Northern Ireland Assembly, 15 September 2025

453 contributions from 72 members. The official report.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Timothy Gaston has been given leave to make a statement on the death of Charlie Kirk and its impact 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 in the usual manner. You have up to three minutes in which to speak, Timothy Gaston.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I pay tribute to and give thanks for the life of Charlie Kirk. At just 31 years of age, Charlie was a devoted husband to Erika and a loving father to his two beautiful children. His loss is deeply felt not only by his family but by all those who value conviction, courage and the right to speak freely. Charlie Kirk stood for family, his Christian values and his conservative principles when he advocated, as he did all the time, for family, faith and liberty. His approach to those who disagreed with him was grounded in biblical exhortation:

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD".

Through social media, his work reached a global audience, with many homes in Northern Ireland, including my own, following him. He gave a voice to those with Christian and conservative views by defending the right to speak without fear of censorship or intimidation. The Assembly should reflect on what his life teaches us: freedom of expression and the liberties that we hold dear are fragile, and they must be defended against political violence.

Politically motivated murder is and was always wrong. We need only to look at our history. Memorials in Parliament Buildings remind us of Sir Norman Stronge and his son, James, murdered by the Provisionals; Senator Jack Barnhill, murdered by the Official IRA; and Senator Paddy Wilson, murdered in particularly vicious circumstances by loyalists. Regardless of ideology, such acts are and have always been wrong.

There is, and there has always been, an alternative.

I began by noting that Charlie lived out the biblical love and concern to reason with his opponents. On that same theme, I want to bring my remarks to a close by observing that he knew the full truth of the verse:

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool."

Whatever differences I have with other Members, I urge each and every one of you to seek the same experience, go after the same saviour and put your trust in him, as Charlie Kirk did.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

On Wednesday evening, the world watched in horror as Charlie Kirk, aged just 31, was assassinated in the United States of America. It was shocking and heartbreaking, especially for his wife and two young children, who I keep in my prayers. Charlie was the co-founder of Turning Point USA, a political activist and commentator, who, at just 31, had built a strong platform, giving a voice to millions of people who felt silenced by the left. Charlie's politics were shaped by his Christian faith, common sense and his conviction that the truth should be spoken plainly, even when it is unpopular. For that, he was hated by people who could not bear to see their ideology challenged.

The battles that are being fought in America are not confined to the United States: they are being fought here, too, in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. On Friday night, we saw Erika Kirk, Charlie's wife, speak publicly with grace and incredible strength. She spoke to the evildoers and told them:

"You have no idea the fire that you have ignited".

She said:

"The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry."

Erika, I have certainly heard your cry. I will speak up here, in Northern Ireland, for what is right and share that message.

Charlie Kirk stood firmly for a common-sense approach. His convictions were rooted in his faith, as mine are. He spoke more broadly, though, to anyone who values truth and fairness, love of their country and the foundations of a stable society. Charlie Kirk never shied away from the challenging issues. He spoke truth with conviction and compassion, and so must we. We, in the DUP, will not bow to those who sneer at the values of ordinary people. We must stand up against the woke agenda. The older I get, the more I see people turning to Jesus. In a world where evil seems to grow louder every day, faith is a refuge; a light that refuses to be swallowed by the darkness. Belief is not just about religion: it is about hope and strength, the promise that goodness has the final word, as, in death, those who are saved live forever with God.

Since Charlie Kirk was murdered, over seven million people have newly followed his social media platforms. His message is stronger from beyond his death — from heaven. His name "Kirk" is the Ulster-Scots word for "church". Members, nothing happens by chance: it is all part of God's plan. Let us remember Charlie by taking up the challenge, honouring his beliefs and values of faith, family and country, and keeping his family firmly in our prayers.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Colleagues, at the heart of this, and what we should focus on, is the fact that there is a grieving family who are mourning a terrible loss. There was no justification for the killing of Charlie Kirk. His murder was wrong. The horrific scenes that were played out on social media were absolutely dreadful to watch. There has been a lot of talk about freedom of speech. While I uphold everyone's right to that, it must come with the understanding that there is huge responsibility with regard to what we say and the impact that it can have. We must be mindful of the language that we use. I am sure that that will be debated ad nauseam over the next period, but, today, I will think of the grieving family at the heart of this who have been left to pick up the pieces.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

The murder of Charlie Kirk is the latest incident in a worrying rise in political violence in the United States and, indeed, across the world. It was an act of political cowardice. I speak as somebody who disagreed with just about every word that came out of Charlie Kirk's mouth, but I can recognise his talent as an orator, debater, activist and organiser. Today, my thoughts are with his young family who are suffering an unimaginable loss.

There is no place for political violence in any society. Indeed, a fair and free democracy relies on the ability of all of us — politicians, activists and members of the public — to engage in public life without fear of reprisal, violence, attack or intimidation. It is important to say that political violence is not the preserve of left, right or centre. Irrespective of where we stand on the political spectrum, we have an obligation as democrats to stand against political violence wherever it raises its head, whoever is responsible for it and whomever it is targeted against. At a time when democracies across the globe are under attack, let the loss of Charlie Kirk be a reminder to us all that those democracies are precious: we must all resolve to defend them.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

On behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party, I extend our thoughts and condolences to the wife and family and friends of Charlie Kirk. It was a brutal assassination, carried out in the full glare of today's social media. Many people beyond his family and friends and, indeed, beyond America will have been traumatised. Such things can be a chill factor when it comes to people expressing their views honestly and passionately.

It is not appropriate, as we acknowledge the terrible crime and atrocity that we witnessed last week, to bring into it in any way a conversation about responsible language. It is absolutely vital that people can speak and be heard and be controversial. Yes, they can be governed under the law, but nothing about a person's words ever justifies the use of violence against them. Nothing about one's political views or views of faith or on how a country should be governed or its constitutional status ever justify one's murder. Every one of us in this place should use our language to say that violence is wrong and always has been wrong. There are people listening to us out there, particularly young people, who cannot make the distinction that some who sit in this place can, in saying, "Violence was OK up to that point — that date — when we said so, but it is not justified any more". We need to take that out of the equation.

As a party, we remember, of course, that we have lost members, including Edgar Graham, to political violence. Therefore, I extend our thoughts as a party to the family and friends of Charlie Kirk, and to people who feel that they cannot speak out because, if they do so, they will be oppressed and may even be assassinated. We all need to stand for free speech, and we all need to have this clear red line: violence is wrong, will always be wrong in the future and was always wrong in the past.

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

Violence begets more violence; hate tends to beget more hate. The scenes, brutally and traumatically relayed throughout the world via social media on people's phones, including those of many young people, of the assassination of Charlie Kirk will leave a lasting legacy for many people who supported and sympathised with him. It will motivate them politically, which is their right, but, for them and for everybody else, it is a grotesque, horrifying sign of the breakdown of basic democratic values. It should go without saying in any democracy that the right to disagree is sacrosanct. The right to free speech, even to say things that offend other people, has to be protected. It should also go without saying that we share our profound condolences with Charlie Kirk's widow, his family and all who were close to him.

It is probably obvious that I did not agree with anything that Charlie Kirk said. In fact, I thought that a lot of what he said was abhorrent and wrong. I am willing to say that here; I am not in any way minimising or giving succour to people who thought that it was appropriate to take his life. My party and I have always believed that political violence of that kind is not just morally wrong but profoundly counterproductive, because it emboldens people and creates martyrs for their causes.

Just before I was born, a man named Robert Bradford was assassinated in the constituency that we share, Mr Speaker. Not long after, when I was a baby, Edgar Graham was assassinated near where my constituency office is now. I have no doubt that, had I been a politician at the same time, I would have profoundly disagreed with most of what those two gentlemen stood for and said, but the taking of their lives was profoundly morally wrong and deeply counterproductive. Ultimately, it was the kind of violence that made it harder to make progress in any society.

While saying that I did not agree with anything that Charlie Kirk said and robustly oppose lots of what he said, let me say on behalf of my party that his murder was grotesquely morally wrong and indefensible. We are at a moment in the United States and in other parts of the world in which we need to be able to stand up for freedom of speech but also for respectful debate. Sometimes, that debate will be challenging, robust and very contentious, but it has to happen in the space of respect for difference and for democracy.

I know what my values are, and I will keep championing them. Others in the Chamber have values that I will continue to challenge robustly, but I respect their right to have those opinions and to make their points. I hope that they will respect my right to challenge them robustly. I wish that Charlie Kirk had been around: if he had been, I and others would have been robustly challenging his views. The taking of his life is an affront to democracy —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

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

— and I offer my condolences to his family and all who cared about him.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Charlie Kirk was a champion. He was a tremendous speaker and a talented debater. First and foremost, however, he was a family man: a father of two young children. He was brutally assassinated because he was effective and because he spoke the truth. He warned against intolerant liberalism and the totalitarian left, but he preached libertarianism. He fought for freedom. He supported family: everybody's family. He talked about his Lord, and now Charlie is in glory. He leaves behind a grieving wife and two young children, however, and that is intolerable. I will continue to pray for that family.

