Northern Ireland Assembly, 7 April 2025

442 contributions from 58 members. The official report.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Eóin Tennyson has been given leave to make a statement on the impact of US trade tariffs on Northern Ireland that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. If other Members wish to be called, they should rise in their place and continue to do so. All other Members who are called to speak will have up to three minutes. I remind Members that interventions are not permitted. I will not take any points of order on this or any other matter until the item of business has finished.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Last week, the US president launched a destructive and damaging trade war. Donald Trump is following a path of populism and isolationism, which will damage the global economy for years to come, irrespective of how for long his tariffs are in place. The upheaval comes despite all the selfies in Congress and at the White House and the Prime Minister's almost sycophantic approach to the president in recent weeks and months. Despite what we have heard about the UK's Brexit advantage, the UK has been slapped with exactly the same tariffs as the Taliban. It is outrageous to be in a position in which a US president is attacking and slapping tariffs on his allies, including Ukraine, rather than focusing on his enemies.

In the Chamber, our collective focus must be on protecting jobs, livelihoods and businesses in Northern Ireland during these turbulent economic times. That means that, first, we need to engage proactively with the UK and Irish Governments to ensure that Northern Ireland's unique position is well understood at a European level. We must stand firm with our allies and use collective bargaining to place pressure on the US Administration. Yes, of course, negotiation must be the first step in our response to mitigate the impact of the tariffs and see their removal, but we must also be willing to, where necessary, find a backbone.

I say to the Prime Minister that if the price is removing the digital sales tax on tech companies; undercutting our agricultural producers or refusing to regulate toxicity on social media, it is a price that is too much to bear. As I said, we need to work with our allies to bring the tariffs to an end but also collaborate closely with our European partners to strengthen the UK economy and exert growth.

I say to the Economy Minister that we can do much at a Northern Ireland level to support our businesses and manufacturers. We need to see efforts towards a "shop local" scheme for Northern Ireland, progress on a manufacturing strategy and support and advice for our businesses at this turbulent time. This is a global issue, but it will have severe consequences for the Northern Ireland economy. Irrespective of our differing political views and beliefs, it is incumbent on all of us in the Chamber to work together to overcome the tariffs.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for bringing this Matter of the Day to the House. He made a lot of salient points about the regrettable actions that the president of the United States has taken at a time when our whole world is in turmoil. We are seeing the continuing genocide of the Palestinian people, people closer to home struggling to pay their bills as it is, a lot of worries for our local businesses and employers and our most vulnerable being attacked again by the new British Labour Government.

I note that the Member who tabled the Matter of the Day referred to actions that the Economy Minister can take. Caoimhe Archibald met businesses and trade unions this morning to try to plot a way forward and see what actions we can take here to mitigate any damage that the tariffs will do to local businesses. This is a time for cool heads and a planned, measured response — it is vital that we exercise caution — and the Minister has met her counterparts in London and Dublin in an attempt to agree a response. It is important that we see a lack of divergence between Britain and the EU. We want to recognise the special place that the North is, recognise our unique circumstances and support our local businesses. That is what we really need to see at the heart of this. We need to see stability and resilience embedded in our local businesses, and I hope that we can all work together to do that.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

It was once remarked that, when the United States sneezes, the whole world gets a cold. That could be true today. There is a lot of righteous concern about the tariff announcement made by the president of the United States from those who have investments in the stock markets, but it is only fair that we set out the rationale for it. What is President Trump's rationale for tariffs? The US national debt is over $36 trillion, its trade deficit is around $122 billion and government debt is rising faster than GDP. The situation in the United States was unsustainable. Action had to be taken.

When I look at the situation, I say this clearly: nobody should want to see trade barriers — nobody. I do not call for tariffs, and I am pretty sure that every Member in the House has said that they do not agree with tariffs, but actions speak louder than words. That is why Mr Tennyson's words on the matter are hollow. He wants to champion and shout about a European Union that is the most protectionist racket in the world. We see that in its protectionism with regard to subsidies and barriers to entry, whether by stringent regulations or protection of the single market. It wants free trade but only on its terms.

I hope that this is a short-term action by the United States and that, globally, countries can break down trade barriers and come to a level playing field, because that is what is needed. We need to see trade barriers broken down. Mr Tennyson talked about the Members — I think that he was alluding to me — who went to the United States to speak to President Trump and articulate a Northern Ireland-first perspective. That perspective is always missing when he goes out to champion his cause. Look at the past: he and, indeed, Alliance, the SDLP and Sinn Féin run to Europe — in fact, rather than putting Northern Ireland first, they got a train down to Dublin — to shout about Northern Ireland being tied to the European Union's hip. He talks about the UK. There is a 10% tariff rate for the United Kingdom and 20% for the European Union. I hope that Mr Tennyson will be as quick to scurry down to Dublin and over to the European Union to call for it to protect —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— Northern Ireland, because those are actions of his that he is bound to repeat.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Today, the turmoil in the global stock markets continues and is heading into territory that has not been seen since the COVID pandemic. A 10% tariff on our exports to the USA kicked in this weekend. For our neighbours, that figure is 20%. While the pharma sector is yet to be sanctioned, the impact of tariffs on that large part of the Republic's economy will not be far off. Some think that that differential tariff is somehow good news and that it will give a boost or advantage to our economy. If the Windsor framework debacle has taught us anything, it is that trade diversion, excessive bureaucracy and punitive measures add only costs and uncertainty.

We will all soon become very familiar again with article 16 of the protocol. If any United Kingdom company, including those that are based here, gets any perceived advantage, you can rest assured that the European Union will implement countermeasures. Have we forgotten how the EU strove to cut access to COVID vaccinations? Sadly, our own Government have failed to defend our economy and did not even engage the Stormont brake mechanism when they needed to. The deputy First Minister has highlighted the potential problems, but the Prime Minister must put the protection of our economy and Northern Ireland workers first. If the European Union seeks to implement countermeasures, we should use the joint mechanisms to put a hold on all Windsor framework provisions.

I have spoken many, many times of this being the worst of both worlds with the Irish Sea border. We will now see whether the EU implements a hard border on this island as well, but, no matter what, the next weeks and months will be particularly challenging but not enough, yet again, for our very own Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee to generate some curiosity. Some things apparently never change.

For Northern Ireland, we need our Prime Minister and our Government to work together strongly against trade dumping and the overzealous application of the article 16 provisions of the European Union protocol, because rest assured, Members, those are coming and we will not be able to get the best of both worlds — indeed, the best of any worlds. That is where we are.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for tabling the Matter of the Day. We are certainly living in very difficult and dangerous times. Watching the news outlets this morning after 8.00 am when the markets opened and seeing them slump was very scary indeed.

President Trump has introduced a sweeping new tariff regime, with a blanket 10% for all imports to the US. EU goods face a 20% levy, and UK goods are subject to the 10% baseline. Those tariffs are not just numbers on a spreadsheet. They represent a real and immediate threat to local jobs, regional investment and the future prosperity of communities right across Northern Ireland. Many of our key exporting sectors, including manufacturing, agri-food and advanced engineering, rely heavily on access to the US market. Those businesses are already navigating really complex post-Brexit trading realities, and they are now being asked to absorb yet more costs in an already difficult global trading environment.

While there has been some suggestion that Northern Ireland may gain a competitive edge over our neighbours in the South, since the Republic of Ireland's goods will face a 20% tariff under EU designation, that is far from a guarantee. There are no winners in this risky game. Relative advantage is not the same as security. Tariffs hurt everyone, and no one should mistake that for an opportunity without acknowledging the serious risks. Northern Ireland is in a unique position. Our ability to access the UK and EU markets through the Windsor framework gives us a platform that no other region enjoys.

The question is this: how will we and what are we doing to take that advantage further? The Minister for the Economy must set out the steps that the Executive plan to take not only to protect our exporters but to ensure that working people are not forced to carry the cost of economic decisions that are made elsewhere. We must not allow local workers, families and small businesses to become collateral damage in a global trade war. Yes, we are a small region, but we should not be passengers. We must be active participants in shaping the response. That means working with Westminster and Dublin, engaging with Europe and, crucially, taking strategic cross-departmental action right here in Stormont to support our local economy. The tariffs are a flashing red warning light about the direction of global trade. We have already seen where isolation leads. We cannot afford to go down that road again.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

A number of points deserve to be made in response to President Trump's announcement. Unsurprisingly, they have passed by the Member who tabled the Matter of the Day. The first is that the EU is not some champion of free and unfettered trade. President Trump is correct when he says that the US has been taken for a ride by the EU. The EU is an aggressive entity; a protectionist bloc that stifles free trade by imposing tariffs on anyone seeking to import into it. The US has now called time on that. That is entirely understandable from a US perspective. In normal circumstances, Northern Ireland would face the prospect of being able to benefit from that situation, as the tariff on UK goods is half that on EU goods. However, businesses can thank Mr Tennyson and the entirety of the nationalist and republican alliance in the House for making the situation far from clear. The protocol has left us in the EU customs code, so, when Brussels imposes counter-tariffs, anything coming from the USA into Northern Ireland will be subject to them. Great Britain will not face that problem.

Furthermore, I have little doubt that, if the EU seeks to use Northern Ireland as a back door into the US, Washington will clamp down on that. Therefore, while the announcement from President Trump highlights the benefits of being free from the shackles of Brussels for GB, it highlights once again the folly of the protocol, which leaves Northern Ireland in a foreign customs code. It also reminds us that, when the leader of the DUP, Gavin Robinson, wrote in the 'News Letter':

"the DUP set out to remove the internal trade border ... that is exactly what we’ve achieved",

he was lying to the people of Northern Ireland.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I appreciate the opportunity to address the impact of US trade tariffs on Northern Ireland, particularly on our small and medium-sized enterprises. Northern Ireland's SMEs are a vital part of our economy, driving innovation, creating jobs and supporting local communities. Many of those businesses rely on exports, with the US market being a key destination for sectors such as agri-food, whisky and manufacturing. Tariffs increase costs, and for SMEs already operating on narrow margins, the burden is difficult to absorb. As a result, businesses are faced with either raising prices for consumers or losing competitiveness in the US market. Moreover, the EU's potential retaliatory tariffs in response to the US measures add further uncertainty. Northern Ireland businesses could face tariffs on exports to the EU as well, compounding the problem.

For SMEs in Northern Ireland, the stakes are high. Without the right support, they risk losing access to vital markets. The UK Government must engage directly with the US and the EU to mitigate the tariffs and explore exemptions or reductions, particularly in sectors where Northern Ireland plays a key role. The Northern Ireland Executive must also step up and ensure that local businesses receive the support that they need, including clear guidance, simplified regulatory compliance and financial assistance where needed. The UK Government and the Northern Ireland Executive must act quickly and decisively to support our businesses. SMEs cannot be left to face the challenges alone. With the right backing, Northern Ireland's SMEs will be able to continue to thrive and maintain their position in global markets, but only if we address the issues head-on.

Northern Ireland's membership of the United Kingdom internal market provides a key competitive advantage, but that advantage is at risk if businesses cannot navigate the growing trade barriers and rising costs.

It is vital that we protect that advantage by supporting our local businesses and ensuring that they have the tools that they need to succeed.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

The tariffs are hugely significant globally, and we need to quickly figure out what it means for us here in Northern Ireland. It is clear that the UK Government must take some urgent steps to protect Northern Ireland's interests and ensure that our place in the UK internal market is fully safeguarded. There is still a lot of detail that needs to be worked through, but what is clear is that President Trump's tariffs will have a far-reaching impact on international trade. Importantly for us, Northern Ireland is vulnerable to being caught in the crossfire of any EU retaliation, and my party leader, Gavin Robinson, made the same case to the Prime Minister last week. The Prime Minister has said that he will protect the national interest, and that must include Northern Ireland. Our DUP MPs will continue to raise that at Westminster.

This is another key example of why it was so important for us to be in Washington last month, making the case for Northern Ireland. I am proud that Emma Little-Pengelly took those opportunities at every chance that she had when she was over there. We will continue to fight daily to safeguard Northern Ireland's economic interests, and the best way to do that is by fully restoring our place in the UK internal market. Anything less leaves us at risk.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

It is DUP/TUV bingo today. We get the usual lines trumpeted out just because it is a Trump tariff. They talk about Northern Ireland first, yet all we have heard about today is the priority of American companies and the tax that they will pay coming into the EU, not realising — I am not sure what has clicked — that we do not pay tariffs into the EU. Therefore, I do not know why we have had minutes and minutes about the risks to America. We are here to speak for Northern Ireland and for our companies and businesses, but it is interesting to hear the DUP speak in support of and give the opinion of America rather than give the opinion of Northern Ireland.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Says the EU's fanboy.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

If you want to continue shouting on, go ahead. Do you want me to give way?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

There is no giving way.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

There is no giving way, so sit down.

Actions speak louder than words, which is what Jonny said a minute ago. Let us talk about red tape, which he talked about a minute ago. Let us talk to all our sporting clubs that have had levelling-up funding and let them hear about red tape. It was way easier when we were in the EU and had funding that was easy to access for all our groups. You can scaremonger and talk and you can be addicted to being on the wrong side of the argument all you like, but the tail is wagging the dog, with one Member at the back, and you are jumping to it.

