budget allocation, I will try to put as much funding as possible into ensuring that we can deliver on education and training and on the priorities that we have in that area. We are still going through the budget at the moment and will have more to say on it in the coming weeks.

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

This is a slightly surreal situation, Minister. You are saying that the budget that you gave to the Department that you are now in charge of is not large enough. Indeed, you are saying that the budget is down from 2021, when your predecessor, now Senator Murphy, was Minister of Finance. There is a slight irony there.

On the departmental budget, you now have a £50 million underspend in financial transactions capital (FTC). More than any other, your Department is one that could and should be making more use of that. Not much seemed to be done in the Department of Finance —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Minister?

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

— so what do you, as Minister for the Economy now, want to do with that unused FTC, and will you bring forward plans?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I see no contradiction in my position between what I said previously and what I say now. The consistent message is that we have been underfunded and need to be properly funded on the basis of our level of need in order to deliver for all our citizens.

The Member may be aware from my presentations to the Finance Committee in my previous role that, in fact, the bids for financial transactions capital in the coming year are up on previous years. Hopefully, we will be able to utilise fully what is available to us. That having been said, however, all Departments have more to do in that area, and, in my new role, I will seek to do that.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

What funding have you set aside for Ulster University's Coleraine campus, considering that Coleraine is your home town?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Again, as I said in my earlier answer, access to education and skills is a top priority for me, and I will work with Ulster University on its plans for all its campuses. As the Member will be aware, universities are autonomous institutions, so it is for them to make decisions on how they spend their money. I will be absolutely committed to the campus at Coleraine, which, as the Member will be aware, is my home town as well as his.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

3. Ms Flynn asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on his plans to deliver community wealth building. (AQO 1512/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

We continue to make positive progress on community wealth building and the nine recommendations outlined in the 2022 community wealth building report that I am responsible for taking forward. Along with my colleagues the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Communities, I will be meeting Development Trusts and community wealth building partnerships in the coming weeks to discuss progress on the recommendations. Relating to recommendation 1, Minister Murphy created the social enterprise co-design group. That group was tasked with developing a three-year action plan, which launched on 4 December 2024. Already, 25 social enterprise champions are in place across Invest NI, InterTradeIreland and all local councils. I am committed to prioritising the implementation of that plan.

In August, my Department published significant research on the benefits and potential for growth of employee ownership models in line with recommendation 4. For recommendation 10, a credit union working group was established to improve the legislative framework for credit unions. That work will be completed within this mandate.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for that response. Will the Minister detail how her Department intends to support the uptake of the real living wage?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Payment of the real living wage is a key element of a good job. The Department for the Economy gives financial support, providing £125,000 per year to the full-time living wage franchise here to encourage uptake of the real living wage and provide accreditation in the North for the first time.

A consultation on proposals for updating our employment law framework was recently completed, and that will inform a 'good jobs' Bill. The Department for the Economy has also commissioned research into the implications of setting new minimum wage levels here. That is a reserved matter, and taking it forward would require Executive agreement for which the First Minister and deputy First Minister would need to formally seek the British Government's agreement to make the necessary legislation to bring devolution into effect.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Cuirim ádh mór ar an Aire ina post nua.

[Translation: I wish the Minister luck in her new role.]

How will the measures that the Minister outlined in her initial answer benefit the North West Community Wealth Building Partnership and the unique challenges of our region?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his good wishes. Community wealth building has an important role to play in creating a more regionally balanced economy. I welcome the collaborative approach that the Larne partnership and the North West Community Wealth Building Partnership are taking. I recognise the huge potential that that pilot could have for other initiatives across the North. There needs to be a strong interdepartmental approach to the issues.

The Member will be aware of and, I assume, will support the intent behind community wealth-building partnerships, which is to utilise the expertise and institutions in local areas and develop the local economy. There is huge potential in working with the local economic partnerships that are just being set up as well. It is work that I am excited about taking forward and that has a lot of potential.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

4. Ms Brownlee asked the Minister for the Economy to outline how tertiary educational attainment rates in East Antrim compares with other constituencies. (AQO 1513/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

NISRA's labour force survey reported that, in 2023, approximately 40% of people here aged 16 to 64 held a qualification at level 4 or above. East Antrim compares favourably with that, with a rate of over 43%. I am committed to continuing the work of my predecessor in addressing subregional disparities such as those in tertiary education attainment rates across the North.

Last October, my Department published a subregional economic plan. That is a locally led approach that places regional balance at its heart and enshrines partnership working. As part of that plan, 11 local economic partnerships are being created. Those partnerships will identify local economic priorities, and my Department will work collaboratively to deliver them. The partnerships have dedicated funding of £45 million to help to pump-prime projects.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. I recognise the rate, but how is your Department supporting people with disabilities or special educational needs to ensure that they also have the opportunity to gain education and support at that level?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for that question. It is a really important issue that we need to address, and it is one that I am committed to taking forward. Ensuring that skills, training and education opportunities are available to everybody, regardless of their ability, is really important, particularly in relation to apprenticeships.

Last week was Apprenticeship Week, and I had the opportunity to meet some of the training providers and the mostly young people who were partaking in apprenticeship schemes. One of the key things that we have focused on is exactly that: ensuring that there are opportunities for people with disabilities, women and people from more disadvantaged backgrounds to take up such opportunities. We are focusing on that work and will continue to do so.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

How is the skills fund in particular supporting educational attainment rates across the North?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The skills fund, which aligns with the economic vision, supports a range of initiatives, including a new SKILL UP programme for those aged 18 and older who are eligible to work here that aims to develop our workforce in priority sectors. SKILL UP courses range from entry level to level 7, are fully funded and are primarily delivered online, allowing access across all regions.

The skills fund is also focused on ensuring support for people with additional barriers to access learning and employment. New initiatives are being supported to provide training and additional support to individuals who face barriers to work and training, including programmes targeting those who are disabled or neurodiverse and have barriers to entering employment or learning. Additional funding has been provided for a series of initiatives for women returners to help individuals use learning to gain the confidence and skills to re-enter the workplace.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Minister, I wish you all the best in your new role and look forward to working with you. Do you agree that, without legislation to mandate a fairer, regionally balanced higher education policy, we will continue to see unequal provision of third-level education across the North?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The work being done through local economic partnerships, the particular focus that we have put on the development of the Magee campus and ensuring that we reach the target of 10,000 students and the task force that was put in place to report on that have been really positive and constructive. Our further education college infrastructure is also important to ensure that we have regionally balanced educational opportunities. There is more work to do, but we can deliver on it.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

5. Mr Buckley asked the Minister for the Economy to outline the work his Department is undertaking to boost tourism in 2025. (AQO 1514/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

In January, my Department launched the tourism vision and action plan, which outlines 17 actions to drive sustainable, regionally balanced economic growth in the sector. Delivery will be overseen by the tourism partnership board. Actions include incorporating local regions into Fáilte Ireland’s regional brands; developing peace tourism; ensuring an adequate mix of accommodation across the North; developing skills in the industry; developing destination stewardship plans; and restoring appropriate funding to Tourism Ireland to increase tourism revenue from overseas. It recently launched exciting international marketing campaigns for 2025.

Summer 2025 also sees the return of the Open Championship to Portrush, bringing hundreds of thousands of visitors and showcasing our beautiful landscape to 500 million households across 150 countries. Tourism NI will work alongside Invest NI to maximise the benefits to act as a catalyst for future economic investment.