We sometimes think that America is so far away, but it is not. The battles that Americans fight we fight also. Surely the past five years have taught us that. Charlie Kirk was a champion to so many people throughout the world. There are many people who had never heard of him but aspired to the same values. Those people now know Charlie Kirk. They know what he stood for and what his family stands for. They know what his organisation stands for. A fire and a passion have been ignited that will grip this world. It will grip America and the UK. Charlie Kirk's legacy will be stronger in death than it was in life.

I am part of a Christian hillwalking club, and we were out in the Highlands at the weekend. The club has young and old members, but Charlie Kirk was the topic of everybody's conversation. There was deep sadness and shock that Charlie Kirk is no longer with us. I recognised the burning passion in those young people's lives for Charlie Kirk and his strength. That strength will go right across this land, and those young, Christian, conservative people will no longer be scared to speak up. They will be like Charlie Kirk, and that will be his lasting legacy.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Last week, the world was shaken by a senseless, barbaric and tragic act: the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

First and foremost, our hearts go out to his wife, Erika, and their children. Today, we hear the courageous battle cry of a young widow. At its core, this is a human loss, with a family broken and torn apart in the most cruel and inhumane way imaginable. No words can ease their pain, nor will they ever, but today, we stand with them in their grief and their loss.

Charlie was a beaming light in a world that is consumed by darkness. A man with unwavering conviction, he stood boldly for the truth, guided by courage and passion. His voice resonated with a generation, especially with young people who saw in him a rare form of leadership, unafraid, unfiltered and unshaken. Charlie Kirk was not assassinated because of the words that he spoke. He was assassinated because our young people were prepared to listen and to take courage in standing up for truth with conviction.

More importantly than any of that, Charlie embraced his Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and he proclaimed the gospel proudly. In his own words, he said:

"I am far more interested in what God wants from me than what I want from God."

He also said:

"My prayer is very simple ... use me for your will".

In Belfast and in London and in cities and towns across his beloved USA, Charlie's name is being lifted up and remembered. His impact was nothing short of seismic as it helped to reignite conservative family values right across the world not in anger but in reason. He gave a voice to the unheard. He empowered people, young and old, including here in Northern Ireland, to question and to challenge. He reminded them that they are not wrong to think differently. Charlie's legacy will endure. It will inspire a boldness in those whom he touched. A new generation will honour him not by retreating into silence but by speaking truth. Thank you, Charlie Kirk.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

On behalf of the people of North Belfast, which is a community that is used to the damage of political violence, I add my sympathy and that of those whom I represent to the Kirk family. Charlie Kirk's murder was motivated by hatred: hatred of his ability; and hatred of his willingness to challenge the status quo and of his willingness to stand up for traditional values. It falls to all of us who are public representatives who value democracy to call out that attack, which was an attack not just on one man or a set of ideals but on a process that we should all hold dear: freedom, tolerance and respect.

To those across the United Kingdom and in the United States who are engaging in the ghoulish and obscene behaviour of celebrating this death, I say, "Shame". However, I also say that the Kirk family will take great solace in that disgraceful act, as they know that those people do that because they hate him. We can look at the words that Charlie spoke. He knew that people hated him because he was willing to challenge them, willing to stand up to them and willing to take on vested interests.

It falls to all of us who value democracy to continue to speak up for that right, which is the right to challenge and to represent those whom we hold dear. This party will continue to be on the side of the silent majority and will stand with the Kirk family.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Mr Speaker, I was not going to speak, but I have just had a message from Senator Wayne Harper, from the Utah State Senate.

I said to him, "Senator, we woke to the terrible news of the death of Charlie Kirk. The use of violence to silence free speech is, regrettably, something that we in Northern Ireland are all too aware of. Charlie Kirk and his young family are in our thoughts and prayers. We also pray for you and your great state at these sad times."

Senator Harper responded, "Thank you for reaching out, and thank you to the Northern Ireland Assembly for reaching out to us all. This is, indeed, a travesty. As you know all too well, violence is not a political solution. Sitting around a table to talk is."

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank all Members for their respectful handling of the issue, as was the case when we had Members' statements on George Floyd, when Members were equally respectful. On Wednesday, we will have a round-table discussion about MLAs' personal safety and the abuse that is ongoing. We all need to reflect on the issue and be conscious that the public square is not necessarily always a safe place to be. Every Member needs to reflect on that and be aware of it. Whilst, in America, such an event can happen somewhat more easily because of the number of guns that are available, we have seen the murder of two Members of Parliament in the United Kingdom, and a number of our offices have been targeted recently and not so recently. Members need to be aware of all those things and reflect on them.

It is important — it is why we are here as a democratic institution — to give voice to people. That voice can disagree a lot and be forceful and contentious at times, but that does not give anyone the right to take anybody's life or to cause harm to another person because of the views that they have expressed. I encourage every Member, as a public representative, to be strong and to go out and represent your people as you are elected to do in the way that you see fit. We all have a job to do for our constituents.

Members' Statements

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Beidh mé ag labhairt as Gaeilge ar dtús. Ar an drochuair, is gá dom aird a tharraingt arís ar chur chuige do-ghlactha an Aire Pobal i dtaca leis an Ghaeilge.

[Translation: I will speak in Irish to begin. Unfortunately, I have to draw attention again to the Minister for Communities’ unacceptable approach to the Irish language.]

The Minister for Communities has responsibility for developing an Irish language strategy. Although, to date, the Minister has failed to publish one, he clearly has his own strategy for the Irish language. It is a strategy to prevent the development of Irish and work against its ongoing growth on this island. It is a strategy to undermine and attack Irish at every opportunity. In his decision to remove trilingual letterheads from his Department, it is a strategy to make Irish invisible. Unfortunately, that is one of a number of interventions that the Minister and his party have made to thwart the development of Irish, including blocking additional funding from the Southern Government for North/South bodies including Foras na Gaeilge and opposing Irish-language signs at Grand Central station.

The Irish language has endured attacks before and survived. It will endure these attempts to undermine and suppress it as well.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Following on from that, I welcome last week's comments from the High Court judge, which pushed back against Sinn Féin's attempts to continue to push cultural dominance in Northern Ireland. As the High Court judge made clear, the Infrastructure Minister's attempt to impose additional Irish-language signs at Grand Central station has made the Executive into a laughing stock. Should we be surprised? My party made clear from the start that the Infrastructure Minister's attempts were unlawful. That was called out by the deputy First Minister and, indeed, in actions by the Communities Minister. Since then, we have seen an attempt to whip up faux outrage.

The previous Infrastructure Minister — now Finance Minister — happily signed off on the Grand Central station project without additional signage, but Sinn Féin has now attempted to politicise this as a johnny-come-lately. Let me be clear: it is not about inclusion. Sinn Féin wants to raise the Irish language above every other minority language in Northern Ireland. Not content with Irish being included with all other minority languages, Sinn Féin believes that its culture and identity should be raised above everyone else's. It is about supremacy, not partnership. Sinn Féin is willing to squander £150,000 of public funding on that project; money that should be used to fix roads and for other infrastructure projects across Northern Ireland.

Of course, we have seen the same supremacist attitude to language adopted by Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party at Belfast City Council, where they have set aside democratic norms. Despite a majority of residents not wanting Irish-language street signs, they are installed in order to whip up fear and intimidate unionists. Sinn Féin is helped by the SDLP and the Alliance Party in doing that. It has become a pattern: every time, they try to make a cultural issue out of it. There was no mention of the fact that Sinn Féin-run Departments exclude Ulster Scots from their letterheads, yet Sinn Féin goes after our Minister for having only one language on his. Once again, I say that Sinn Féin wants dominance, not partnership.

We know what Sinn Féin members mean when they say, "Equality". Gerry Adams was secretly recorded telling the unionist community what he meant by "equality": he wanted to break unionists. Sinn Féin will not break unionists, and he will not break this party.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

As an East Belfast MLA and chair of the all-party group on ADHD, I ask where the report on commissioning adult ADHD services in Northern Ireland is. In March 2024, thousands of people signed my petition calling on the Health Minister to urgently commission those essential services here. My inbox has become flooded with the concerns and anxieties of those living with and potentially living with the condition, who, crucially, are unable to access a diagnosis or treatments, because we do not have commissioned services.

Since then, I have persisted and fought to meet the Minister in his office alongside ADD-NI. I was told in the Chamber that the report would be completed by the end of the financial year. I was then told that it would be finished by the start of the summer. I was then told that it would be finished by the start of September. I fully appreciate the work involved in creating a meaningful and purposeful report, but people who live with ADHD have been overlooked for too long and have waited for too long, living in crisis and despair. It is likely that we have already missed two to three generations of struggling young people who are now struggling adults.

My petition was launched in April 2024. We are now midway through September 2025 and have still heard nothing officially or unofficially. That is nearly a year and a half. I do not want to prejudge what the report will say, but I fear that I could write the conclusion: "I'd love to do it, but it's too expensive, and you all voted for the Budget". Meanwhile, adults living with or potentially living with ADHD will suffer by facing high costs for access to transformative medication, lengthy waiting list times, damaged relationships, missed opportunities to use ADHD for the better, self-medication through alcohol and substance abuse, chronic disorganisation and poor mental health.