Let us call it for what it is: taxes are tariffs and tariffs are taxes, and these are our businesses that we are here to stand up for. They are the ones that are paying the taxes; it ain't you. We have people who are coming to pension age and whose pensions are falling through the floor, and you are in here getting social media clips to look hard and look the big man on TV. It is ridiculous that you have constantly called for borders and barriers, and Alliance will continue to speak up so that we do not have trade barriers and we do not have tariffs on our companies

[Pause]

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Take a breath.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The protocol ensures that we do have them.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Take a breath.

[Laughter.]

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

We should be part of the GB —.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

This is a time when we should be working closely with our partners —.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

[Inaudible]

Mr Honeyford.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. The Member needs to be heard.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

We should be working closely with the UK Government, with the Southern Government and with the EU to make sure that Northern Ireland's voice is clearly heard. We have to maximise the voice of the Assembly to speak as one. This is a time when we should be investing in innovation and R&D. We should be increasing the number of products that we have to sell and we should be giving support to our businesses. We need a manufacturing strategy. We need stuff to come through that actually delivers for business. What we do not need are cheerleaders for a Trump Administration who are taxing the very people and causing —

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Rigorous implementers —.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Bingo! I will end with the DUP/TUV bingo. Here we go: the usual slow, thick lines that come out every single time. Let us have calm heads and not be cheerleaders for Trump.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr Honeyford. We now move to the next item of business. Members, you were getting a bit excited there. Just calm down a bit.

Members' Statements

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

I wish to express my concern at the most recent statistics for waiting times for cancer patients. Those statistics were published last week and are relevant for the period from October to December 2024. The figures do not make good reading. Only 87·5% of cancer patients started treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat, instead of the target of 98%; only 37·9% of patients started treatment within 62 days following an urgent GP referral for suspected cancer, when that target is set at 95%; and just 31·7% of people were seen within 14 days by a breast cancer specialist following an urgent referral, despite the fact that all urgent breast cancer referrals should be seen within a two-week period.

I acknowledge that there are several caveats at play with any statistics, so some caution should be exercised. However, it is clear that the expectation that people will have when beginning their journey of cancer tests and, if appropriate, diagnosis and treatment is falling far short of reality. Any delay in diagnosis or treatment will clearly impact on patient outcomes. It is important to remember that the figures that I have mentioned are not just statistics: those percentage figures equate to real people. For too many, the delays are their lived experience, and, for others, they are the experience of partners, family members and friends.

I note that the Health Minister has a confirmed budget and ring-fenced money for red-flag cancer and time-critical treatment. We are in the third year of a 10-year cancer strategy, and we must do better. We need to see the Minister building on the recommendations in the cancer strategy. We also need to see the wise investment of the money that the Minister has available to him and the target waiting times for cancer to be met.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

On Saturday afternoon, I attended a community commemoration on the Shankill Road to mark the 50th anniversary of the bomb and gun attack on the Mountainview Tavern by the IRA. That attack on Saturday 5 April 1975 resulted in the death of five civilians and injuries to over 60 people. On Saturday, I spoke to various people who were injured or bereaved in that atrocity. As it was this year, that date in 1975 was Grand National day, and the bar was packed with people who had enjoyed watching the race. Republican terrorists drove to the bar, and two shot into the entrance area while another planted a bomb just inside the door and lit the fuse before making their getaway. When the bomb exploded, it blew a hole in the ground floor ceiling and brought people crashing down from the upper floor. Four people were killed in the explosion, and a fifth died later in hospital.

Those killed were Joseph Bell, Alan Madden, Nathaniel Adams, William Andrews and Albert Fletcher. On Saturday, I spoke to Kenneth "Digger" Whiteside and Billy Whyte, who were injured in the explosion. Having played football that afternoon, they were upstairs when the bomb exploded and fell down as the floor beneath them was blown away. Billy Whyte sustained considerable leg injuries and spent six weeks in Musgrave Park Hospital after surgery to insert metal pins and screws. He was unable to work for seven months and was never able to play football again. Kenny Whiteside suffered neck and hand injuries in the explosion. Another survivor Dennis Larmour told me that he was working in the upstairs bar when the bomb exploded. He had five operations to help restore his hearing. Many survivors also suffered post-traumatic stress disorder.

To my knowledge, the IRA never claimed responsibility for that heinous, murderous, sectarian attack on a civilian target that was designed to cause multiple deaths and injury. Perhaps that is an indication that, even by the IRA's warped standards, the attack could never be justified. The getaway car was found abandoned on the nearby Springfield Road. On the Shankill, the atrocity is remembered alongside other republican bombings of civilian targets during the Troubles: at Balmoral furniture showroom and the Four Step Inn in 1971; at the Bayardo Bar in 1975; and at Frizzell's fish shop in 1993. We must never forget that atrocities took place and that they were evil and wrong. There was, of course, an alternative to that campaign of terrorism. Ultimately, what did it achieve? Only a lot of death and suffering, which endures to this day.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

My thoughts, today, are with those who were killed, injured and bereaved. We will remember them.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Last Thursday, some parents woke up to admission emails from the Education Authority (EA) regarding preschool and P1 places for their children. Those emails came as a surprise, given that parents had been told by the EA to expect that announcement on 9 April.

It may seem like a small issue, but, for the parents, children and schools impacted on, it is not. It caused additional anxiety for parents who received an email and even more anxiety for those who did not. Those who got a place for their child were left questioning whether that place was confirmed or whether the email was a mistake. For those who did not get the place that they wanted or any place at all for their child, it caused additional confusion on their next steps. Of course, those who got no update were left in the dark, wondering why they had not heard from the EA and what that meant for their child.

Because of the confusion, schools were, naturally, contacted by worried parents and had to pull together updates quickly. Since Thursday, the EA has confirmed that the issue was with its IT system. I thank the staff who answered calls and tried to reassure and advise parents. Families, however, need to know that lessons have been learned and that it will not happen again. Telling parents which school their child is going to is one of the absolute basics for the EA. We need to have confidence that it will not happen again.

Today, the EA portal is due to open for parents to accept preschool places and for some parents to begin the second round of applications for a place. I hope that the process goes smoothly. Being a parent is difficult enough without having additional anxiety. I hope that the EA will outline clearly what changes have been made.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

In April 2021, we all watched in horror as fire tore through the Mournes. We were promised swift action then. We were promised a comprehensive fire prevention and management plan to ensure that such devastation could never happen again, but here we are: it has happened again. As I stand here, the mountains are ablaze. Massive damage has been caused by a 2 mile-wide fire front. The risk to life and property has been severe, with terrified people moved from their homes in the middle of the night.

What people want to know is this: where is the plan? Four years on, we still do not have the robust strategy that was pledged. The communities around the Mournes, the groups that work daily to protect and conserve the Mournes, those whose livelihoods depends on the mountains and those whose homes and lives were put at risk at the weekend deserve leadership and action. I pay tribute to and thank the heroic Fire and Rescue Service, which has been battling to control fires in the Mournes not just at the weekend but over recent weeks.

While we wait for a plan, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs continues to allow controlled burning in the Mournes and across the North right up until 14 April. The emergency is not over. The mountains are burning. Controlled burns are anything but controlled. The regulations, safeguards and enforcement mechanisms are clearly not working. How many more fires will there be? How much more damage? How much longer do we have to wait? I call on the Minister to review urgently the current burn period and to deliver on the promise of a fire prevention and management plan for the Mournes. It is not just about protecting our natural heritage but about safeguarding communities, about biodiversity and about the future of our environment. The Mournes are burning as I speak, and we can wait no longer for somebody to start doing something about it.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I commend Killyman District on its fundraising event, "Killyman Does Strictly", on Friday and Saturday night. I am hard to impress — in fact, I am very hard to impress — but, on Saturday night, I was certainly impressed. The dancers were excellent, as was the planning, and a considerable amount of money was raised for the Killyman project and for the Air Ambulance.

In closing, I will say that there were moves on the dance floor that I had seen before, moves on the dance floor that I had not seen before and moves on the dance floor that I do not want to see again.

[Laughter.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you for some levity, Mr Buchanan. It is always useful.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I bring to the House's attention a recent report on the impact of climate change on Northern Ireland. The study, which was led by the University of Bristol and linked to Queen's University Belfast, provides critical insights into the increasing climate risks that our rural areas face, particularly regarding health and agriculture. The localised research that was conducted focused on towns across Northern Ireland, including Castlederg in County Tyrone, which holds the records for Northern Ireland's hottest and coldest temperatures.

The lead author, Dr Alan Kennedy-Asser, who is from Moira in County Down, said that the research emphasises the valuable insights that we can gain from local experts, such as those in Castlederg, which already faces the impacts of global warming: changes that other areas of Northern Ireland are likely to encounter in coming years. For instance, the study shockingly shows that extreme heat in Northern Ireland could result in nearly 100 deaths each year, primarily affecting rural communities. The statistics highlight that, as climate change intensifies, heat-related health issues such as cardiovascular and respiratory complications will emerge as more significant public health challenges.

In addition to public health, the report findings show that the impact on our agriculture sector will be significant. We can anticipate more disruptions from flash flooding, which will hinder operations and extend drought periods, necessitating more water for crops. Furthermore, such unseasonal weather can have disastrous effects on farm planning and management and pose risks to animal health and welfare.

The report suggests that we might experience the peak of those effects in just 50 years' time. Nevertheless, we already see those issues arise, including increased water temperatures affecting Lough Neagh, along with biodiversity and species decline. Climate change is not a future threat: it is happening now and impacting on our farming methods and the well-being of our rural communities.

The report contributes to the increasing evidence of the ongoing harm that we are causing to our planet and the anticipated impacts on our daily lives. As Members of the Assembly, we need to face that truth, as we are swiftly running out of time to undo the harm that we have caused and are still causing. The Alliance AERA Minister has already been working actively to address the effects of climate change, and such efforts require equal commitment from all parties. We have a responsibility to future generations to make sure of that.

It is probably important to mention today, with the backdrop of the report that I have referenced, that, although some scepticism has been expressed by some parties on the appointment of a climate commissioner and, indeed, on climate change in general, existing and emerging science shows that we must work at pace on climate action. That is especially important given that various collapses of the Assembly and gaps in delivery have resulted in Northern Ireland falling behind —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

— when we could have been making progress —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

— on those issues.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Last Wednesday, an email was issued in error by the Education Authority regarding preschool and primary 1 placements. The error in itself caused confusion and anxiety. The start of a child's educational journey is a significant milestone for families, one that is already stressful. The email only added to the concern and uncertainty of many families in my area. The Education Authority has since said that it was investigating why it happened. It is vital that it takes steps to ensure that it does not happen again. The error has also created a situation in which any parent wishing to appeal the decision regarding their child's placement is unable to do so, as the appeals form will not be available until later this week, when parents should have received the placement notification.

I have been contacted by many parents and preschool providers in the statutory and community sectors about a severe shortage of nursery placements, and that is across urban and rural areas of Mid Ulster. As in all these things, rural areas are often hardest hit because of already limited provision. Many working parents are being told that there is no available preschool placement for their child. That is not acceptable. Every child should have the opportunity to avail themselves of a preschool placement to ensure the best possible educational experience and outcome for all our children.

The Minister needs to have a flexible approach to the number of placements in community settings. I have spoken to many providers that have said that they had capacity and would be willing to take additional numbers but that would require the Minister to give clear direction to the Education Authority on a flexible approach. The Minister needs to listen to and work with providers, parents and families to deal with the current challenge. It is simply unacceptable in this day and age that children would not be able to access a preschool placement.

Before I finish, I congratulate Coalisland Na Fianna on its unbelievable fundraising efforts for children from Palestine to come here to be operated on in Dublin. It raised over £53,000. Déanaim comhghairdeas leis Na Fianna, Oileán an Ghuail, a bhailigh airgead ar son páistí ón Phalaistín le déanaí.

[Translation: I congratulate Na Fianna, Coalisland, which collected money for children from Palestine recently.]

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I declare an interest, as I have family members who live along the A5.

This is a reminder to all in the Assembly that road infrastructure projects are for everyone in Northern Ireland. I say that because, unfortunately, comments from the GAA president, Jarlath Burns, last week seemed to miss that point. He claimed that the A5 was "a GAA road". I can only the imagine the outcry if the grand master of the Orange Order called it "an Orange road". There are people who seek to dismiss those comments, but those who do so have little concept or understanding of the feeling on the ground.

I represent an area in which the upgraded A5 will be constructed. To classify a road as belonging to one section of the community is crass and does not take into account the fact that people from all sections of the community have lost their lives on the A5. Nor does it recognise that the funding was not won by the GAA, never mind the fact that the farmers and landowners who care for the land are trying to manage their own businesses and their future viability at this time. Last week, the DUP agriculture spokesperson, Michelle McIlveen, and I met landowners on their farms to hear their concerns. All that landowners ask for is fairness when they give up their land. Mr Burns's comments are ill founded and disgracefully tone-deaf, given the wider issues that are under consideration. It is taxpayers' hard-earned money that pays for road infrastructure projects in Northern Ireland. No road can be claimed by a sole entity or person.

Everybody in the Chamber will recognise, sadly, the number of lives that have been lost on the A5. We send our sympathies to every family. It is important that respect is given to all. I have written to Jarlath Burns to ask that he retracts his comments and recognises the hurt caused to families, some of whom I have spoken to in recent days, who feel that their loss was not reflected by the GAA president's comments. I trust that Mr Burns will reflect on the hurt that he has caused.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

It is appropriate to place it on record that my prayers and deepest sympathy go to the family of young Morgan Henry, who, at 18 years of age, was killed on the Dungannon Road, Portadown, on Sunday morning. Today, they face the devastating task of preparing for the funeral of a young family member and the life sentence of grieving his loss. My thoughts and prayers are with those who were injured in the accident, many of whom are in hospital with severe injuries.

It gives me great pleasure to recognise the outstanding achievement of a special group of athletes in Upper Bann. I am sure that the House will join me in congratulating the Portadown College under-16 girls' football team on being crowned the Schools' Cup winners with their 2-0 victory over Parkhall Integrated College last week. Goals from Heidi Baird and Sasha Thompson helped the girls to secure the trophy for the second year running. It is more than just a trophy; it is a testament to the hard work, determination and team spirit displayed by those girls throughout the season.

It is fair to say that women's football is really starting to capture a lot of attention. The girls' wins in Portadown simply reinforce that. Many of them left the football game immediately to go and prepare for a hockey game straight afterwards. That is the true grit and determination that I expect from Upper Bann. Huge congratulations to the players, coaching staff and all those who supported them on a special day at Windsor Park. Prior to that, the girls had also lifted the Mid Ulster Schools' Cup on Monday, retaining the title for the second year in a row. You have made the school and the people of Portadown proud and shown what it means to represent Portadown College with pride and excellence.

I also pay tribute to and commend the efforts of Craigavon Senior High School team, who competed in the Under-16 Boys Schools' Cup final on the same day. While the result may not have gone your way, reaching a final is a fantastic achievement in and of itself. It reflects your talents, dedication and hard work throughout the year. It takes real character to get to a final, and you have done your school proud in all your efforts. Hold your heads up high, and thank you for doing Craigavon proud.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

Last month, I launched a public consultation on new legislation to tackle age discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services, which should have been addressed in Northern Ireland long ago. At present, it is still entirely lawful for someone to be treated unfairly simply because of their age when trying to access everyday services from insurance to financial products, car hire to travel and, in some cases, even healthcare. Other parts of the United Kingdom and Ireland have already legislated to stop that. Northern Ireland is now the only region without that protection. That failure sends a clear message that age-based discrimination is tolerated here and that people, older people in particular, are not valued equally. I cannot accept that, and I know that many others across the House will not accept it either.

When I first entered the Assembly over 11 years ago, I made it a point to get into the heart of my constituency. The most active and organised voices that I encountered were from older people's groups, and this was the first issue that they raised. That led me to establish the all-party group on ageing and older people, and I have worked closely with the sector ever since.

My motivation has come from those conversations with older people, but the legislation will protect people of all ages. Age discrimination can affect younger people too, whether it is in financial services, access to housing or how they are perceived when trying to access services. Everyone deserves to be treated fairly, regardless of their age. The legislation is not about giving anyone special treatment; it is about equality. It is about ensuring that people are judged on their circumstances and needs and not their date of birth. It is also about the bigger picture and how we value people in our society.

We have an ageing population. Many live longer, often with complex needs and without the support networks that they once had. At the same time, we have seen cuts to transport, community services and benefits. Isolation is rising, and issues such as elder abuse remain under-recognised and under-reported. I saw that at first hand as Justice Minister. One of the first events that I supported was a conference on tackling elder abuse, an area where the silence has been deafening. Yet, despite all that, Northern Ireland has still not delivered on that basic protection.

It is the last major equality legislation left to enact. For a region that talks so often about equality and rights, that omission is hard to justify. Therefore, I encourage Members from across the House to support the consultation and to encourage their constituents, local groups and service providers to respond. It is time to bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of these islands. It is time to show that age discrimination in any form has no place in our society.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I welcome the fact that Northern Ireland looks set to host the 2035 Women's World Cup as part of the United Kingdom bid. It is the first time that Northern Ireland will host such a prestigious tournament, and it is a huge opportunity for the economic, cultural and sporting development of this part of the United Kingdom. In recent years, women's football has gone from strength to strength in Northern Ireland, and, just like our men's national team, our women's national team brings people together from all sections of our community to proudly play for it. The economic opportunities are hugely impressive. The 2022 Euros, which were held in GB, provided a huge economic boost, and I look forward to welcoming the World Cup to Northern Ireland.

One of the most exciting aspects of our bid is that our national stadium at Windsor Park will soon be upgraded and further extended. I thank Conrad Kirkwood, the president of the Irish FA, who, unlike others, does not simply talk the talk; he walks the walk. I look forward to the forthcoming expansion of our national football stadium, and I am sure that all members of the House will proudly support our national team — Northern Ireland — as we host the 2035 Women's World Cup.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I appeal to the Education Minister regarding the current allocations for community-based playgroups in North Antrim. To date, TUV has received representations from See-Saw Playgroup in Mosside; Kirkinriola Early Years Playgroup; Rasharkin Community Playgroup; Glenravel Community Playgroup; and Cloughmills Early Years. All those playgroups have the same problem: their pupil allocation numbers for this year are too low to deal with the number of parents listing them as their preferred preschool choice. Each playgroup can take more children than the number allocated to them for this year.

Take Cloughmills Early Years as an example. Over the past five years, it has had an average enrolment of 14. Last year, the Education Authority threatened to remove its funding, as it had below the minimum of eight children due to a low birth year in the village.? Thankfully, the EA saw the folly of its decision, and the playgroup picked up its eighth child during October. This year, instead of allowing the playgroup to return to its previous numbers, it has been told that it can accept only eight, with 11 parents listing it as their first choice.? For next year, it already has 14 parents who have signalled that they want their child to attend that playgroup. ?The staff in Cloughmills have poured their hearts into the playgroup over the past 12 months to ensure that they would not find themselves in the same position as they were in last year. The group now boasts one of the best facilities in my constituency, and its reward is that the Education Authority has slapped a cap on it, whilst children from the village have to go elsewhere to get a preschool place.

?Let us look at See-Saw in Mosside. The?facility can offer 24 places. It has 24 first-preference applications but is being limited to 19 places. The enrolment number over the past number of years has been between 24 and 26, yet the powers that be, like in Cloughmills, are forcing children who can be catered for in their first-choice setting to go elsewhere. That puts?unnecessary stress and hardship on parents.

What makes matters worse and, indeed, discriminatory is that the criteria provide that, in the Irish-medium sector, all first preferences are guaranteed their place of choice.? However, in Cloughmills, Kirkinriola, Glenravel, Rasharkin and Mosside, the EA is slamming the door in the faces of local children destined to progress through the controlled sector. Where is the fairness in that, Minister Givan? I trust that you will act on that great injustice.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That brings to a conclusion Members' statements. Members may take their ease before we move to the next item of business. Thank you.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Ministerial Statement

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have received notice from the Minister of Finance that he wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members that they must be concise in asking their questions. It is not an opportunity for debate or long-winded introductions, so, without further ado, I call the Minister.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.]

Thank you for the opportunity to make a statement on the final Budget 2025-26.

The Executive agreed their final Budget for 2025-26 on 3 April, and I made a written ministerial statement on the same day. Given the pressures that the Executive faced and the limited resources available, the Executive have strived to provide a Budget for 2025-26 that focuses on providing funding for the delivery of our Programme for Government (PFG) priorities. We have considered the consultation responses from our stakeholders, organisations and citizens alike. The Budget reflects our Programme for Government commitments and shows the Executive's determination to work together to deliver.

The Budget includes £16·8 billion of investment in public services, plus £2·4 billion in capital spending, with Health receiving £8·5 billion; Education £3·3 billion; and Justice £1·4 billion. That means that those three Departments alone account for some 80% of the funding for the day-to-day spending that is available, providing vital funding for our health service, schools, policing and the wider justice system. It sets out the direction of travel, which shows that the Executive are prepared to do things differently and use our limited resources to do what matters most.

We all know someone on a waiting list — a mother, a father, a child or a grandparent. The Budget will mean £215 million going towards cutting health waiting lists and supporting investment in elective care, with £165 million of that earmarked in Health’s final Budget settlement and a further £50 million to be provided in June monitoring.

Our children are the future, and we must invest in them. The Budget doubles our investment in the early years and childcare strategy to £50 million, with a commitment to provide a further £5 million in June monitoring to support our children and help hard-working families. It provides an additional £15 million for special educational needs (SEN) and delivers a further £8 million for skills, bringing the total to £15 million to build the skills needed now and in the future to grow our economy.

The Budget provides an additional £5 million to make our communities safer and £2 million towards ending violence against women and girls. It recognises the importance of Lough Neagh and our desire to protect it through a £5 million ring-fenced investment. It supports our agriculture, agrienvironment, fisheries and rural development with £332·5 million ring-fenced for this, recognising the importance of the sector to our economy and local farming communities. It also provides £21·3 million for transformation projects in health, justice, infrastructure and special educational needs and £100 million to create more social housing. In line with that commitment, we are also investing £105·7 million in water infrastructure. There is also a capital allocation of £12·3 million for the just transition programme, in line with our commitment on climate change.

The Budget shows that the Executive are prepared to do things differently and prioritise the limited funding that we have available to make real change for the better in people’s daily lives.

There is no doubt that the financial outlook remains incredibly challenging, particularly given the Westminster Government’s continued policy of austerity. The Chancellor’s spring statement continued the austerity agenda by choosing not to invest in public services and, instead, cutting benefits and targeting those most in need. It provided limited additional resources: £12·5 million resource departmental expenditure limit (DEL) and £1·6 million capital DEL for the Executive in 2025-26. That, together with the £146 million employers' National Insurance contribution support, will be included in the Executive’s DEL totals following Main Estimates in May/June, meaning they will be available for allocation in the June monitoring round. Given the need to provide Departments with the ability to plan, indicative June monitoring allocations for those funds have been agreed in the final Budget. As there is no additional funding for the final Budget, the allocations made were to distribute the funding held centrally at draft Budget and the unallocated financial transactions capital (FTC).

Recognising the important work of our public servants, the draft Budget sets aside £26 million to meet the costs of the pay settlement for those on Civil Service terms and conditions. That pay award has now been agreed, and the funding has been allocated to Departments in the final Budget.

Some costs are inescapable, and the Budget provides funding for the costs associated with the Open and for statutory salaries. To provide further support for the health sector and recognise the important role that family health services play, £3·5 million has been earmarked to provide support for the impact of National Insurance increases on GP practices, dentists, pharmacists and other family health service providers. The final Budget also gives each Department a general allocation to be used towards wider pressures, including pay and employer's National Insurance increases.

The Executive gave a commitment to provide funding of up to £20 million capital on an equal basis to Education and Infrastructure, if it became available. Therefore, the final Budget provides both Departments with a general capital allocation of £7·7 million, with a further £1 million each as an indicative June monitoring allocation.

The final Budget also sees the allocation of £8·4 million in financial transactions capital that remained unallocated in the draft Budget. The Department for the Economy will receive £6·1 million towards Invest NI capital grants to businesses, and the Executive Office will receive £2·3 million towards interest payments.

For the first time, the FTC funding has been oversubscribed, and with the DFE bid exceeding the available funding, an indicative June monitoring allocation of £1·1 million has been agreed to. That reflects the amount that will be carried forward from 2024-25.

There is no doubt that the Executive's finances remain under pressure. While the 2025-26 financial position remains challenging for all Departments, the Budget agreed by the Executive clearly prioritises their Programme for Government priorities, and, excluding earmarked allocations and in-year transfers, provides every Department with an uplift on its 2024-25 budget position. With the indicative allocations included, the Budget provides Departments with £19·3 billion funding. That money will be spent on running our public services and investing in our infrastructure. There will never be enough money to fund all our ambitions, but we can make a positive difference.

Regrettably, it seems likely that the second phase of the spending review, which will be announced in June, will be a continuation of the austerity agenda that the Treasury is pursuing. On behalf of the Executive and the people whom we serve, I will continue to make the case for better funding not just for the Executive but for all public services. It is incumbent on us all to manage our budgets efficiently and effectively. All decisions should be taken with the intention of making things better, and every pound should be treated with the same care as that with which we would treat our own money. I will continue to work with Executive colleagues to support workers, families and communities.

As Members are aware, I intend this to be the last single-year Budget, now that the Treasury has committed to undertaking a multi-year spending review. I believe that the introduction of a multi-year Budget will be a game changer, providing Departments with the ability to undertake longer-term planning. The five-year departmental financial plans will play a crucial role in that. Behind the figures of millions and billions of pounds are people and families. It is incumbent on all of us in the Chamber to work together to improve their lives and opportunities for the future. For now, I commend the final Budget 2025-26 to the Assembly.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat, a Aire.

[Translation: Thank you, Minister.]