I was delighted to open the new ADD-NI office in south Belfast earlier this year, and I am proud to have my name on the wall there for having done so. However, I am about results, and I will continue to raise how ADHD and the lack of commissioned services here destroy families and lives across Northern Ireland. I call for the urgent publication of the report and for the commissioning of ADHD services in Northern Ireland.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

There is a lot of disappointment and anger, although not a lot of surprise, across the football fraternity and beyond in the north-west at the Communities Minister's announcement last week on the Northern Ireland Football Fund. The decision not to fund Derry City Football Club and Institute Football Club has caused cross-community consternation and concern and makes a mockery of the claims of regional balance in the Executive's Programme for Government.

It was a political decision that coincidentally, was made in the week in which the DUP leader threatened funding for Derry. Since that announcement, which should have been made in the Assembly, we have heard Minister Lyons do his best to distance himself from it wherever clubs have been disappointed: "It was an independent process. It was nothing to do with me".

However, he will clamour for credit from those who are content. While the Minister will point to the application criteria and the assessment process, how can he expect us or anyone to believe or accept that he had no say in how £36 million of public money is to be allocated? Remember, this is the same Minister who is spending public money to challenge another Minister in the Executive over spending £150,000.

This is £36 million from the Executive's Budget, so it is right that MLAs should get clarification and assurance where there has been understandable consternation. Given the Minister's having suggested that he hopes for money in the future, it would be a naive dereliction for MLAs not to scrutinise criteria, weightings and their working application. The SDLP is demanding a VAR-like review of this diabolical on-field decision, and we will be canvassing cross-party support for such a review, be it through a petition of concern, the Communities Committee or the Executive. This cannot lead to accusations of delaying a process that has already been disastrously delayed by being used as a political football and by five years of Assembly collapse. The Minister himself has conceded that funding will not be allocated until late next year and that several of the successful projects will probably never even come to fruition. This decision cannot stand. Derry clubs deserve better. We all deserve better. We all demand transparency.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I raise the issue of a dog that has been incarcerated for life, I am afraid to say, in Magilligan prison by the leadership of the Northern Ireland Prison Service and by our Department of Justice. There is not single animal charity that has not, to me, expressed outrage that a dog has been placed, with the title of "comfort dog", inside Magilligan prison. It has no master, and it has no handler. I am unaware of any service dogs that are in that position. Anyone who understands pets or working dogs professionally knows that they need to have a handler and a master. This dog does not go home; it lives in the prison.

I think that it is our job to cut across party lines. We are here to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, and a great number of people in the Prison Service are very uncomfortable with the fact that the dog is there. The staff who are looking at after it are not trained, it has no designated handler and it is passed from pillar to post between untrained staff. I have had it confirmed in writing by the Justice Minister that it does not go home and that it has no master. Those who understand service dogs know that they have clear boundaries. Dogs in the Prison Service or the Police Service and other service dogs wear a different harness at work than they do when they go home. There are dogs that will be hypervigilant at work but will sleep through a thunderstorm when they go home because they know that they are at home. This dog lives in a prison.

The Justice Department should be a role model for good behaviour, not ignore it. Every dog charity agrees, and Causeway Coast Dog Rescue has been speaking to me all weekend. I saw some pictures — an attempt, perhaps, to draw equivalence — of a comfort dog supporting victims of crime in court. I welcome that. That dog, a St Bernard, is brought in to see the victims of crime by its handler, its owner. It then goes back home. There is no equivalence between that and a dog that is kept in prison.

There are real questions about the welfare of this dog. To whom is it microchipped? Who is the lawful owner? Who is responsible for it? No rules, no regulations, and yet it is in one of the most high-risk settings that you can have in society — a prison. It is housed in the H2 wing, and it is walked by a sex offender. We agree that there is a role for rehabilitation, but there have to be proper boundaries and proper safeguards for our animals. Therefore, I ask for cross-community and cross-party support. We need to look out for this animal. You cannot pluck out an animal and put it in a prison with no trained handler and never let it go home. It is an abuse of the animal, and I am calling for the Justice Minister to cease this programme until there is proper legislation and proper safeguards and boundaries.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

There seems to be light at the end of the tunnel for the community in Warrenpoint, which has suffered a nightmare of almost three years due to the storage of tens of thousands of tons of black bin waste at Warrenpoint Harbour Authority and in close proximity to homes. Warrenpoint Harbour Authority has released a statement today stating that ReGen will cease storing waste at the harbour authority immediately. I tentatively welcome the statement. Members of the House will know — they have heard me talk about it before — that, for almost three years, the odour has invaded not only people's sense of smell but every aspect of their daily lives in Warrenpoint. It was wrong to allow the waste to be stored at Warrenpoint Harbour Authority in close proximity to homes and businesses to begin with. Warrenpoint Harbour Authority and ReGen owe the community in Warrenpoint an apology for the torment they have suffered over the last almost three years.

It is appropriate to pay tribute to the community in Warrenpoint, the various campaign groups and my political colleagues from across the spectrum of parties who have campaigned on the issue for the last three years. We stepped in along with the community and the campaign groups when the Environment Minister, the NIEA and those with responsibility for making sure that people's lives were not impacted by the waste and put an end to the smell washed their hands of the matter. I pay tribute to the community, the campaign groups and everyone who did not let up on the issue over the last three years.

While it is good news that the waste will no longer be stored there, and we tentatively welcome the statement, we will keep a close eye on the situation, because, ultimately, it is for others to decide how this is achieved. Ultimately, the odour issue must end, and we will focus on that. While Sinn Féin welcomes the statement, we will watch closely to make sure that all the odour issues associated with the ReGen operation at Warrenpoint port stop.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

How many times has unionism been told of a mythical new Ireland that will be inclusive of all our cultures and traditions? How many times have we been told by Sinn Féin and the SDLP and by some quiet voices — they are getting louder — in the Alliance Party about that myth? Members may be aware that, at the weekend, Heather Humphreys launched her campaign for the Irish presidential election. In doing so, she described herself as a symbol of Ireland's tolerance and inclusivity towards Protestants and unionists.

Heather is from County Monaghan, a place not far from here or the communities that I come from and represent, but one wonders if her perspective has been shaped and moulded by her place in the Dublin establishment politically, rather than the everyday lived experiences of the many Protestant families who live in border counties. For those families, the picture is very different. Their story has often been one of exclusion, quiet and vocal discrimination and gradual erasing. Whole communities, once vibrant and confident, have dwindled. The sharp decline in the Protestant population of border towns and villages has not been by accident; in many cases, it has been by design. It is the result of sustained social, cultural and, at times, violent pressures that are simply not acknowledged in the narratives presented by the Irish political class.

Just two weeks ago, we paused to remember the anniversary of the Tullyvallen massacre, when five innocent Orangemen were murdered in cold blood by republican terrorists. Those wounds have not healed, and they should never be forgotten. We have a "Bury your head in the sand" approach from the Irish Government when it comes to legacy, facilitating and protecting terrorists who skipped across the border, terrorised communities and destroyed innocent lives. We have border bogs that still hold the bodies of certain individuals who have never had the comfort of a simple burial.

Over the weekend, it got worse, when a national newspaper had a sensationalist headline about Heather Humphreys's family's former Orange links. Is that the approach that republicans take to anybody from a unionist tradition? Has the mask slipped? Be assured that unionists know exactly how they would be treated in a so-called new, inclusive Ireland.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Today, I welcome the investment in 1,000 new jobs. That good news shows the value of investing in our people. Three years ago, funding went into college training programmes. The weekend's announcement proves that supporting skills and backing our young people delivers real opportunities. That is why it is essential that, moving forward, Northern Ireland have a joined-up approach, such as that taken by Skillnet Ireland in the South, in order to build a pipeline of talent linking business with education and our colleges to build opportunities and attract global investment. I have just left a meeting with Seagate, during which we talked about exactly the same thing.

Last week, I spoke at the Northern Ireland Manufacturing and Supply Chain Conference and Exhibition at the Eikon exhibition centre, at which industry leaders showcased the latest technology and innovation. They were really clear that they need to hear more than words from the Assembly. I again call on the Minister for the Economy to bring forward a manufacturing strategy and, crucially, an action plan to go along with it.

Other regions are racing ahead. Germany has its Industrie 4.0 strategy, Singapore has its advanced manufacturing 2030 vision and the Republic updates its strategy every five years. Only last week, it launched a new action plan to deliver on that. Meanwhile, we risk falling behind here, and that means missed investment, weaker productivity and lost opportunity.

We need a strategy and delivery plan that provide a strong skills pipeline for apprenticeships and reskilling; a Skillnet Ireland-type body in Northern Ireland that supports SMEs to adopt digital and industry technologies; regional investment zones such as at the Maze and Blaris, which are in my area; plug-and-play industrial parks; and net zero manufacturing to keep firms competitive. We have the talent, the ambition and the entrepreneurs here. We have 19,000 young people who are not in education, employment or training. We need to identify how we can address that issue. We need government leadership and a manufacturing strategy and action plan that deliver on growth and bring in skills and jobs for the next generation. It is about providing good jobs, achieving regional balance, having stronger exports and putting money back in people's pockets. It is also about creating hope and securing our place in a modern economy.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

This morning, we stood with the Bloody Sunday families, as the trial of Soldier F began in a court in Belfast. For over five decades, they have been denied truth and justice. I take the opportunity to acknowledge their dedication, determination and support and the inspiration that they provide to other families in a similar situation and, indeed, to families right across the world.