I call Colin McGrath to ask a question on behalf of the official Opposition.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Given that the First Minister said last week that the Executive are investing to deal with waiting lists but that it transpires that the so-called investment is merely the ring-fencing of existing money — the First Minister says "investment", the Finance Minister says "ring-fencing" and the Health Minister says "creative accounting" — do you think, Minister, that the Executive owe the public, those languishing on waiting lists and our hard-working and dedicated healthcare staff an apology for their gaslighting and fake news about the money to deal with health?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Answer that in whatever way you wish, Minister.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Let us be very clear: the Executive have ring-fenced £215 million to tackle waiting lists. Be in no doubt about that. Things are going to be done differently. We cannot continue to be in a position of continually uplifting the Health budget and expecting different outcomes but not getting those outcomes. The Executive have made their position clear: we expect a different outcome from this Budget. We have ring-fenced £215 million of the Budget to start to tackle Health waiting lists. The Health Department has received over £200 million additional funding this year. What the Health Minister chooses to do with that funding is a matter for the Health Minister, but the Executive, in agreement with the Health Minister, have set out quite clearly what they wish to do.

I took the time to read your press release on the Budget, Mr McGrath, which is entitled "Underwhelming". Yes, it is. It is also absent an alternative Budget. I look forward to reading his alternative Budget —

[Interruption.]

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

Have you an apology for the people?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Order, Members.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I look forward —

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

[Interruption.]

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I look forward to reading his alternative Budget and seeing how the Member intends to deal with waiting lists.

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

[Inaudible]

an apology for the people?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

OK. Will Members chill their jets, please?

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Minister for the statement on the Budget. This week, the impacts of Labour's Budget decisions are being felt acutely across the country through the increases in wages and employers' National Insurance contributions. In the Minister's Budget statement, we heard an acknowledgement that our core Northern Ireland public sector will be short £55 million this year towards the increases in employers' National Insurance contributions, and that our GPs and community pharmacies will be short more than £30 million. Minister, going into 2025-26, what are you doing to address those upfront shortfalls?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Executive made a conscious decision to redistribute the £158 million extra funding that they had as a result of Barnett consequentials in the way that they did. Around £50 million of that will go to tackling waiting lists; £8 million of it will go to tackling the skills deficit; £5 million will go to Lough Neagh; and £15 million will go to special educational needs. Those are priorities in the Programme for Government. I do not suggest for one second that the challenges faced by the sectors that you read out are not real; they are real. However, the Executive made a conscious decision to direct their limited resources in a certain way, and that was the correct decision.

I will continue to engage with the Treasury. I have made a robust case to the Treasury, as have the other Administrations, that its funding mechanism for National Insurance contributions is unsatisfactory. We will continue to make that case. Ahead of the spending review, we will continue to make the case for a needs-based analysis for the Executive. The Executive continue to be underfunded significantly by the Exchequer and the Treasury.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister, for this important statement. You mentioned the allocation to Lough Neagh. How does that reflect the Executive's commitment to dealing with the important issues pertaining to Lough Neagh and how those are being prioritised in the Budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Executive continue to recognise the challenges that are faced on Lough Neagh. We also recognise that it will take considerable investment and time to correct the mistakes of the past. In the Budget, we have ring-fenced £5 million for the AERA Minister to engage with sectors and continue to take on the challenge of pollution in Lough Neagh, as is only right and proper.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. You mentioned both our underfunding and the second stage of the spending review, which is due in June. Given that Professor Holtham was appointed only this year to undertake a review, are we in the eleventh hour and is there a risk that we are too late?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

No. A lot of work has already been undertaken, and Professor Holtham will have access to that research and data. I am confident that his report will be available in sufficient time for us to submit it to the Treasury ahead of the spending review. The case was originally made by the Fiscal Council. We continue to make that case, and Professor Holtham's work will add to it.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome that £215 million is ring-fenced for health waiting lists. However, I note that £50 million of that is due to come from June monitoring, which is three and a half months away. Is there a risk that that monitoring money may not be available? What faith have you that we will get sufficient funds in June monitoring to deal with that vital issue?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We took a conscious decision to allocate the funding in this way at this time. We cannot include it as part of the Budget spending, because we have yet to receive the letter from the Secretary of State confirming it — we are dealing with a number of technicalities here — but, in reality, £50 million is set aside for tackling health waiting lists. It is only right and proper that we inform the Health Minister that it is available now to allow him to plan for that spend from June. We have taken the appropriate action.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Given that it is one of the Programme for Government priorities, how does the Budget support investment in skills?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Again, that is a strategic investment by the Executive: we have almost doubled the investment in skills. In the draft Budget, it was £7 million. The Executive have taken a decision to increase investment in skills to £15 million. That is a huge boost for upskilling the current workforce, for bringing new workers into the workforce and for the economy.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. In his written ministerial statement of 3 April, he highlighted the fact that the Department for Infrastructure had identified an easement of £15·7 million. As Chair of the Infrastructure Committee, I put it on record that the Committee was sadly not briefed on that during any of our budgetary sessions. Given the pressures in the Department, will the Minister outline from where the easement has arisen and whether it was ring-fenced?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My understanding is that it is from the A1. More details on the easement will be made available to the Member. How the Committee engages with the Department is a matter for the Committee and the Department. I have no concerns about the identified easement, however. The Department has a proven record of investing its limited resources — all Departments' resources are limited — in front-line services.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Research and development, innovation and skills development are vital if we are to grow our economy and deliver a more productive, globally competitive economy. The Minister mentioned additional funding for skills, which is really welcome. How will the Budget support research and innovation across Departments, including by delivering the funding that is required for R&D in our universities?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have given Members the headlines about the additional funding that has been allocated to Departments as a result of Barnett consequentials and expected Barnett consequentials. The funding and the projects that were identified in the draft Budget stand. Departments' responsibility to outline their projects also stands. I have allocated the funds to Departments, and we have ring-fenced, on this occasion, significant amounts of funding. How Departments now spend their allocated funding is up to them.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. You talk about the Executive doing things differently. Ministers also need to do things differently, however. What interrogation is your Department, along with the Department of Health, conducting of the situation in which the management costs of the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust (BHSCT) of £63 million are more than the management costs of the Southern Health and Social Care Trust (SHSCT) and the Western Health and Social Care Trust (WHSCT) put together? Bureaucracy and administration should surely be managed in such a way as to allow more money to be spent on reducing waiting lists.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not have responsibility for micromanaging Departments, although I obviously have an overview of and an interest in how funding is delivered in them. We need to take a long, hard look at bureaucracy in how we deliver public services and at the number of public bodies and quangos that deliver those services. It is clear that we will continue to have significantly constrained Budgets, so every penny counts. If delivery of public services is overly bureaucratic, I therefore encourage Ministers to remove the bureaucracy and put the savings made into front-line services.

Colin Crawford (UUP, North Antrim)

Minister, on the back of the Chief Constable's recent comments, have you given any consideration to ring-fencing funding for the PSNI?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Contrary to popular belief, a business case is not sitting on my desk. A business case is in the Department of Finance, where it is being appropriately scrutinised by the relevant officials, who are working with the Department of Justice and will, at the appropriate time, provide me with a report. I await the outcome of that scrutiny of the business case. When it comes to me, I will continue to engage with the Minister of Justice on supporting policing and on ensuring that investment in policing is sufficient, is delivering the safer communities that all our citizens want and is being delivered in a front-line services way. There is a process to follow — it will not be sped up by googling or doing anything else — and I will follow it.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

Further to my colleague's question, the Chief Constable has indicated that the PSNI will struggle to carry out its basic functions and, indeed, some of its statutory responsibilities as a result of the Budget. I note from the Minister's statement last week that he intends to allocate £5 million to the safer communities programme and to make a £4·7 general allocation to the Department of Justice.

In light of the Chief Constable's comments, will the Minister outline how the Budget will prioritise keeping people safe, if the people tasked with doing it indicate that they cannot do that with the money allocated to them?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The five-year business plan presented to my Department obviously covers five years, and this would have been the first year. As far as I am aware, the amount of additional expenditure in the first year was limited and would not have had a significant impact on policing numbers or plans. As I said, there is a process to go through. I am sure that the Member will want to ensure and will want me to ensure that any bids for quite significant additional funding will be spent appropriately and will be fully required. We cannot run our public finances according to who gets the most dramatic headline on whatever day of the week it is. We have to run our public services on the basis of the Programme for Government's priorities and by ensuring that the limited public resources that we have are best utilised.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, it is welcome to see additional funding for childcare. However, with families protesting on our streets at the weekend because of the high costs, the funding barely touches the sides. Do you agree that the Budget means that we will continue to underfund childcare in comparison with elsewhere on these islands?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Executive and, indeed, the Assembly have to be commended. From a standing-still point last year, we are now spending £50 million on early years and childcare, and we have pledged an additional £5 million in June monitoring. That is £55 million from the standstill point this time last year.

Thousands of families are benefiting from the Executive's decisive action in that regard. There is more work to be done. As I said, I look forward to seeing the Opposition's alternative Budget. I will study it closely to see their suggestions. I am always keen to engage on that basis. However, it is £55 million compared with zero.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement. The Minister will be aware of the Executive's priority to grow the economy. In his statement, he mentioned that £6·8 million had been allocated to Invest NI. Will the Finance Minister confirm whether that is a new grant support scheme or the continuation of a current scheme?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As I understand it, it is the continuation of a current scheme, and it fulfils projects that would not go ahead without the money. It is a welcome investment in the economy along with the skills investment.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

The Budget is in danger of being called the "yes, but" Budget. The Health Minister has said:

"We will not be helped by creative accounting or the political equivalent of the three-card trick."

What does the Finance Minister have to say about that extraordinary language? What does that commentary do to public confidence? Who is gambling with the future of our elderly and vulnerable people? Who is performing sleight of hand here?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It is vital, whether you are a Minister, an MLA, a chief executive or a public servant, to be careful about the language that you use and that you do not unnecessarily raise anxiety and concern among the general public, patients and, particularly, the health service workforce. We all must act responsibly in these matters. Therefore, I caution everyone who will be on the airwaves or seeks to be on the airwaves to be extremely cautious with the language that they use.

The sentence in the Health Minister's letter that stands out to me — I commend him for it — is this:

"I accept the challenge of trying to deliver better with less funding".

That is the challenge for all Executive Ministers, but it is a challenge that we have to take on. We cannot simply throw our hands in the air and say, "It can't be done". We have a duty to do better.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I note that, in the welcome announcement of £100 million for more social housing, the Minister stated that, in line with that commitment, there will be investment of £105 million in waste water infrastructure. We are aware that waste water infrastructure is often the major issue with planning applications. Will the Minister impress on his party colleague, the Infrastructure Minister, the need to ensure that the investment in waste water infrastructure is allocated across all parts of the community and will stand up to scrutiny in an equality impact assessment?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not have to impress that point on the Infrastructure Minister. The Member will be aware, however, that that funding will be allocated to NI Water, which has a chief executive and a board who are ultimately responsible for how the money is spent.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Why did the Minister neglect to mention the £15·7 million DFI easement, which was raised by the Chair of the Committee, but present the reallocation of £7·7 million of that money back to DFI as a new capital allocation? The Minister laments the lack of an alternative Budget, but it is fair to say that we are seeing plenty of alternative facts.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

If I were to go through every financial transaction and movement that occurs in the 2025-26 Budget, we would be here until midnight. I have given Members the headlines, the movements of finances and, attached to the statement, tables of all the financial transactions under the headlines.

Look, it is understandable and right that the Budget is open to question. I have no difficulty with that; in fact, I fully support it, because we end up with a better, more transparent system. However, I would like to compare it with something. I would like to compare it with the Opposition's Budget. Thus far, I am unable to do so, because you have not produced one.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Minister, I agree with your remarks: we cannot keep doing the same thing in the health service and keep getting the same negative results. We need to do things differently. Given that the Executive have ring-fenced the money for waiting lists, what engagement have you had with the Health Minister about how things might be done differently? History has taught us that, when it comes to the Department of Health and all the trusts, there is a reluctance to change.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have had some engagement with the Health Minister, but the £50 million extra is on the proviso that the Minister bring forward a plan for how it will be invested. In the Health Minister's budget, £165 million is ring-fenced, and the £50 million of additional funding that I am bringing forward for him is on the proviso that he brings forward a plan for how it will be invested to tackle waiting lists. I am not challenging the Health Minister in that regard, because, in fairness to him, he is on the same page.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Does the Finance Minister dispute the Chief Constable's contention on Friday that the policing budget has reduced by 6% since policing was devolved in 2020 — to the tune of £836 million — without accounting for inflation? If not, why is he giving additional money to the Executive Office instead of to policing, when it comes to tackling violence against women and girls?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We can all be very thankful that policing is in a different place from where it was in 2010 and that our society is a much more settled place than it was then. That needs to be reflected when comparing policing budgets over that period. As I said to some of your colleagues, there is a business case with the Department. My officials are analysing that, as they would any business case. When it is appropriate to do so, it will be brought to my attention. I will continue to engage with the Justice Minister at that stage on how we move financing for policing forward. I am sure that, if someone were looking for an extra £200 million of very limited public resources, the Member would be the first to tell me that he expected proper process to be followed. Proper process will be followed.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you, Minister. That concludes questions to the Minister of Finance on his statement.

Executive Committee Business

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill [NIA Bill 13/22-27] be agreed.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

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

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.]

I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on this incredibly important legislation. The Bill is an important step forward for our registration services.

Few things touch the lives of everyone who lives here in the way that the registration of births and deaths does. Many families have had the positive experience of registering the birth of their child, providing formal recognition of the joyful news of the arrival. Sadly, other families have had the very different experience of registering the death of a loved one or a stillbirth. Regardless of our background and whether we are young or old, births and deaths are part of our shared lived experience, and how we record them matters. As legislators, our job is to make positive change. The Bill will, with Members' approval, afford families who suffer losses early in pregnancy the same formal recognition as those who experience the death of a loved one. It will remedy disparities in birth and stillbirth registration processes for some same-sex couples. It also represents the modernisation of the registration service. It is a Bill that will impact on a great number of people whom we are here to represent, and I hope that it will gain the support of MLAs.

I will now consider the three areas of the Bill's focus in turn. First, the Bill will make permanent the temporary provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 that relate to the registration of deaths and stillbirths. Those temporary powers have enabled those registrations to take place remotely and provided for the electronic transfer of documents between parties. Rather than coming into a council office, grieving members of the public can make arrangements to register a death or a stillbirth from their home. They can be assured that the key documents that enable a timely burial will pass electronically between doctors, officials and undertakers. Over the last five years, that has become the normal way in which the vast majority of such registrations take place. The provisions have enabled our registration service to be more modern, more efficient and more effective, and they have enabled us to provide an empathetic service to people at a difficult and often emotionally challenging time around the death of a loved one or following the terrible circumstances of a stillbirth. It is right that we should put no new burden on grieving families and should run our public services in a way that supports them and makes their lives easier. The Bill will therefore put those temporary arrangements on a solid statutory footing; provide permanent powers that sustain remote registration and electronic transfers of documents; and end the use of the Coronavirus Act 2020 powers in the context of the registration service, which Members on all sides are, I know, keen to see.

Secondly, the Bill will provide a statutory footing for a baby loss certificate scheme. As Members on all sides will sadly be able to testify, the impact and trauma of losses early in pregnancy are significant. Estimates of how many pregnancies end during the first 24 weeks vary. The charities Sands and Tommy's suggest that there may have been around 4,000 such losses here in 2021, but, because of a lack of reporting, that could underestimate the true figure. For those families, the loss of a baby early in pregnancy is a tragedy. The very real hurt that they feel is often borne in solitary silence, with little formal recognition and little support as they navigate their grief. Under existing law, the registration service can recognise only losses during pregnancy that occur after 24 weeks: losses after that point are treated as stillbirths. However, the Bill will change that and make provision to recognise losses that occur earlier in pregnancy.

A new baby loss certificate scheme will offer the opportunity for those who have experienced a baby loss prior to 24 weeks to have their loss formally recognised. While no certificate can undo their pain and grief, the new scheme will help to support families at a very difficult time and provide a voluntary way of acknowledging and recognising their loss. It will confirm that their baby existed and can be used to start a conversation with siblings or other family members. Certificates can help them to start to navigate the grieving process. Where such certificates have been introduced, they have been widely welcomed. That support has been reflected in the large number of questions that my Department has received about the proposed scheme and in the supportive and often personal letters that have been received on the matter. I am grateful to all those who have been in touch and have, often bravely, talked about their experiences.

It is important to me that families, charities and third-sector organisations have the opportunity to shape the certificate scheme so that it meets their needs and expectations.

To that end, we will hold a public consultation on the new scheme. That consultation will help to determine the details of the scheme, including consideration of who can apply for a baby loss certificate, the time period that it will cover and the content of the certificate. Once the consultation is complete, secondary legislation will be brought forward to implement the scheme. I am grateful to the Minister of Health, whose officials have worked with those in my Department to bring forward the legislation. I look forward to working with Minister Nesbitt to specify the detail of the scheme that will follow. If those matters progress smoothly, I anticipate that the scheme will be operational by the end of the year.

Thirdly, the Bill will rectify differences in the registration process for some couples. Under current law, different birth and stillbirth registration options exist for same-sex and heterosexual couples who are neither married nor in a civil partnership. Same-sex female couples that are in that position cannot jointly register a birth or stillbirth in the same way as heterosexual couples. Some second female parents do not have the same birth and stillbirth registration options as the father in heterosexual couples. The Bill will fix those disparities, ensuring that unmarried, non-civil-partnered couples have the same choices about how to register a birth or stillbirth, regardless of whether they are a same-sex or a heterosexual couple. That change will remedy our legislation in order to ensure that there is equality in the registration process.

As I outlined, the Bill will impact on a large number of the people whom we are here to represent, often at some of the most difficult and challenging times of their life. It contains provisions that make permanent the steps that we have taken to modernise the registration services. It introduces important remedies to disparities in our birth and stillbirth processes. It provides the statutory footing that is required for a new baby loss certificate scheme. I urge Members to support the Bill, and I commend it to the Assembly.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

In the absence of Matthew O'Toole, the Chair of the Committee for Finance, who is on paternity leave, I will speak about the Committee's scrutiny of the Bill. I thank the Minister for his comments.

The Committee very much welcomes the Bill. I know that other members of the Committee will agree that it has been quite a journey to get here. However, that does not diminish the importance of the Bill or the very positive impact that it will have. Members will be aware that it was the Committee that pressed for baby loss certificates to be included in the Bill. The presence of an enabling power to bring forward the certificates is very welcome. The Committee takes its legislative scrutiny role extremely seriously and will be diligent in its approach to examining and reporting on the Bill if, as expected, the House agrees that it be referred to the Committee for consideration.

I do not plan to repeat what the Minister said about the content of the Bill other than to say that the Committee is supportive of the provisions in the Bill, which make the processes to report deaths and stillbirths and to transfer documents less onerous on all parties concerned. That is important at a time that will already be very difficult for all those concerned.

As Members will be aware, the House previously supported the introduction of baby loss certificates, and that it was the Committee that urged that they be included in the Bill.

The Committee notes that there has been no consultation on the Bill. As per normal procedure, the Committee will undertake a call for evidence on its provisions, should the Bill be referred to the Committee following the debate.

The Committee previously agreed statutory rules made under provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 relating to the recording of deaths and stillbirths. Those changes allowed the registration of deaths and stillbirths by telephone, without an informant's signature and the electronic transfer of registration documents between the various parties in the process. The Committee agreed at its meeting on 10 April 2024 to extend the use of the provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 until 24 September 2024 through SR 2024/57 on the proviso that that would be the last time that the Coronavirus Act would be used. Departmental officials indicated to the Committee at that time that they would proceed to make the changes permanent so that the continued use of the Coronavirus Act 2020 would no longer be necessary and that that could be accomplished using delegated legislation. Although the Committee was supportive, it was sceptical about whether that would be possible through the use of delegated or secondary legislation. However, the Department's initial discussions with the Departmental Solicitor's Office seem to suggest that statutory rules could be introduced under the Civil Registration Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012, following an amendment to those regulations that would alleviate the need for primary legislation. The Committee was content for that to happen so as to allow the Department to move away from the extensions under the Coronavirus Act, which was not designed for that kind of long-term application. Due to that reassurance from the Department, the Committee considered two proposed statutory rules, and the Committee indicated at its meeting of 8 May 2024 that it was content with the proposals. The two statutory rules were, however, never laid in the Business Office.

The Committee was notified on 19 June 2024 that the Office of the Legislative Counsel had ruled, and the Departmental Solicitor's Office had subsequently agreed, that there was insufficient scope in the regulations for the changes and that primary legislation would be required to make the changes permanent. Thus, the hope that the changes could be made permanent via delegated legislation was dashed. The Committee received an urgent oral briefing on the issue from the permanent secretary at its meeting of 3 July 2024, when the Committee confirmed its disappointment in the requirement for new primary legislation, having previously outlined its scepticism over that being possible and being reassured that it was. Members went on to express concerns about the delay, which would inevitably lead to the provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 having to be extended again.

It was confirmed to the Committee that the Department had also looked to see whether there was any appropriate upcoming legislation that could be piggybacked on, which the Committee would have supported. However, nothing appropriate was identified, leading to the need for primary legislation. The Committee had an evidence session with the Registrar General on 11 September 2024, when members expressed regret that the changes could not be made through delegated legislation. The Committee again outlined its disappointment over the further extension of the provisions under the coronavirus legislation. The Committee also expressed its view at that time that a baby loss certificate scheme should be included in the legislation, potentially through enabling powers in the Bill. The Committee agreed at its meeting of 2 October 2024 to recommend to the Assembly the extended use of the provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2020 until 24 March 2025 through SR 2024/172.

Minister Archibald told the Committee on 27 November 2024 that the inclusion of a baby loss certificate scheme meant that legislation would require more development, further delaying the process. The Committee welcomed the inclusion of the certificates nevertheless. At its meeting of 26 February 2025, the Committee considered a further extension, with the intent to extend the provisions until 24 September 2025. The Committee agreed with the intention of the proposal, and the motion for that to be approved by the Assembly will be moved in early May. The Department has expressed to the Committee the hope that the Bill will have completed its legislative process by 24 September 2025 so that no further extensions will be required. However, while that hope is laudable, the Committee must be given appropriate time and space to undertake appropriate scrutiny. The Committee will consider a Bill timetable at its meeting this week, should the Bill be referred, and, at that point, the Committee — the Committee alone — will decide the length of extension that it requires to properly deal with the Bill and report to the House. The Committee expresses its disappointment that the provisions of the Coronavirus Act are still in effect at this stage. The powers in those regulations were only meant to be used in a time of national crisis, and the continued use of those provisions is of great concern.

The Committee supports the principles of the Bill. The ability to register deaths and stillbirths without having to attend a registration office in person is to be welcomed, and the opportunity for bereaved parents to obtain a baby loss certificate is an important step. The Committee is disappointed at the length of time that it has taken to get to this stage, especially for legislation such as this, which has the support of all parties. If the Bill passes Second Stage today, the Committee will look forward to working with the Department to ensure robust scrutiny of the Bill. As I indicated previously, the Committee welcomes the Bill and is supportive of the process today, which should ultimately see the Bill referred to the Committee for Finance for its Committee Stage.

Speaking briefly as a DUP MLA, I welcome the legislation. Increasing efficiency of a process that is used at a time when compassion is required due to death and stillbirth is very welcome, but, as per my Committee comments, it is disappointing that the legislation, which is on a simple and efficient process note, was not sitting ready to go last February. The coronavirus regulations were to make things efficient in a time of national crisis. To have to extend — repeatedly — and live under coronavirus regulations now is not where we want to be. However, the delay has enabled me and my colleague Paul Frew to recognise the Bill as an opportunity for a legislative vehicle by which to progress baby loss certificates to bring us in line with Great Britain. Our action on this in Committee, for which we had full Committee support, has enabled the potential for baby loss certificates to be introduced in Northern Ireland in this mandate rather than having to wait for stand-alone legislation to be developed at a later date.

The DUP is a pro-life party. We recognise and value every life from the moment that it is formed in the womb. In Northern Ireland, we have no recognition of the lives of babies who, devastatingly, were lost before 24 weeks, except for those women's medical records and feelings in their hearts. We welcome the introduction of baby loss certificates for families across Northern Ireland. As the Minister mentioned, many people have been in touch and are looking forward to seeing this come forward. The tales that I have heard since the Bill was introduced at First Stage the other week, have been heartbreaking. People are looking forward to this. I urge the Minister to see the Bill progress at pace, with a meaningful consultation. It is important that we take account of the consultation and that we are able to deliver for people in Northern Ireland. The DUP supports the progression of the legislation.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

On behalf of the SDLP, I support the Bill on an issue about which I am passionate, and on which I have been persistent. We thank the Minister for bringing forward the Bill. I also give recognition to the former Minister of Finance who laid much of the groundwork for it.

Reform of the processes through which we manage the issuing of death certificates is long overdue. It is an issue that was communicated to the Assembly by affected families a long time ago, and it is an issue in which there has been broad consensus across the Assembly. I believe that we will see that here again today. It is fair to say that there has been a hugely positive public response to the news that this important piece of work, which will mean so much to so many, will be legislated on. The mere recognition of the loss of the life that they never got to share will mean the world to the many grieving parents whom I have spoken to.

I will speak to the provisions in the Bill surrounding baby loss certificates, and then proceed to some of the issues relating to the improvement to death and stillbirth registration. Those of us who have had a child will know that, from the moment that you get the first positive test or see the first sonogram, your entire future changes. It is a frightening and exciting frenzy as parents immediately begin to start thinking about their baby, try to decide names and think about cribs, nappies and onesies. Will it be a boy? Will it be a girl? What will its first words be? What school might they attend? What great things might they accomplish? Will they have my eyes? Will they have my smile? Will they have my hair?

[Laughter.]

It is an unusual kind of grief to have that future — that life that you could have had — taken from you, to mourn not just what you have lost but everything that you were meant to have and to know that the baby that you were so excited to hold in your arms will be out of your reach forever.

What makes it worse is that that is a pain that women and their partners must often face alone. We have no way of knowing how many pregnancies end in miscarriage each year, but the most common estimate that we hear and use is that as many as one in four pregnancies could end in a miscarriage. That means that it is a sorrow that a huge section of society has endured and does endure. However, if you were to ask people across our country, "Do you know a woman who has had a miscarriage?", a significant number of people will say, "No", and fewer still might be able to say that they know a man who has lost a baby in that way.

As a society, we do not encourage people to talk about it or share our guilt. How many of us were told to keep a pregnancy secret for the first trimester just in case something went wrong and that, in that case, it would be better if no one knew? I understand that instinct entirely, but I know that it means that women are made to feel as though it is something to keep secret and to be ashamed of. It is often not until years later that women and men feel comfortable sharing their experience, and others never share it at all.