The civil rights that people marched for in 1972 were for a better future and for equality in housing, employment and voting. Those people created a better future and a more equal society for my generation. My generation has a responsibility to stand with the Bloody Sunday families and to ensure that there is truth and justice.

Although a soldier stands trial in a Belfast court today, those culpable also include the British Army generals who ordered the murder of innocent civilians on the streets of my city and the successive British Governments who denied truth and justice and who took every opportunity to cover up what their soldiers did. Successive British Governments did that. I call on the current British Government to repeal the Legacy Act, which all parties in the Chamber oppose, and finally to put the voices of the families first.

As has been stated today by John McKinney, a brother of William McKinney:

"regardless of the ... outcome, ... we are on the right side of history."

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I rise to celebrate a phenomenal victory and a moment that echoed across boxing circles and in the heart of everyone in Northern Ireland and beyond. Lewis Crocker, "The Croc", has done what few believed he could and claimed the IBF welterweight world title against Paddy Donovan in front of a roaring crowd at Windsor Park on Saturday evening.

From the outset, Crocker was the underdog and was doubted by many. On Saturday, he showed heart, composure and power and finished 12 rounds without even a mark on his face. He boxed smart and walked away a champion. It was clear how much it meant to him, and he called it the "greatest night" of his life. He said, "Nobody gave me a chance", but Saturday was all the proof that was needed, and more, to show what a fantastic boxer this young man is. I say this to Lewis: Northern Ireland is incredibly proud of you.

It really was a dream come true. He was boxing on the world stage, which that night was a stone's throw away from his Sandy Row, and he walked out to 'Sweet Caroline' at the home of his beloved Linfield Football Club. The achievement has been fantastic for Lewis, but I hope that it resonates with every person. Even when you feel that you have been written off and that the world may be against you, that should give you even more fire to achieve anything that you set your mind to.

Lewis has paved the way for many boxers, putting himself above the parapet and raising very real concerns about treatment and selection in the Commonwealth Games selection due to his community background as a Protestant, giving other boxers, such as Daryl Clarke from my constituency, the confidence to come forward and demand equality in boxing and to call out sectarianism.

We still await the report from the Equality Commission, but, despite those past barriers, Crocker managed to become world champion. My North Belfast colleague Phillip Brett was also incredibly proud for his constituent, young Kyle Smith, who, on his debut, scored victory over Connor Meanwell in the super middleweight division. What a promising career that young man will have.

On this occasion, fortune favoured the brave. I say this: well done, Lewis and Kyle. We are all so proud of you.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The president of the United States will arrive tomorrow for his historic second state visit to our nation. Not only should that be warmly welcomed but it comes as the Bank of America is setting up a centre of excellence for financial technology and security operations and Citibank continues to announce further investment in those cutting-edge sectors in Northern Ireland.

In comparison with the relationships with other presidents, that with the forty-fifth and forty-seventh president, though controversial for some, has brought real benefit to Northern Ireland. The advantageous 10% tariff deal with the United States, against the 15% or more for the EU, gives us, unlike the usurious Windsor framework, an actual advantage. That should give us further reason to welcome POTUS to our nation.

Some here regularly complain about the president's stance on international relations while remaining remarkably coy about making similar comments about the leaders of Russia, China, Iran or North Korea. If I were an investor or a balanced political commentator from the United States, I would closely question that hypocritical attitude to the United States and its key allies. In fact, the United States and United Kingdom work closely together on cybersecurity along with key partners such as the Five Eyes community and Israel. That should also be celebrated, particularly by those whose job it is to promote our economy.

Next year is the 250th anniversary of the United States. Our links to its Founding Fathers are many, because they came mostly from us. As we celebrate our transatlantic relationship, it gives us many more opportunities to promote Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. As we look at the many journeys that our two nations have taken, we should remember John Adams's view:

"the Circumstances of Language, Religion and blood, have their natural and full Effect"

in bringing together a much closer relationship. We should use every opportunity to do that.

Sadly, it is therefore incomprehensible that the so-called First Minister for all has refused an invitation to the state dinner. However, I am pleased that the deputy First Minister will attend. Despite the disrespectful stance of Sinn Féin and some of its fellow travellers on this issue, I hope that we give President Trump a warm welcome to our nation.

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

Today, on Lymphoma Awareness Day, I will speak about a young mother from my constituency Catherine Sherry, whose story must compel the Executive parties to act. Catherine was undergoing chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in London when she tragically passed away in May.

The treatment was working, but her immune system was severely compromised, and the repeated air travel left her too weak to fight off a final infection. Catherine died far from home and far from her three young, heartbroken boys: Manus, Tomás and Donal.

Here is the devastating truth: life-saving treatment is available just 60 miles away in Dublin at St James's Hospital, but Catherine could not access it because no agreement exists to allow patients in the North of Ireland to receive the specialist treatment in the South. I have raised that directly with the Health Minister, and I have urged the Department of Health to act, but, so far, they have shown reluctance to explore or facilitate access to CAR T-cell therapy in the Republic. It is not a question of resources or a question of medical capacity or capability; it is a question of political will. We are now being told that the CAR T-cell therapy centre in Belfast may not be operational until 2030 and only after accreditation. That is at least another five years of patients being flown to London or Manchester, when a short drive to Dublin could spare them and their families an enormous physical and emotional toll.

There is already a shared all-island commitment to cooperation on cancer care. That commitment must mean something. It cannot be allowed to gather dust while patients suffer and families grieve. Catherine's story is not just a tragedy; it is a call to action. Her treatment was working. Her battle and her bravery were heroic, but the journey — the unnecessary travel — ultimately cost her her life. No mother should have to leave her children behind in order to fight for survival in another country. No family should ever again be told, "We did all that we could", when we know that the system did not. The infrastructure exists, and the expertise exists, but the barrier is political will.

I have organised a round-table discussion next Monday in Stormont with representatives from Leukaemia & Lymphoma NI, Blood Cancer UK, leading clinicians and families of those who have been impacted on by the inaccessibility of CAR T-cell treatment close to home. It is an issue that impacts on people and families across the North. Therefore, it requires a collective response and a joined-up effort from all Executive parties. If any Member wishes to join that discussion or to support the SDLP's campaign to right that wrong, please reach out to me directly.

On Lymphoma Awareness Day, let us say clearly that people in the North deserve access to life-saving cancer treatment on this island, and they deserve it now. My heart goes out to Catherine's family — her husband, Fergal; her sons, Manus, Tomás and Donal; her parents, Roisin and Phil; and her colleagues, her club and her community.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you, Mr McNulty.

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

I measc na naomh go raibh sí.

[Translation: May her soul rest in peace.]

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Timothy Gaston has sought leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22. The Member will have up to three minutes in which to speak.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I present the petition on behalf of over 3,300 citizens, parents and taxpayers who are deeply concerned about the Health Minister's decision to fund a so-called lifespan gender identity service. The scheme commits to spending £806,000 every year: money that our struggling health service cannot spare. While cancer patients wait and mental health services collapse, Mike Nesbitt has chosen to bankroll a controversial project built on ideology and not on evidence.

At the root, it comes down to truth. A man is a man; a woman is a woman; and no service, ideology or lobby group can change that. Yet, the Minister invited the Rainbow Project — a radical activist organisation that rejects those basic realities — to act as a co-design partner. That is outsourcing public health policy to lobbyists.

The petition highlights three fundamental issues. The first is the lack of medical evidence. The Cass review found the evidence base for child gender services to be of poor quality and insufficient. The Minister's hasty, rapid review announcement, made only after the petition began to get traction, merely proves that he acted first and thought later. The second issue is the vulnerability of children.

Young children are still developing. They cannot meaningfully consent to lifelong consequences. Referrals at such an early age push them down a path from which they cannot return. The third issue is the misuse of public funds. An FOI request revealed that the funding was not a one-off but will be repeated year after year, with even more costs planned for GP involvement in phase 2.

Minister, listen to the public, not the Rainbow Project. Heed parents, not activists. Stand with biology, not ideology.

Mr Gaston moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I will forward the petition to the Minister of Health and forward a copy to the Chairperson of the Health Committee.

Executive Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call the Minister of Education, Mr Paul Givan, to move the Consideration Stage of the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Givan (The Minister of Education).]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There are two groups of amendments, and we will debate the amendments in each group in turn.

The first debate will be on amendment Nos 1 to 4 and 8 to 12, which deal with the monitoring and enforcement of guidelines. Members should note that amendment Nos 9 and 10 are mutually exclusive. The second debate will be on amendment Nos 2, 3, 5 to 7 and 13, which deal with the contents of guidelines and commencement.