At his trial, Oscar Wilde spoke of:

"The Love that dare not speak its name".

Baby loss is like the grief that dare not speak its name. The Bill will not solve that — no legislation can. However, it is our sincere hope that the Bill, by creating the option of a baby loss certificate, will allow those going through a miscarriage to have some way to mark their pain; to acknowledge the loss that they have suffered; and to maybe have some degree of closure and catharsis. It is also our hope that the creation of the baby loss certificate scheme will encourage more couples to share their experience of miscarriage. The mere existence of the scheme will allow us to gather more data on the scale of the problem. That, I hope, will help further to destigmatise baby loss; show those who are going through a miscarriage that they are not alone; encourage them to tell their loved ones what happened and get the emotional support that they need; and facilitate us, as a society, to have a wider conversation about baby loss and rethink our attitudes towards it.

While we wholeheartedly support the Bill and the intention behind it, one or two matters warrant further exploration at Consideration Stage. In particular, if we look at clause 11(3)(e), we see that it empowers the Department of Finance to set fees for baby loss certificates. I would be grateful if the Minister could set out his intentions on that more clearly. Does he intend that access to a baby loss certificate will be free, as is the case across the UK, or is it the Department's intention to issue a fee in order for someone to access the scheme? If it is the latter, that would be a mistake. I understand the financial pressure that the Executive and every Department are under, and I am confident that any Minister's sole intention in attaching a fee would be to cover the projected costs of running such a sensitive scheme. However, while I do not and never would doubt the Minister's good intentions, any step to charge a fee for issuing a baby loss certificate risks being perceived as callous and may even compound grief. Neither England nor Scotland has felt the need to request any fee to access the service, and, if they can deliver that in a financially sustainable way, I see no reason why we cannot.

In the Budget sustainability plan, we have recently seen that even the smallest charge can be tied into a Department's budget. We saw hospital car parking charges and charges for Ordnance Survey maps tied into Departments' financial plans. Having a fee for baby loss certificates creates the option, no matter how repugnant I and, I am sure, everyone here would find it, for baby loss certificate fees to be seen in the future as a source of revenue. Beginning the scheme with a fee will make it much more difficult to remove it later. Once the Department begins receiving that fee money, it will inevitably play a role in its internal budgeting processes. Making the scheme free from the beginning will prevent that.

I turn now to the remaining reforms, which are common sense. Despite our differences in and around the Chamber, I am sure that we have all had a bereavement in our family. We all know the pain and grief of losing someone and the way in which lives get turned upside down and families get thrown apart. One element that does not always get spoken about, however, is that it is also a hectic and busy time. From the moment that someone dies, at a time when people are emotionally distraught, they need to begin the process of registering the death, organising and planning a funeral, paying for it and notifying relevant Departments. Following their sad passing, people may have a week to clean out a loved one's home, after which they have to value the estate and enter into a legal process around a will. That is before they even begin to look after themselves and their family, review their own needs and see what bereavement support they and others might need to access. If the deceased had next of kin or dependants, they may need to decide what support they need or see what changes they need to make to their taxes and benefits. In extreme cases, they may need to review their own immigration status. It is an overwhelming labyrinth of forms and bureaucracy that can often feel callous, given everything else that the bereaved and their family are going through. While much of that work, painful as it may be, is needed, it is a simple point of compassion to ease the burden if and when we can.

The pandemic was a brutal test for Governments, businesses and families around the world. In the midst of the shutdowns, innovative solutions had to be found to manage almost every aspect of our lives from shopping to working to socialising with friends and family. I am sure that I am not alone in being relieved that those dark and challenging times are done. It would, however, be remiss of us not to learn from elements of those solutions and ask whether they improved matters, and the Bill is one such example. For example, steps that we took during the pandemic included allowing people to give details of a death or stillbirth over the phone or digitally rather than attend in person; providing the option to share the relevant documents technologically by allowing electronic signatures for death certificates; and enabling medical professionals to transfer death or stillbirth forms. All proved not only to be common sense but to make the entire process of the registration of deaths and stillbirths more expedient and a wee bit less distressing for the families involved.

I am pleased that the Bill removes the restrictions on the right of a lesbian couple to the same rights as a heterosexual couple when registering a birth, stillbirth or baby loss. The fact that there is no provision, as there is for heterosexual couples, for the same-sex partner of a pregnant woman to register the birth of a child is just absurd. It is a relic from a darker time when the Government felt it appropriate to value one form of love or relationship over another and consider only a rigid, exclusive definition of "family". Not to allow the same-sex partner of a new mother to register a birth is to deny them their status as a parent. To say that because there is perhaps no biological connection between the child and them is to say that the woman who will feed, clothe and sit and do homework with that child is not a mother and not an equal partner in raising that child. What is more sinister and, frankly, cruel is that a unmarried same-sex partner cannot register a stillbirth. Most of us can only imagine how painful and upsetting it must be for a woman to suffer a stillbirth. In that scenario, it is only natural and human that her partner may want to take as much burden off her shoulders as she can while she physically and emotionally recovers. We understand and accept that with heterosexual couples, married or not. To deny that to same-sex couples is senseless and heartless.

That is not, however, the only area of the registration process in which lesbian couples continue to face barriers and discrimination. On 17 September last year, my office reached out to the then Minister of Finance to raise an issue about the registration of same-sex couples who have had a child through IVF. Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, if a same-sex couple conceive a child through IVF in Northern Ireland, both mothers are automatically registered as parents. If, however, the IVF treatment is administered abroad, which is common, as many fertility clinics often have an international sister clinic, both parents are unable to be registered on the birth certificate. Given that obvious gap in the legislation, I am interested to hear the Minister's opinion on whether he feels that that falls within the remit of the Bill. If so, does it not make sense to fix that anomaly now, rather than having to return to the matter in follow-up legislation? The SDLP is more than happy to work with the Minister on a friendly amendment to include that among the reforms set out in the Bill or even to support a departmental amendment.

We welcome the Second Stage of this important legislation and look forward to playing a constructive role as it passes through the Assembly.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As Question Time begins at 2.00 pm, I propose, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue after the question for urgent oral answer, when the next Member to speak will be Jemma Dolan.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 1.56 pm and resumed at 2.00 pm.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Education

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

1. Mr McReynolds asked the Minister of Education to outline when he will repeal article 4(1)(c) of the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. (AQO 1840/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

As Minister, I do not have the power to repeal article 4(1)(c). That would be a matter for the Assembly. I am considering whether to bring any such proposals to the Executive.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

Minister, I raised the issue with you on 30 April 2024. Why has nothing changed in almost a year?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is an issue on which differing views have been expressed, particularly by those in our schools who have to navigate what can be very difficult challenges. I moved to establish a working group and invited participants to be part of that so that we can look at what guidance can be provided. The outworkings of that will provide a better understanding on which to base a decision on whether to repeal the article.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

3. Ms D Armstrong asked the Minister of Education whether he will review school security protocols following the recent reports of hoax security alerts at primary and post-primary schools. (AQO 1842/22-27)

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

8. Ms Mulholland asked the Minister of Education, following recent reports of school closures as a result of security concerns, to outline what support is in place for schools to ensure their security arrangements are appropriate. (AQO 1847/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will group questions 3 and 8.

I condemn the disruption caused by the recent school closures due to security concerns, and I welcome the speedy response from the PSNI. Our young people and staff should be able to attend school without concerns about their safety or security.

The Department’s building handbook specifies the use of CCTV in schools with respect to building and site security and is for the protection of school premises and grounds against vandalism and theft. The handbook also provides for an intruder-detection system and external lighting for school security purposes. For new-build schools, consultation with the PSNI crime prevention design adviser and architectural liaison officer takes place on all aspects of site and building security from an early stage of development.

If schools have concerns about their existing security infrastructure, they should submit an unavoidable minor works application, supported by a PSNI report. Guidance on security and personal safety is available on the Department of Education’s website, and the Education Authority’s health, safety and emergency planning service is also available to provide schools with information and guidance. While that guidance was originally introduced in 1997, it remains relevant and largely current. However, I am happy to commit to a review of the guidance to ensure that it remains appropriate and up to date to mitigate the risks in today’s world.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. I welcome his condemnation of the security hoaxes and the steps that he is taking. I want to press the Minister on the issue of communication with parents and stakeholders in the event of any unfortunate security alerts in the future. What steps will he advise taking in such circumstances?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for her interest in the issue and for the question in light of the security threats that came through by email. The advice was that they were hoaxes, and schools were able to reopen.

When it comes to communication, schools are well placed to advise parents of any circumstances that may require a response from parents, including if they need to collect their children. That is a plan that schools should have in place.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. I apologise for missing the first part of your answer. Would your Department consider putting in place any capital funds, particularly for smaller rural schools? I should have declared an interest as a parent of children who were impacted on by the school closures. Two of my children go to a school that was closed in Ballycastle. Rural schools might not necessarily have large security infrastructure and have very open sites. Will there be a capital fund for those schools?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Where there is a need for any capital, that can be brought forward by way of an unavoidable minor works application. An application for funding for security measures that may need to be provided in a particular school would be considered. If a school feels that it needs some security infrastructure, I encourage it to engage with the relevant managing authority and submit an application so that it can be considered.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

I am grateful to the Minister for that information. He will be aware that there are a number of entrance points to schools, particularly secondary schools. In my constituency, there is at least one school that has several buildings. The Minister has indicated that funds may be available and that schools should apply. Will he indicate how schools can apply for that associated funding for security for their estate?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is by way of an unavoidable minor works application, and that will be considered through the normal processes. Each school differs in what would need to be developed and tailored to its unique circumstances. Schools are well placed to know what is necessary by way of any capital investment in security-related equipment. They should then engage through the Education Authority and put forward that application so that it can be assessed.

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

Minister, understandably, those calls and emails caused a lot of stress and concern for parents. Does your Department feel, at the moment, that all our schools in Northern Ireland are adequately prepared for emergency situations, events or threats, and will you revisit the current protocols around that matter?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Where there is a security incident, there should be a security policy in place where schools have a strategy setting out how to deal with a wide range of issues. Those can range from security of cash, personal property and personal safety to incidents of violence. The school's response to any incident should be led by its safety strategy. While it is not realistic to plan for every possible situation, the safety strategy should set out the appropriate responses that can be implemented in an emergency.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

4. Ms Ferguson asked the Minister of Education to provide an update on the appointment of an integrated design team (IDT) to improve disabled access at St Brigid’s College, Foyle. (AQO 1843/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The integrated design team for the project to improve access to St Brigid's College was appointed on 2 April 2025.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you for the update, Minister. As you are aware, the demand on the physical resources in the school is extremely challenging. For instance, when visiting the school, you see the likes of the 50-year-old toilets with no ventilation and in really bad condition; likewise, the poor condition of the changing facilities and the area for disabled parking and taxis. Can you ensure that a comprehensive approach will be taken to St Brigid's College to improve accessibility for all students?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The good news is that the IDT has been appointed. As the group with the relevant expertise, it will take forward the works needed at St Brigid's, so that allows things to commence. There was a business case for the specialist provision of classrooms and associated accommodation at St Brigid's. That business case was for a five-classroom specialist provision extension at a total cost of around £4·5 million. That was received in November 2024, but the level of cost means that it is currently with my Department's economists for review before submission to my director of finance for consideration. We therefore do not have a complete timeline for the works on that particular aspect that is needed in St Brigid's, but progress is being made, and I will continue to seek to make that progress.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

How will the Minister ensure that any physical works required to allow a pupil to access a new placement at that school in September 2025 will be completed before the start of the new academic year?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Obviously, there are teams involved in what would be necessary to take forward particular works in the school. That is actively monitored by the Department and the Education Authority. Where there are commitments for work schemes to be completed by September, there will be effective monitoring of that. If it is not going to happen, it should be flagged up to the school and the Department.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Patsy McGlone is not in his place. I call Declan McAleer.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

6. Mr McAleer asked the Minister of Education for an update on the development proposal for Dean Maguirc College, Carrickmore. (AQO 1845/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), as the planning and managing authority for Catholic maintained schools, has indicated that it will seek to increase the admissions and enrolment numbers at Dean Maguirc College via the development proposal (DP) process under article 14 of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986. As it is a statutory process, CCMS will work with the school in that regard.

The DP process can be separated into four main phases: first, identification of need in the area planning process; secondly, the pre-publication consultation; thirdly, publication of a DP; and, fourthly, the statutory objection period leading to a decision by the Minister. I should point out that the Department’s role in the DP process commences when a proposal is published.

On 16 January 2025, the Education Authority published its second operational plan for 2024-26. Dean Maguirc College features in 'Operational Plan 2' under a short-term work stream that says:

"The Council for Catholic Maintained Schools is reviewing the approved admission and enrolment numbers for Dean Maguirc College. The Council for Catholic Maintained Schools will engage with the Board of Governors regarding provision for the area."

While that work is ongoing, the school remains able to apply for temporary variations to enable it to increase its intake when there is oversubscription in the area.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. I should declare an interest as a former pupil, former teacher and a parent of two children who are at the school. Does the Minister have any indicative timeline for when the DP will commence and, indeed, conclude? The school was built in 1966 and is in urgent need of capital investment.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I know that the Member has pursued the issue very effectively and has raised it with me on a number of occasions and continues, rightly, to do so. On 9 May 2024, I met the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools along with other elected Members, departmental officials and representatives from Dean Maguirc College to discuss the admission and enrolment numbers at the school. The CCMS subsequently indicated that it would bring forward a DP to seek to increase the admission and enrolment numbers at the school through the DP process and that it would work with the school to bring it forward.

I mentioned 'Operational Plan 2' and its reference to Dean Maguirc College. It is not possible for me to put a specific time frame on bringing forward the DP. That is a statutory process, and a number of steps need to be carried out before it can be published. The initial steps in this case have to be carried out by CCMS and then by the Education Authority. At that stage, the Department's role in the DP process begins when a proposal is published. My Department is then engaged in that process.

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

7. Mr McGrath asked the Minister of Education for an update on the progress of the Priorities for Youth policy. (AQO 1846/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Priorities for Youth policy review commenced in September 2023. My Department is taking a co-design approach to the review. The review includes children and young people, the Education Authority, which is the statutory provider of youth services, youth work practitioners, the voluntary and community sector and other Departments.

My officials are gathering, reviewing and assessing evidence from a broad range of sources, including a young person's reference group; a regional advisory group; a cross-departmental group; five thematic subgroups; the project board; the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI); relevant research reports; and other policy areas in the Department. The review findings and evidence-based policy options will be brought to me for consideration during the summer of this year. Quarterly updates on the policy review are made available on the Department's website, and the next update is scheduled for April 2025.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. Inherent in the previous 'Priorities for Youth' document was the protection and enhancement of the role of those in the voluntary sector as the leaders in the delivery of youth work in our communities. I am not sure that the Education Authority actually delivered on that policy element of the previous document. Will the Minister assure us that the voluntary sector, which is delivering and is the most flexible in our communities in its ability to meet the needs of local children, will still get that prevalence and be able to deliver quality youth work?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The point that Mr McGrath makes is one that I have heard repeatedly from a number of the community groups that I engage with. It is also one that I can speak to from my constituency point of view, where I see how the voluntary and community sector do excellent work on youth services. That is why I am very keen to make sure that they are enabled to do their work and that, where they can do that work, there should not be the need for statutory provision because the voluntary and community sector can do it. There will always be a role for statutory provision — absolutely — but the review is working through all the various aspects that I just outlined. Once we get to that place where there is a policy, that will be subject to a public consultation process, which will give a further opportunity for community and voluntary groups to have an input into shaping the policy.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I heard from the Minister's response about a consultation process, but is there any indication about how long it will be before there is a launch date for the policy?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I have questioned my officials on this because I would like to see things expedited, but a number of voluntary and community groups have indicated that they need to get this right and that they would rather go through the detailed work. That is why the time frame is slightly longer than I would like it to be. It is hoped that there will be a launch in early 2026. The proposals need to come to me in the summer. We then need to take decisions and put them out to public consultation, and time will be needed to work through that. The objective, however, is to move towards having a launch in early 2026. The sooner all the key stakeholders can move forward on the process, the better. I want to enable the outworkings of the policy, but I am dependent on all the organisations playing their part to aid me.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I will pick up on Colin McGrath's question and your response to it in a bit more detail, Minister. When it is finally published, will the Priorities for Youth policy set out clearly the Department's policy on whether the community and voluntary sector is to be the primary delivery mechanism for youth services in Northern Ireland?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I cannot predetermine the outworkings of the process that are being engaged in. I want to enable an effective youth policy. I have my own view on that, but it has to be shaped by those who are actively engaged in that important work. I have a lot of sympathy with the direction of travel that the Member indicated, but the detailed work that is under way needs to be taken forward. That process will allow me to be engaged, and we will move into a consultation process. Members of the House, along with other organisations, will be able to help shape that.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

9. Mr Tennyson asked the Minister of Education for his assessment of the process for allocating minor capital works. (AQO 1848/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

My Department is operating within an extremely constrained capital budget. Within those budgetary constraints, minor works are restricted to ministerial priority 1, which refers to those works that meet inescapable statutory requirements such as health and safety, fire protection, safeguarding and statutory obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Schemes that meet those requirements are prioritised for delivery. Timescales for delivery will vary depending on issues such as their state of readiness, including whether there is a need for planning approval; the logistics of delivery, because, for example, some projects can only be delivered when pupils are not on site, limiting the window for delivery to holiday periods, which are typically the summer months; and the availability of funding — some small-scale projects can be mopped up at the end of the financial year, if funding is available. Unlike major works or school enhancement programme projects, minor works projects are initiated almost daily in order to address inescapable concerns. The minor works programme therefore needs to include a degree of flexibility so that it can respond to emerging priorities.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister, for that answer. Bridge Integrated Primary School, which is in my constituency, submitted an unavoidable minor works application in June 2023 and has been awaiting a feasibility report and business case since then. Do you accept that school leaders' confidence in the minor works system has been shattered? Will you commit to a review in order to restore their confidence?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A lot of the questions on issues with confidence are being raised by Members who created a false narrative and inaccuracies. Where there is a lack of confidence in the process, therefore, that is an issue for the Members who created it. I am absolutely confident in the processes that have been followed, so the answer to the Member's question is no, I will not commit to a review. It is a matter for others to do that, if they feel the need to review their processes. The Education Committee can carry out a review of those aspects, but the Member has asked me to initiate a review based on a false premise, and I do not have the resources available to waste my time on that.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

The Minister is absolutely right to highlight the fact that the biggest undermining of confidence comes from false information from democratically elected Members in the Chamber. Will the Minister confirm again that the works are being allocated to priority 1 cases and, perhaps, set out further context for why that is the case?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I can confirm that it is around priority 1 cases. I outlined the reason for that, which is to meet inescapable statutory requirements such as health and safety, fire protection, safeguarding and statutory obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act. Projects are also progressing to provide the minimum accommodation required to implement approved development proposals. As Members will appreciate, the Department is operating within an extremely constrained capital budget. Decisions have necessarily been taken to direct available investment to keep schools open, keep pupils safe and provide education access for the most vulnerable.

I very much want to fund more than just the school that Mr Tennyson referred to. Many Members of the House bring me to their constituency to advocate on behalf of their schools. We can only spend what is available. That is dependent on the Budget allocation that my Department receives. Therefore, I encourage Members to advocate on behalf of the Department of Education and help us to put that funding into our school community rather than into a new canteen for prisoners in Magilligan. I would sooner have the funding spent in our schools. That is where the priority should be.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 10 has been withdrawn.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

11. Mrs Dodds asked the Minister of Education to outline what steps he is taking to ensure that the Education Authority produces business cases in a timely manner for those schools involved in the school enhancement programme. (AQO 1850/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

In recent years, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of children with special educational needs (SEN). Since 2019, the total number of children with statements has risen from 19,000 to 27,000 and there has been a 21% rise in the numbers of pupils attending a special school, with many schools operating at or beyond capacity.

As part of my statement to the Assembly on 30 April 2024 to announce the establishment of a SEN capital investment programme, I said that one of the four strands of the programme would focus on the development and delivery of school enhancement programme (SEP) projects at special schools. I set out that there are currently 10 SEP projects pending in special schools, and they will be prioritised and expedited for delivery. I can confirm that that does not mean that the mainstream SEP projects have been paused or placed on hold. However, at present, SEP projects at special schools have been prioritised, with resource directed to take forward those schemes. Regrettably, that has meant that the programme of mainstream projects has been prolonged. However, the EA is currently exploring options to increase its resource to take forward SEP programmes in mainstream controlled schools as soon as possible.

I can assure you that there has been no change to the policy regarding SEP. Funding continues to be available to progress SEP projects through the design stages to pre-tender. A decision to release projects to tender for a contractor will be taken on a case-by-case basis, dependent on budget availability at that time.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister. It is good to hear that some of the SEP programmes in mainstream schools are still being progressed. However, progress is slow. I know that he will agree with me that many of those schools become very disheartened. They have extremely challenging accommodation needs. I am keen to for him to explore what additional resources the EA needs to progress cases. For example, Carrick Primary School in Lurgan has waited for almost 10 years for that business case. I am keen to know what more we can do to progress the issue.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member has had me travel to Upper Bann on a number of occasions, where I have been able to see schools and SEP projects. I assure her that my Department and the Education Authority are actively working to consider how processes can be accelerated. I share the frustration that the Member has raised. I have also indicated to the EA that, where it requires additional capacity to help move these projects forward, I and my Department want to assist it. That work is under way. I want those projects to move forward. We need to get them to the point where they are sitting ready to go. Then, it is another battle to secure the funding. However, we first need those projects to be shovel-ready, then I can seek the finances. Currently, too many projects are not at that stage.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

How will the Minister ensure that the schools most in need of emergency works will be able to access them via minor works?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I encourage the Member to view the significant number of applications that are considered and processed; there is a substantial volume. The Education Committee knows that, having looked into this particular issue. These are all priority 1 cases. That is indicative of the financial pressures that the school estate is under. Countless reports indicate that there needs to be much more investment in our school estate. That is what I want to see achieved. Decisions are delegated at appropriate levels in the Department and the Education Authority. The proper processes are followed to reach those decisions.

Colin Crawford (UUP, North Antrim)

Minister, will you commit to publishing a quarterly update on SEP progress that includes which schools have been prioritised and why?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is a good point. I ask my officials to provide me with updates on the capital programme, and there is a strong argument that those could be published so that the process is transparent and people are kept informed. I am considering setting up a process to provide that information.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

12. Mr Durkan asked the Minister of Education, further to the publication in 2022 of a Queen’s University Belfast research paper, ‘Is academic selection in Northern Ireland a barrier to social cohesion?’, to outline whether his Department will take any action to abolish academic selection. (AQO 1851/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Academic selection supports the principle of parental preference in education. It is a principle that underpins the legal foundations of the education system in Northern Ireland.

For each study that criticises academic selection, there is another that highlights the shortcomings of comprehensive education. In England, for example, the shift from selective grammar schools to comprehensive education did not improve social mobility as intended; rather, selection by ability has been replaced by selection by postcode. Work by the Centre for Economic Performance in the London School of Economics shows that poor access for economically disadvantaged groups to high-quality schools is among the reasons for low social mobility in England. The increase in house prices near high-quality schools means that, even though choice is available, poorer parents cannot make use of it because they cannot afford the inflated house prices in the catchment areas of those schools.

There is no societal, political or academic consensus on academic selection. Either we continue the same tired, old conversations, trying to socially engineer better education outcomes and setting school sectors against each other, or we focus on what the evidence tells us is important. An education system that promotes social mobility is most fundamentally one in which every child is able to attend a good school. That is why my new TransformED strategy sets out the most detailed and systematic programme of transformation in over a generation. It will make Northern Ireland a truly world-leading education system. It provides a pathway to educational excellence based on supporting effective teaching and a renewal of curriculum, assessment, qualifications and school improvement, all underpinned by a relentless focus on tackling educational disadvantage. Let us focus on building a truly high-quality school system in which all our children and young people can flourish.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

We all desire the flourishing of our young people; however, you will not see many, if any, reports that say much that is good about putting children under such pressure at such a young age. Previous Ministers essentially privatised the process. Will the Minister acknowledge the role that private tuition now plays, to the extent that it has become a de facto part of it, putting so much pressure —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

OK. Minister.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

— on so many parents and children and creating an uneven playing field?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member's points can be debated, and I have sympathy for some of them. The decision to abolish academic selection by the state led to the privatisation of the transfer process, so I find it ironic that some advocate greater state control. I have a lot of sympathy for that point. Some parents ask, "Why can these exams not be sat in the school environment? Why can it not be regulated by the state?". Those are points of conversation and debate. I suspect that we will not reach consensus, however, and, if I spend the next two years debating that issue, we will miss what is critical: ensuring that every child is able to access a good school. That is why I published my TransformED document, which is, at its core, about closing the attainment gap between those who come from a more socially deprived background and those who are better off, with parents who, as the Member rightly outlines, are able to engage private tuition to aid their child.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

13. Mr Robinson asked the Minister of Education for an update on the revised teachers’ pay offer. (AQO 1852/22-27)

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister, you have about half a minute.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It was announced on Friday 28 March that, following individual consultation with members, the Northern Ireland Teachers' Council (NITC) was not in a position to ratify an agreement on the management side's revised formal offer to resolve the teachers' pay dispute 2024-25. That second pay offer was rejected.

That is why I personally intervened, took control of the situation, met the trade unions and put forward a proposal that broke the deadlock. As a result of that action, our teachers are now getting the 5·5% increase, and they will get their backdated pay in May of this year. It is something that the teaching profession has very much welcomed. We continue to work on the issues that teachers have raised about workload.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We will now move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Ms Hunter asked the Minister of Education, given that, understandably, the Education Authority error in distributing letters to parents on preschool placements has caused great distress, leaving many parents devastated to learn that they had not secured a place for their child and scrambling to make alternative arrangements, whether he can detail to the House how many children in Northern Ireland have been left without a nursery place and whether he will commit to delivering the necessary funding to ensure that those families can avail themselves of a placement in one of their preferred nurseries. (AQT 1211/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I agree entirely with the Member about the regrettable information that was put out in advance of what was meant to be sent later this week. The Education Authority looked into the matter and engaged with the company that was responsible, Version 1, and it has apologised. It was preparing to release the information this week, and it appears to be down to human error that the information was released in advance. That was wrong, and, as I said, Version 1 has apologised.