I remind Members who intend to speak in the debates on the two groups of amendments that they should address all the amendments in each group on which they wish to comment. Once the debate on each group has been completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each amendment will be put without further debate. The questions on each clause standing part will be taken at appropriate points in the Bill. If that is clear, we shall proceed.

Clause 1 (Guidelines as to policies on school uniforms)

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We now come to the first group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. I call the Chairperson of the Committee for Education, Mr Nick Mathison, to move amendment No 1 and address the other amendments in the group.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I beg to move amendment No 1:

In page 1, line 10, leave out "from time to time" and insert "at least once every three years".

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 4: In page 2, line 9, at end insert—

"(6) The Department must lay any guidelines issued under this section before the Assembly." — [Mr Mathison (The Chairperson of the Committee for Education).]

No 8: New Clause

After clause 4 insert—

"Reporting on school uniform costs and capping of expense

4A.—(1) The Department must publish a written report, at least once every three years, detailing—

(a) its assessment of the cost of school uniforms and their components, including mean costs, median costs and factors contributing to these, and

(b) the effect of any capping of expense included in guidelines as a result of section (4), or if no such capping of expense has been set, the reasons for this, and

(c) its subsequent plans for—

(i) reviewing and, if appropriate, amending the guidelines, and

(ii) imposing, ending or otherwise modifying any capping of expense.

(2) The first report under paragraph (1) must be published within the period of three years beginning with the date on which this Act receives Royal Assent." — [Mr Mathison (The Chairperson of the Committee for Education).]

No 9: In clause 7, page 3, line 31, leave out subsection (1) and insert—

"(1) The Department must give directions as follows to a manager of a school if the Department is satisfied that the manager is (or staff at the school are) in one or more material respects failing to adhere as required to guidelines under this Chapter.

(1A) The Department may give directions to a manager of a school as follows if the Department is satisfied that the school’s pupils are liable to disciplinary measures or participatory disadvantages at the insistence of the manager (or of staff at the school) in consequence of breaching a school uniform policy applying at the school." — [Mr Mathison (The Chairperson of the Committee for Education).]

No 10: In clause 7, page 3, line 35, after "to" insert "undue". — [Mr Givan (The Minister of Education).]

No 11: In clause 7, page 4, line 11, leave out paragraph (b). — [Mr Mathison (The Chairperson of the Committee for Education).]

No 12: In clause 7, page 4, line 30, at end insert—

"(8) Where the Department gives directions to a school, it must publish these within three months of the directions first being given." — [Mr Mathison (The Chairperson of the Committee for Education).]

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

With your permission, I will make some comment on the Committee Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill before speaking directly to the first group of amendments. The Committee ran a robust scrutiny stage despite the constrained timescales imposed on it, and I will give a brief overview of how that stage was conducted.

The Bill was introduced on 18 February 2025 and referred to the Committee for Education for consideration after Second Stage on 3 March 2025. The Committee received 19 written submissions and took evidence from 14 stakeholders in oral evidence sessions. I record the Committee's thanks to all who took the time to engage with us on the Bill and to inform our deliberations.

I turn to the timeline of our process. On 25 March 2025, the Minister wrote to the Committee outlining the process for the publication of information around school uniform policies by schools and the corresponding timelines being observed by the Department in an attempt to facilitate the publication of guidelines, which is a key part of the Bill and forthcoming Act. The Department flagged the tight turnaround times and urged the Committee to conduct a Committee Stage to complete by summer recess.

The Committee set a longer Committee Stage, which was to complete in December 2025. The motion was agreed on 18 March. The motion and amendment in relation to the timeline was debated in a plenary session here on 7 April 2025. It proposed an extension of the Committee Stage to 30 August rather than the longer date proposed by the Committee. That was agreed as the end date of the Committee Stage.

I put it on record again that I did not support that date of extension. I felt that the Committee needed more time to scrutinise the Bill, and we found that our processes became incredibly rushed towards the end. Undoubtedly in my mind, there was evidence that we would like to have heard from a range of stakeholders, particularly schools and school leaders, but that we were unable to hear. The shorter timeline meant that the Committee Stage required significant reorganisation of the Committee's schedule of work, and we had to consider the availability of members as well as the times and spaces required to facilitate our engagement with stakeholders in order to give us the opportunity to deliberate on the Bill.

It was notable that, at the Committee Stage extension debate, members expressed their intention to be available to facilitate the shorter time frame. It is a credit to members that we remained quorate for the whole process when, at times, we were convening two or three times a week through May and June, often during plenary sittings. I pay tribute to the Clerk and Committee staff team, who facilitated every meeting with the administration and record-keeping needed to keep the process moving effectively.

That is not to say that the shorter stage did not create challenges. For example, with the extension date running to 30 August, we considered how appropriate or feasible it would be to engage with education stakeholders during the holiday period for them. Therefore, we endeavoured to complete our task by 2 July 2025, and we succeeded.

Later in the Committee Stage, concerns were expressed by some members around the Department's engagement on the Bill. There was a query about whether there had been a miscalculation of time frames and the necessary resourcing to deliver the Bill. For the sake of balance, I would add that, in its responses and engagement with the Committee, the Department strenuously contested that assertion.

I am sure that this will get much debate today in the Chamber, but the Committee was not given sight of the Department's proposed guidelines for schools on their uniform policies. That is the principal outworking of the legislation. Initially, we were given a clear assurance that those would be provided. To my mind — I think all members agreed — that would have been a significant and substantial assistance to the scrutiny process, particularly for clarity with regard to the provisions of clause 7 and the enforceability of the guidelines. The Committee had no desire to create unnecessary levels of prescription in the Bill with any proposed amendment, but, without sight of the draft guidelines, it, at times, felt compelled to insist on prescription to satisfy members as to the effectiveness of the guidelines that would flow from the legislation.

In delivering the Committee stage, the Committee's priorities were clear. We wanted to ensure that there would be robust measures to deliver affordability for parents. That was a priority for all members. Members will know from their constituency offices how much pressure the cost of school uniforms brings to bear on family finances. The Committee also sought to ensure the best interests of every child and non-discrimination principles in the Bill, and it was interested in limiting contracts with retailers that might amount to market dominance. The Committee sought to improve transparency around available sanctions for breaches of the guidelines on uniform policy and to improve complaint-handling and implementation reports for the future monitoring of the Bill's effectiveness. Those are the intended impacts of the proposed amendments that have been accepted for debate, notwithstanding the fact that a range of amendments that were put forward have not been accepted. Of course, that was a decision not for the Committee but for the Speaker.

On 1 July, the Committee undertook its formal clause-by-clause consideration and agreed 23 amendments to the clauses drafted. Twelve of those amendments were selected for debate, plus an additional amendment from the Minister.

With that summary of our process, I move to the Committee's proposed amendments in group 1, which, as the Speaker has referenced, refer to the monitoring and enforcement of the guidelines.

Amendment No 1, which relates to clause 1, specifies the frequency of the review of guidelines. The Committee's research and stakeholder feedback quickly identified a widely held view that there was substantial appetite among stakeholders to have aspects of measures proposed in the Bill more precisely defined. Several witnesses highlighted concern about the wording of clause 1 regarding the proposed frequency of review of the guidelines. It is currently framed as "from time to time". The Committee was conscious that review mechanisms of the legislation would create milestones to improve efficiency and flexibility of the guidelines but would also create opportunities for reflection, post-legislation, on whether the implementation of the guidelines aligned with the objective of the legislation of reducing costs. The Committee felt that it was entirely reasonable that a period of at least once every three years for review would give clarity and continuity. We felt that that would likely result in a review being carried out each mandate, which, we felt, would be an appropriate and necessary measure to ensure that effectiveness was routinely given attention by the Department.

Mindful of the importance of the guidelines, the Committee decided on amendment No 4 as a measure of post-legislative scrutiny to require the Department to formally lay them before the Assembly. That would ensure that the Committee and Members remained up to date and clearly informed in a timely manner about any changes to the guidelines made under the Bill.

I turn to amendment No 8. Throughout the Committee's consideration of the Bill, repeated concern was raised by stakeholders and members across our evidence sessions about the cost of uniforms. There was also agreement on the need to monitor and report on those costs and for the Department to consider whether it was necessary to introduce a cap on uniform costs. The Committee agreed that introducing a regular report on that would identify areas of concern and improve our ability to scrutinise the impact of the Bill. The Bill had no such provisions. It created enabling powers around a cost cap. I must emphasise that the evidence that we heard from parents and anti-poverty groups was clear that the cost cap was where they would like to see the intervention of the legislation. There was a concern that the enabling powers around the cost cap could gather dust for years with no formal mechanism for Members to hold the Minister and Department to account on whether the Bill was delivering for parents and whether the cost cap needed to be implemented. The Committee believes that the new clause addresses that risk and puts in place robust accountability measures that, I hope, Members will support. I may, if given permission, speak to that amendment as a private Member later.

The Committee's intention around amendment Nos 9, 11 and 12 is to improve accountability in situations where the Department is concerned that schools are not following the required guidelines. If the guidelines, as seems to be the case and as the Minister assures us — I am sure that he will set it out clearly — are what will deliver the meaningful changes in how schools manage their uniform policies and reduce costs, how schools are held accountable in how they follow or do not follow the guidelines is absolutely crucial. The Committee was satisfied, on balance, that the amendments struck a balance between requiring the Department to intervene when guidelines are breached and ensuring that the process is open and transparent.

I understand that there is likely to be debate on the amendments. It was rehearsed at length in Committee how best to do this. How do you find the balance? Nobody wants to name and shame schools, but nobody wants an enforcement mechanism that has no teeth and cannot be utilised to ensure that the guidelines are adhered to. On balance, there was debate backward and forward and differences in opinion, but we feel that that balance has been struck with the amendments.

That concludes my remarks on the group as Chair of the Committee. I hope that that contribution sets out clearly the rationale of the Committee in proposing the amendments.

With you permission, Mr Speaker, I will speak to one amendment in particular in the group in my capacity as an Alliance MLA, and that is amendment No 8. To my mind, it is fundamentally important in ensuring that the Bill is effective. Amendment No 8 is the requirement that whoever holds the office of Minister of Education in future years come to the Assembly every three years and report clearly on the impact of the Bill and what it has done to the costs of school uniforms across Northern Ireland and, specifically, to address whether the cost-cap power will be utilised; if it has, what has been the impact; and, if not, whether there is the intention to do so.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Every Member of the Assembly will hear from their constituents about the impact of excessive school uniform costs on their family finances. At times, for some schools, those costs can be crippling and create huge stress and distress, particularly over the summer months. As the Bill is really fairly light on detail about what will be delivered as an outworking of the guidelines, we felt that it was vital that there was a mechanism to ensure accountability. To my mind, the Bill gives us no assurances of what the guidelines will specifically require schools to do.

We have not seen the draft guidelines. I assume that they have been drafted and are in place, but, for whatever reason, they have not been provided to us. We certainly do not have even a sense of what their content will be. I sincerely hope that the guidelines will provide a clear, enforceable framework that will require schools that still expect parents to pay excessive costs to get the situation under control. No Member wants to see £180 blazers in any school uniform policy. That price seems to be so disconnected from parents' lived financial realities as to make it hard for me to comprehend how it could be stood over.

The Bill is light on definitive elements that schools will be required to adhere to in guidelines, while the provisions to restrict branded items or to introduce a cost cap remain either "may" provisions that are subject to amendment today or, in the case of a cap, an enabling provision that may or may not be used in the future, so I am clear that there is a need for accountability. It therefore seems entirely reasonable to me that, once a mandate, whoever holds the office of Minister of Education should report to the House on the legislation's impact on reducing school uniform costs; on any intention to implement a cost cap, and if not, why not; and on any plans that the Department has to carry out a further review of the guidelines.

Without amendment No 8, I fear that, regardless of its impact on cost — positive or negative — once it gains Royal Assent, there is a real risk that the Bill will be seen as the final destination when it comes to intervention from the Department on the cost of uniforms. It is therefore vital that there be accountability regarding its effectiveness and what the Department will do if the legislation does not deliver as promised.

I wish to be clear. I have said this before, but it bears repeating: I sincerely hope that the legislation is effective, and I welcome the fact that it is being debated in the Assembly today. I will welcome its impact if that is the scenario in which we find ourselves, because if we are serious about doing our job, everybody here will want to see uniform costs be reduced for parents. It is not in any way about getting one up on any other party or winning but about making sure that parents win out of the process. If the Bill is not effective, or it is not as effective as it could be, the Assembly should have the opportunity to interrogate properly why that is the case and to hear how it will be corrected.

I am satisfied that my remarks as Chair set out a clear rationale for the other amendments in the group, but I place firmly on the record my views on the importance of amendment No 8, which I was pleased to propose at Committee Stage. I am also pleased that it received support from all members when we went through our clause-by-clause deliberations. I look forward to the rest of the debate on the amendments in the group.

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

I speak in support of the Bill and the amendments in group 1. Those amendments, which cover regular review, reporting, enforcement and transparency, are about making sure that the legislation delivers real relief to parents rather than gathers dust on a shelf.

Let me be clear that, although schools may close their doors during the summer months, parents' stress does not stop. The reality of school uniform costs weighs heavily on the mind of tens of thousands of families across Northern Ireland, and each September is marked not by excitement but by dread at the mounting bills for blazers, PE kits and endless branded items. Research from Pivotal has shown that one in 10 children here has missed school because they could not meet uniform requirements. Just think about that for a moment. Young people are being excluded from education not because of their ability or willingness to learn but because their parents cannot afford the right jumper or trainers. The same study showed that 73% of low-income families struggled to meet the costs.

Those are not just statistics. We all hear from our constituents day and daily. Families are paying over £100 for a single blazer, and often more when the school insists on specific suppliers being used. For families with two or three children in different schools with various uniform requirements, the costs become crushing, yet a £100 blazer does not make a child a better learner. It does not help them in their maths test or help improve their spelling. Rather, it drives up inequality in our classrooms. The Irish League of Credit Unions (ILCU) tells us that the average cost of getting a child back to school is nearly £1,000, and uniforms make up a huge part of that cost. Figures from the Parent Engagement Group (PEG) suggest an average uniform cost of £378 in Northern Ireland.

That is simply not sustainable. It is pushing families into debt and forcing them to make impossible choices between heating, food and their children's education. That is why the group 1 amendments matter.

Amendment No 1 requires guidelines to be reviewed:

"at least once every three years".

Without that amendment, the Department can review them "from time to time", which, in practice, means maybe or maybe not. Families cannot wait on good intentions. They need regular scrutiny to be written into law in order to ensure accountability.

Amendment No 4 requires guidelines to be laid before the Assembly. That matters, because guidelines have power only when they are open to proper scrutiny and debate. We cannot outsource that to departmental corridors. The Assembly must see and approve what is being done in the name of affordability.

Amendment No 8, as outlined by the Committee Chair, introduces "Reporting on school uniform costs", including figures on mean and median costs, the effect of any capping and future plans. The Minister has argued that that is too prescriptive or unclear, but there is nothing unclear about a family staring at a £400 bill for a uniform for a single child. Parents will want clarity on whether the Bill is working and whether schools are lowering those costs. Without data, we are blind. Amendment No 8 ensures that the Department gathers and shares the evidence that we need.

Amendment Nos 9 and 11 strengthen the Department's power to intervene when schools fail to follow guidelines. If schools do not comply, it cannot be optional for the Department to act, otherwise we risk creating a law with no consequence, which is a mistake that is made too often in the House. Families deserve to know that, if a school breaches its duties, the Department must step in.

Amendment No 12 ensures that directions that are given to schools are published. Again, the Minister has objected, suggesting that that amounts to naming and shaming, but let us be honest: transparency is not about shaming. It is about accountability. If a school is failing its pupils by imposing unaffordable and unfair uniform rules, parents have the right to know. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and secrecy will only erode trust.

The amendments are not radical; they are quite modest, practical and necessary. They place transparency, regular review and accountability at the heart of the Bill. Let me add this: while we work through the law, parents and communities have not been waiting. Across Northern Ireland, pre-loved uniform schemes are making a real difference to many families and to the lives of young people. The Redeeming Our Communities project, for example, has helped nearly 900 families with recycled uniforms. Those initiatives save money, reduce waste and build community spirit. Similar initiatives in my constituency have played out well and have supported countless families over the summer and leading into September. It is a pity that amendments to embed such schemes more fully in the Bill were not accepted, but the fact that those projects exist shows the will of parents and communities to act where the Government have been too slow or non-existent.

As we consider the group 1 amendments, let us remember this: the success of the Bill will be measured not on its technical drafting but on the pounds and pennies that families save come September. The group 1 amendments make sure that the law is not just words on the page but a tool that can deliver affordability, fairness and dignity for parents and pupils alike.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I would like to be able to get up and say that I welcome the Bill as far as it goes. Unfortunately, it does not go very far at all, and that is the difficulty with it. We on the Committee had a very productive Committee Stage. The Committee heard evidence from many witnesses, including from schools, teachers, parents, the Children's Commissioner, representatives from the Human Rights Commission and others. There was an opportunity to include in the Bill affordability and equality, not just for boys and girls but for children with special needs, so that they would also win from the legislation. The Minister and his party, I have to say, were opposed to practically all the amendments that were brought forward by the Committee. That is unfortunate. What we are left with is a watered-down piece of draft legislation. We are not even sure what impact it will have. I suppose that what the Minister wanted was for the Assembly to give him the power to make guidelines. What the Committee wanted was for the Bill to be much more prescriptive, because, whatever guidelines the Minister may intend to implement at some stage, another Minister could come in and change those guidelines. If the Bill were more prescriptive and issues such as affordability and equality were included in it, we would be in a much stronger position.

The amendments in group 1 ensure that any guidance that comes out of the Bill is not only written but enforced and monitored. I will speak briefly in support of amendment Nos 1, 4, 8, 9, 11 and 12. I will not support the Minister's amendment No 10.