It created considerable distress, as there often is at this time of the year, but, if the information had not been released early, there would have been less disruption in preschool settings, because work was still being done to find resolutions. The Education Authority is working to make sure that a place is provided for every child in Northern Ireland.

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

I thank the Minister for his response. Given the Education Authority's recent policy change on the published admission number (PAN) and the impact of the standardisation programme, what action will the Department take to ensure transparency and fairness in preschool place allocations, particularly in rural areas such as my constituency?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member rightly outlines how the Education Authority is responsible for allocating the PAN to providers. The allocation takes place annually and can change, and that can create instability in some of the settings. The Education Authority is, however, actively trying to manage the number of places in order to match them to the needs of our community, and it needs to make sure there is no oversupply. This year, the circumstances in which the information was communicated were not satisfactory. We are investigating in order to understand how that happened.

I accept what the Member has said, and that is why I have commissioned a review of the process used to allocate numbers to preschool and nursery providers. I have asked the EA to take forward work to look for a better way in which to operate the process, rather than Members and the Department having to deal with the issues that are brought to my attention every year.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

T2. Mr K Buchanan asked the Minister of Education to indicate the consequences of the request for an extension of the Committee Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill until 3 December 2025. (AQT 1212/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The motion on the Committee Stage extension, which will be debated later today in the House, would, if the Committee follows its inefficient approach, result in the legislation not taking effect until September 2027. It is therefore vital that Members support the amendment that has been tabled. The Committee and its Chair are absolutely wrong on the issue. Our first priority has to be hard-working families. The Committee needs to reorganise its workload, and its members need to do what they are elected to do as Members of the legislative Assembly. It needs to carry out its scrutiny work within a much more efficient time frame than it proposes and put the interests of hard-working families first. The Committee should not seek to deny the implementation of the DUP's manifesto pledge to deliver on that education issue. It should not play politics on the matter and should put hard-working families first.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. What other options are open to the Committee for scrutinising the Bill?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Committee could work harder. The public expect this place to get on with its job. I note that, on 27 September 2024, when the consultation on the school uniform Bill went out, the Chairman of the Committee, Mr Mathison said:

"This is an issue which has gone on for too long."

I agree. It has gone on for too long, yet he wants to bring forward a proposal that would lead to legislation not taking effect for three years after he made that statement. The Alliance Party needs to sit back and ask itself why it is here. Is it here just to frustrate and delay the Assembly, or will it allow me, as a Minister, to get on with the job and deliver for hard-working families? I will support the amendment, and I trust that the Alliance Party will support it rather than frustrating the Assembly's work.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

T3. Mr Tennyson asked the Minister of Education, on the subject of frustration and delay, whether he accepts his share of responsibility for the delay in reaching a teachers' pay settlement last week. (AQT 1213/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I was delighted that we were able to reach an agreement on teachers' pay. It was a commitment that I wanted to deliver on. When I first came into post, a new recruit coming out of our teacher training college was paid £23,000 a year. Thanks to a DUP Education Minister, new recruits will now start on £31,650 a year. They will be paid £7,500 a year more than when I was not in this post. I am delighted that we have reached an agreement. I refer the Member to the trade unions' press releases, which I welcomed, in which they thanked me for my intervention as Education Minister. I encourage him to listen to the unions, which praised the work that I carried out.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

The Minister lives on another planet. He must not have been engaging directly with teachers and support staff recently: they are not happy with where the situation has landed. What steps will the Minister take to address the workload and caseload issues that teachers have raised?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Maybe the Member is incapable of reading. He may want to go back to school so that he can read the agreement. The agreement includes 26 workload areas. That was the commitment that management side entered into with the teaching trade unions. We have not only delivered a 5·5% increase but committed to 26 areas around workload. We listened, rightly so, and I then intervened to say, "Let us set up a commission. We will appoint three members to it. It will carry out oversight, report to me and hold not just me and my Department but others to account, so that this is delivered on". As a DUP Education Minister, I have engaged, listened and delivered, and I will continue to do so.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

T4. Mr Clarke asked the Minister of Education how many special schools still require places to be allocated to pupils. (AQT 1214/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is an important issue on which we continue to engage with the Education Authority. We believe that around 1,300 places are required to accommodate the need identified for September 2025. While the Education Authority has been working to increase the majority of the capacity across the school estate, an assumed pressure of around 400 places remains in advance of the new academic year.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

That number is quite high. What steps are being taken to reduce it and allay the fears of a large number of parents?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

There is ongoing engagement on the issue and has been over the past week. This week, the most senior representatives of the Education Authority — the chief executive and directors — will actively meet schools in areas where need has been identified in order to provide assurances that the schools will be supported when they engage with the Education Authority to enhance the provision in their school. Some schools are concerned that they are not supported when they make provision available, so the EA is engaging in outreach work with schools. The SEN task force that was established last year will meet on 16 April. My most senior officials — the permanent secretary and deputy secretaries — will be part of that task force to make sure that, whatever support the Education Authority needs, my Department will be there, engaging with it. We need to ensure that every child who should have a place will have a place for the next academic year.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

T5. Mrs Dodds asked the Minister of Education for an update on any of the actions taken since the launch of TransformED NI. (AQT 1215/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Following the launch of the TransformED strategy, there have been important announcements about assessment and professional learning. Working with the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA), we have introduced a new system-level sample assessment in literacy and numeracy for pupils at the end of Key Stage 3. That mirrors arrangements in many high-performing jurisdictions. The new tests will involve a representative sample of around one third of schools. That will begin in March 2026 and will provide important data on how our system is performing in those areas. It is something that trade union representatives have welcomed, because the involvement of CCEA in the assessment will assist in reducing the workload of teachers.

I have also announced a new programme called "Making Best Practice, Common Practice", which aims to bridge the gap between academic research and classroom practice. TransformED contains a specific action to improve access for teachers to educational research. The Making Best Practice, Common Practice programme includes three key elements: funding for school and school clusters to support research-informed conferences; a monthly newsletter for teachers on the science of learning; and a quarterly Northern Ireland publication for teachers on wider education research.

Most critically, my officials are working on a detailed implementation plan to support delivery of the TransformED strategy over the next number of years. That will identify lead organisations and delivery mechanisms as well as funding requirements. Officials are engaging with key stakeholders to discuss the plan.

This week, I will issue a new TransformED magazine. That will keep school leaders and teachers updated each term on the programmes and reforms that are being taken forward as part of the TransformED strategy.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister. All of us in the House recognise that excellence in our schools and throughout the education system for all of our pupils is really important. What do you see as the long-term stages in the process?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I concur with the Member. She is absolutely right about the importance of excellence.

The next stage of the TransformED will be a detailed implementation plan to support the delivery of the strategy over the next number of years. That will identify lead organisations and delivery mechanisms as well as funding requirements. Officials are engaging with key stakeholders to discuss the plan.

I am also delighted that the inaugural TransformED conference will be held on 8 May. That event will bring together school leaders and policymakers to provide them with an opportunity to engage directly with global education experts and learn more about the reform agenda. Speakers will include members of the international ministerial advisory group, such as Daisy Christodoulou and Tim Oates. Lucy Crehan will also present key outcomes from the strategic review of the Northern Ireland curriculum, offering a first look at potential changes that could redefine education in Northern Ireland.

The conference will be a huge event. We already have over 500 principals who will attend, and I expect that number to increase. We anticipate having 800 educationalists together on that date as we move forward our education system in Northern Ireland.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

T6. Ms Bradshaw asked the Minister of Education to provide an update on his discussions with the Health Minister on ensuring that nursery provision is restored to the special educational needs schools from which it has been withdrawn. (AQT 1216/22-27)

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Chief Nursing Officer has been commissioning work for allied health professionals who operate in our special schools. That is an area on which I have engaged with the Health Minister, and I will continue to do so. We await a report on how that work is being taken forward, because I have heard concerns from principals about the need to have that support in our special schools.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Minister, given your support for the process, what support can you give to principals and the leadership in those schools while that work is being undertaken?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Obviously, there is support for our special schools, but they are managing increasingly difficult medical complexities. The pupils who are coming forward, thankfully, live much longer than used to be the case as a result of advances in the medical world. However, that means that support is required in our special schools to enable the principals to, first and foremost, provide an education for those young people. That will be possible only where there is the appropriate medical support.

Some of the principals whom I have met are deeply concerned that they are reaching the point at which they will have to say to a child, "You're not able to come to the school, because your medical needs cannot be catered for". That is not a tenable position. We do not want that to be the case. That is why we need to secure the appropriate support. I am seeking to do that with the Minister of Health.

Oral Answers to Questions — Finance

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

1. Mr Beattie asked the Minister of Finance to outline whether the Northern Ireland Prison Service stores personnel files outside of the secure document storage facilities provided by his Department. (AQO 1855/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

With the creation of the centralised NICS HR function in 2017, the data controller for all Civil Service staff files moved to the Department of Finance. Given the security considerations for prison-grade staff, it was agreed that all live and legacy hard copies would remain in NI Prison Service headquarters.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

The Minister will know that concerns have been raised with the Information Commissioner's Office about the break-in at Dundonald House by those who feel that personnel files kept there were not secure. Will the Minister outline the processes for accounting for all personnel files, be they of prison officers or anybody else from the Civil Service, particularly when in transit between your Department and the Department of Justice?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member is correct, and it is on the record: Dundonald House was accessed in recent times. However, the room containing Prison Service files was not accessed, and, even if it had been, there would have been no access to the storage facilities in which the files were held. I asked whether the room was entered and whether cabinets were opened, and the answer to both of those questions was no.

I understand that the files were transported securely, in agreement with the Prison Service, to a new location.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Minister, given the recent break-ins at Dundonald House, will you assure us that all steps have been taken to secure it?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Since the break-in and further incidents of attempted unauthorised access, all locks on the entry and exit doors to Dundonald House have been changed, chains and padlocks have been put in place where access is believed to have been gained, access to the roof has been closed off and 24-hour on-site security has been put in place inside the building. The Department of Finance is also arranging for wire mesh to be installed internally to cover up the windows on the lower floors of the building to help to prevent further unauthorised entry, and it has closed the pedestrian access point adjacent to Dundonald House. The need for ongoing or further security measures at or around the building will be kept under review by my Department.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

2. Mr Kelly asked the Minister of Finance to outline any measures being taken by his Department to simplify procurement practices. (AQO 1856/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

At the beginning of March, the Executive approved an increase in procurement control limits to reflect inflation over the past five years and to introduce greater flexibilities for public bodies. The new limits were effective immediately. The changes allow public bodies to target spending below £50,000, or £65,000 for utilities, to microbusinesses and the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector. For those contracts, public bodies can seek price checks or quotations by email. The simplification means that businesses will not be required to use the eTendersNI system, which can be seen as a barrier by those groups.

The flexibility will also ensure local accountability and allow spending decisions to be made locally. Many reports point to a risk-averse culture across the public sector. I encourage ministerial colleagues to ensure that their Departments maximise the flexibilities that the new limits create and ensure that that flexibility is replicated in their arm's-length bodies, such as schools. In addition to flexibility in procurement practices, my Department is in the process of raising the delegated limits at which Departments are required to seek approval from the Department of Finance's Supply division. Again, I encourage Ministers to review the practice in their Department to ensure that delegated limits for their arm's-length bodies are proportionate and focused on delivery.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

[Translation: I thank the Minister.]

Will the Minister expand a little on how the new simplified procurement process helps local small businesses to access public-sector contracts?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am committed to ensuring that our procurement practices are simplified and easily accessible for local businesses, particularly as 85% of businesses here have between one and nine employees, and 97% have fewer than 50 employees. The simplification of the procurement processes and practices for contracts that are below £50,000, or £65,000 for utilities, will mean that businesses will not be required to use formal tendering to provide quotations. That will make it easier for the public sector to do business and, more importantly, for businesses to bid, negotiate and work in partnership with the public sector.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Minister, during the past five years, the health trusts in Northern Ireland have spent close to £3 billion on care home contracts without going through procurement processes. What is your assessment of how that spending aligns with requirements and best practice, given that there are concerns about the lack of flexibility for those who are availing themselves of places in care homes?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

That is a matter for the Department of Health, the Health Minister and, indeed, the Health Committee to assess and interrogate. It is important that public funds are used wisely and are accounted for. It is also important that we are getting maximum value for money and that small- and medium-sized enterprises are not ruled out of or have barriers placed in their way to accessing considerable amounts of public funding, which can make a huge difference to a small business and, therefore, to our local economy. On the detail of the Member's question, I encourage her to engage with the Department of Health.

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

Minister, what methods or mechanisms are available to the Department to ensure that not only proper procurement procedures but proper payment procedures are adhered to for arm's-length bodies?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Each procurement exercise will have its own contract. Departments should monitor those and satisfy themselves from the outset that the procurement process is being followed properly and that, as I said to the previous questioner, value for money is being achieved. The Department of Finance sets out policy on those matters. We can and will offer support to Departments when it is asked for, but we in the Department of Finance do not have an interventionist role on those matters. As I said, I am more than happy, where resources allow me, for my officials to support other Departments if and when questions arise, where queries arise on those matters or where they want advice on best practice.