Amendment No 1 puts a clear duty on the Department to review guidelines at least once every three years. Families deserve the reassurance that those rules will not gather dust on a shelf. The cost of uniforms is not static. In recent years, we have seen the impact of inflation as well as the behaviour of some schools and suppliers, all of which drives up prices for families. Recently, we saw that a school had introduced a new blazer for its high performers. No one objects to schools acknowledging excellence in their school, but what that school did was to say that, if you were a high achiever, you could get a £180 woollen blazer to show how good you had been. I listened to the Minister — this is why I am so concerned about his intentions — when he was asked about that in a radio interview, and he could not even mildly criticise what that school had done. That was very disappointing. It showed that the Minister is not really serious about building affordability into the legislation.

Amendment No 4 requires guidelines to be laid before the Assembly. That is democratic oversight: pure and simple. If we want parents to trust the process, we cannot have decisions taken quietly, behind closed doors, by the Minister and his colleagues. As my colleague Daniel McCrossan said earlier, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant".

Amendment No 8 forces the Department to report on uniform costs, to assess the impact of any cost cap and, if no cap is introduced, to explain why. Families deserve full transparency and a clear rationale from the Minister if no cap is introduced.

Amendment No 9 gives the legislation some teeth by compelling intervention when schools ignore the rules. Is that not just simple and straightforward? If you tell a school what it has to do, and the school says, "No, we do not like that and will not do it", should there not be some sanction for that? There are already guidelines, although they are not statutory, on school uniforms and school uniform policy.

I wonder whether the Minister has spoken to any schools about implementing those guidelines. I am pretty sure that he has not.

If schools ignore statutory guidelines, what will the Minister and the Department do? Will they say, "Come on, play the game. Get your act together and implement a fair and affordable uniform policy in your school"? The school will say, "Minister, sling your hook". What will the Minister do? The days of schools ignoring such guidance cannot —

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that any attempt to dilute the amendments that the Committee has tabled on the enforceability of the directions and on openness and transparency around them will not inspire confidence in how serious the Department or the Minister is about ensuring that the guidelines are implemented?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I agree wholeheartedly. Any legislation must garner the confidence of the House in the Minister's seriousness about the intention behind it. It seems that the Minister is involved in a bit of window dressing, saying, "Look at me. I will bring in legislation that will make uniforms more affordable". In reality, we have thus far seen no evidence that that will happen. The Chair of the Committee will know that we were promised that we would see the guidelines. At one stage — probably April or May; maybe even before then — we were told that we would see them the following week. When they did not arrive, we were told, "It might take us a couple of weeks. We have to dot the i's and cross the t's". Where are the guidelines? We still have not seen them. If the Minister were serious about trying to marshal support for the legislation, the guidelines would have been available long before today.

As I said, the days of schools ignoring guidance cannot continue. Families are relying on the legislation to make a difference.

Amendment No 11 removes ambiguity, and amendment No 12 requires directions to schools to be published. Parents need to know when a school has been instructed and compelled to change course.

I will touch on amendment No 10, tabled by the Minister. It would undermine any limited protections that the Bill might have offered to children and young people. It proposes to insert the word "undue", which, in my opinion, raises the threshold for intervention. That means that pupils could still be punished for uniform breaches as long as the punishment is not judged to be undue. The point of the Bill is to stop unfair penalties on families, not legitimise them with wriggle room. We will oppose that amendment.

For Members' information, we recently spoke to a principal whose school has an excellent uniform policy. Parents are able to purchase the uniform of that school for £2 less than the uniform grant. With the Bill, the Minister could have done the same thing for every school. One of the big issues in our schools is absenteeism. Many children are absent because they have not conformed with uniform policy. That principal told us that he does not care what children wear, as long as they are in school. We should all have that attitude in trying to get our children into school, because we all know about the long tail of underachievement here.

There is a wider issue. To date, as I have mentioned, neither the DUP Education Minister nor his Department has produced the draft guidelines that will accompany the Bill. Never mind that we were promised the guidelines; it is just not good practice, if we are serious about legislating properly, that the Department and the Minister should promise us guidelines but we do not get them. We are being asked to blindly trust the Minister, and we are not prepared to do that. That is exactly why we worked with others across the Chamber, particularly the Alliance Party and the SDLP, in the Education Committee, to table wide-ranging amendments so that, no matter which Minister may be in post, families could be assured of consistency and fairness regardless of who holds office.

Finally, while we support this group of amendments, again, I must mention the missed opportunity. We tabled amendments on children's rights, on equality, on making reasonable accommodations for pupils with additional needs and on uniform reuse schemes, all of which were considered not to be part of the Bill and that, therefore, cannot be debated today. Perhaps, in due course, we will get an explanation of why that is the case. Sin a bhfuil le rá agam.

[Translation: That is all I have to say.]

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

The legislation should not greatly divide the House. There were several times during the Bill's Committee Stage when some were distracted from the Bill's original intent and the core promise that we and a number of other parties in the House laid out as our overriding aim: to bring down the cost of school uniforms for hard-pressed families across Northern Ireland.

I thank the Minister for introducing the Bill, and we should all be united in ensuring that no child is denied opportunity or dignity in school because of the cost of a blazer or a PE kit. To be fair, despite the areas where we differ, I do not believe that any Member here is blind to the pressures that households face, particularly in today's climate, where every pound is stretched further than before. While we share that concern, it is our duty to ensure that the way in which we legislate is proportionate and workable. There is always a balance to be struck between affordability, with checks and balances against excess, and school autonomy.

To be clear, most of our schools are mindful not only of their pupils but of the families that support them. Schools seek to do their best to balance uniform requirements and practicality against the costs that, they know, their choices will place on parents and guardians. The schools are communities in themselves, and often uniform is a vital part of fostering identity, discipline and pride. In seeking to solve one problem, we must not create another by imposing rigid, centralised rules that leave governors, principals and parents without flexibility or, worse, add to the burden of bureaucracy. It has been clear in the Committee process that some of the aspects that we might understandably wish to have in the Bill are neither as simple as they sound nor as likely, without significantly more work or learning from other jurisdictions, to have as positive an impact on parents and schools as we might wish.

I suggest that the answer lies in strengthening the guidance and partnership, rather than legislating every detail. The Bill does that, and it gives the Minister the power to bring in sanctions where justified, should a school gratuitously continue to ignore guidance. While such powers under the Bill would reside in the Minister's gift — Pat has looked at that point from another angle — I remind the House that, as the mandate draws on, we do not know who will hold the portfolio in future. Parties should not be unduly influenced in their judgement over how aligned or not they are with the current Minister. I thank Pat for his vote of confidence in the current Minister, but I wonder which party he is afraid of holding the post in future.

Parents want fairness and transparency, schools want discretion and respect for their ethos, and that balance can be struck appropriately. We are mindful, too, of the impact that such legislation can have on many of our small retailers, and we heard about that from Retail NI. Those retailers have been diligently serving families and schools for many years — some for generations. The Committee heard from a panel from Retail NI about the complex web of supplies and turnaround times and the effects that that can have, particularly in trying to come to a conclusion on a cap. While we cannot expect that they can compete on price with online giants for generic items — some have moved away from supplying PE kit due to schools' direct arrangements with branded manufacturers, as we have heard — they have long done their best to provide good school-specific items at the lowest cost they can to our communities.

As we move through the clauses of the Bill, our party has given and will continue to give each one careful consideration. We have listened to the sensible provisions to improve accountability and transparency, but we have resisted and will resist measures that add bureaucracy without significant gain or have been more about projecting ideology over achieving a better outcome for families.

We are not minded to oppose amendment Nos 1 and 4 to clause 1. There are some concerns about the additional bureaucracy but not so much as to oppose.

Despite allowing it to pass to this point, we will oppose amendment No 8. That is the new clause 4A. We share the concerns that the Minister laid out in correspondence to the Chair of the Committee this morning, and we feel that the terminology of the clause is unclear. There is also a lack of recognition that uniforms at secondary level are normally, as a standard, more expensive than those at primary school. Clearly, we understand that, as he has laid out, the Minister will undertake to table an amendment at Further Consideration Stage that should give the same outcome as that which Members intend but takes into account the complexities around the cap that the Committee has heard.

On principle, we will also oppose amendment No 9 to clause 7. The amendment would remove consistency, as, again, the Minister laid out, with article 101 of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, and we feel that the impact of the amendment would be limited, as the assessment of whether a direction is required still takes place.

We will support amendment No 10. We will oppose amendment Nos 11 and 12, as with amendment No 8, in light of the correspondence and engagement with the Minister. On amendment No 11, it is on a similar basis to that laid out with amendment No 9, as it introduces inconsistency with existing provisions and legislation and prevents consultation with the school and an opportunity to resolve any issues informally. On amendment No 12, we share the Minister's concern and do not feel that placing in legislation rather than at the Minister's discretion the requirement to name and shame schools is helpful or necessary.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you for giving way. In relation to the issue of publishing directions that are made, do you agree that that would deliver a more effective deterrent and that schools would be much more likely to roll the dice around whether to comply with the guidelines if they knew that there was a sanction that could impact on their reputation?

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

It can, of course, act as a deterrent. In all of these things, it is about a balance. Naming and shaming and balance in any sector on any cause is always a controversial subject, so it is really about whether we think that the effect that naming and shaming a school might have is disproportionate and, not least, unhelpful as regards a conducive atmosphere between the Department and our schools. It is about finding that balance. I understand the argument, but, in this case, I side on the other side, I am afraid.

We must be clear: the objective of affordable, accessible school uniforms for families and of no child making school choices either on the institution that they desire or the activities and subjects that they get involved with on the basis of affordability is an aim that we should surely all share, but the means of achieving that must be fair, workable and respectful of school communities. That is the test that we have always applied in considering the Bill. I look forward to seeing it progress and, even more, to the delivery of reduced costs for parents and guardians across Northern Ireland.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

The amendments are about ensuring that whatever guidance, when we finally get to see it, comes out of the Bill is not only written but enforced and monitored. I will speak briefly in support of amendment Nos 1, 4, 8, 9, 11 and 12. I will not support the Minister's amendment No 10.

Amendment No 1 would ensure that the Department reviews the guidelines:

"at least once every three years".

Uniform costs continue to spiral. In recent years, inflation, paired with the actions of some schools and suppliers, has increased costs for families. Regular inspection of the cost of uniforms would give families the assurance that such interventions are not temporary.

Amendment No 4 would require guidelines to be brought before the Assembly, thus taking the decisions out of the hands of the Minister and his colleagues and putting them in those of the Assembly, thereby ensuring full transparency for families.

Amendment No 8 would make it a requirement for the Department to publish a report:

"at least once every three years",

to review the cost of school uniforms and to consider the introduction of a price cap. A clear explanation from the Minister when no cap is applied would also be required. That is the transparency that families need and the test that is required.

Amendment No 9 would give the Department the ability to intervene if schools breach uniform guidelines or if pupils are being unfairly punished for not following uniform rules. As my party colleague Pat Sheehan stated, amendment No 11 would remove any ambiguity, while amendment No 12 would require directions to schools to be published. Parents need to be informed when a school is being directed to change its approach.

We will not support the Minister's amendment No 10, as it seeks to undermine any limited protections that the Bill may offer to children and young people. As my party colleague explained, adding the word "undue" risks allowing pupils still to be punished for uniform breaches. That means that a girl who is on her period cannot wear trousers; that a child who is standing outside in the freezing cold cannot wear their coat; and that a child who has sensory needs must go on feeling uncomfortable and distressed. Further amendments could have addressed such situations, but their selection was at the Speaker's discretion.

Although I support most of the amendments in group 1, I note a missed opportunity. I drafted a private Member's Bill that would have introduced stronger proposals to ensure that we drive down the cost of school uniforms. We are in this position today because the Minister's Bill takes precedence over private Members' Bills. Instead, my Sinn Féin colleagues and I therefore worked alongside other parties on the Committee to table amendments on children's rights; on giving girls the option to wear trousers, although it is unbelievable that we are even discussing that in this day and age; on making reasonable accommodation for pupils with additional needs; and on introducing uniform reuse schemes. All were left out of today's debate. Perhaps, as Pat Sheehan said, we will, in due course, be offered an explanation as to why that happened.

We are now in the peculiar position of discussing a Bill on uniforms when neither the DUP Education Minister nor his Department has produced the draft guidelines that will accompany it. That is unacceptable. If we are to be serious about ensuring that school uniform policy is fit for purpose, the Minister should take the opportunity today to clarify when we can expect the guidance to be produced.

We wanted a Bill that would truly make uniforms affordable for everyone, make them inclusive and promote equality. Unfortunately, I now need to be convinced that that is what we have in front of us in what remains in the Bill after it has been stripped of genuine interventions.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

It is good to have legislation before us today. Delivering and scrutinising legislation is what we are here for, and I appreciate the opportunity to debate the selected proposed amendments to the School Uniforms Bill. I thank the Committee for its careful work on scrutinising the Bill in a very compressed time frame, and I also thank the Bill Office, which provided diligent and invaluable support to Members.

The Alliance Party has long campaigned for action on the cost of school uniforms, so we welcome the fact that at least some progress has been made after years of inaction. It is a shame, however, that the Bill lacks ambition and scope. For example, I got up today and thought about what I would wear for "comfort and practicality", which is the language of the Bill, and I opted for trousers, yet girls across Northern Ireland do not necessarily have that choice, and the Bill will do nothing to address that. Let me be clear that our concern is that the Bill's main achievement risks being that the Minister can say that he did something: a neat box ticked for an election leaflet rather than genuine relief for families. We all understand the importance of tradition in schools, but policies must never exclude. Schools that are funded by public money should not create barriers for children from families on low or modest incomes.

The amendments in group 1 are on monitoring and enforcement. Legislation has value only if it changes practice. That means having real monitoring, real enforcement and real accountability. Families cannot afford another round of warm words and glossy guidance; they need affordable uniforms for their children, and the Assembly should accept nothing less. The amendments in this group are essential, because, without good enforcement, those schools that already demonstrate best practice in affordability will continue to do so, while those that do not will simply be able to carry on without consequence.

Amendment No 1 is important to ensure that the Department regularly reviews the statutory guidelines. We imagine that the Minister will want to do that more regularly initially anyway in order to ensure that the guidelines have the impact of making school uniforms more cost-effective. The Department's report on the consultation made it clear that there was widespread support for that regular review, with 77% of respondents agreeing:

"schools should review their uniform policies every 3 years",

and 79% agreeing with "monitoring and evaluation proposals". It therefore makes complete sense that the Department should have to review statutory guidance and that it should not be left as a "from time to time" approach.

Amendment No 4 simply requires the Department to lay the guidelines before the Assembly, which is the minimum standard of transparency and democratic oversight for them.

I am glad to say that amendment No 8 passed unanimously at Committee Stage. That amendment is a response to the fact that the Department was not able to present details on how a price cap could work or provide a preferred option. We know that the Department will consult specifically on the price cap, and I hope that the Minister can speak to when that will be and to his confidence that it will become a reality. We know that there is support for a price cap. The consultation report notes that 88% of respondents supported a "cost control measure being introduced". When I spoke to families about the legislation, that was the element that they told me that they would like to see. That is what people believe will bring costs down. I fully understand why they believe that, especially given that we have not seen any draft guidance. In the absence of draft statutory guidance from the Minister on the proposals for a price cap, Alliance tabled this amendment. It holds the Department to account on a price cap, stating that it must report:

"at least once every three years"

on the:

"assessment of the cost of school uniforms",

on the effect of a cap, if introduced — or, if no cap has been introduced, why not — and on "subsequent plans" for guidance on the cap. Amendment No 8 is, essentially, a scrutiny amendment.

Amendment No 9 is concerned with directions on adherence to guidelines. Essentially, it is about how the Department will ensure that there is compliance with its statutory guidance. We could not understand why the Department would not give directions to schools that failed to adhere to guidelines. That is especially the case when there is an allowance or transitional guidance in place in the Bill. As outlined in clause 7(1)(a), the Department will be assured, through its investigation, about whether a school is "failing to adhere ... to guidelines". When we are talking about directions to the school manager, we see that those are clearly outlined in clause 7(5). I truly do not understand why that amendment would not be supported. The Department gave little assurance or clarity on the issue; therefore, the Committee felt that it was important to ensure that the Department will do its job, although I hope that it will not be necessary.

Amendment No 11 is about simplifying the process of how the Department issues directions. Again, the majority of the Committee could not understand why, after having conversations with a school on potential breaches of the guidance — that is, of course, the right approach — the Department would then go back to consult the school manager on their proposals for directions.

Amendment No 12 is not about naming and shaming schools. There is a considerable road to travel for engagement with schools before a direction would be given. Publicly funded schools should not have policies that breach statutory guidelines. There should be transparency on that.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I was not planning to speak at this stage — my colleague and I have separated out the groups — but I thought that I would pick up on a couple of things that have been said so far. The Member for West Tyrone Mr McCrossan is not in his seat. He said that the success of the Bill will be judged by the pounds and pennies that are saved and not by its "technical drafting". To a degree, I agree with him in that the outworking and policy intent of the Bill will be judged by the amount that parents actually save. To achieve that policy intent, legislation has to be right, and that is what we are about at fourth stage today.

I want to pick up my feeling so far in the debate from some other parties. Obviously, Members are on the Committee with me. I am a bit disappointed in the negativity around the debate. We have before us a Bill — Members can have different views on this — that will, in my view and in the expert opinion of the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC), reduce uniform costs for parents in Northern Ireland.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Thank you to the Member for giving way. Will he not share my frustration and disappointment that the majority of the amendments put forward by the Committee have not made it today for debate? Will he not question why, given that they are well within the scope of the Bill yet are not there?

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for West Belfast for his question. I will point out a few things to him. Clearly, the Speaker makes those decisions, and he is completely independent. Secondly, on numerous occasions during Committee Stage, I and my colleague pointed out that there were some things in the amendments that I felt — that is just my opinion — were outside the Bill's scope.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for giving way. I was due to say a few words before we break for Question Time and resume the debate at 3.30 pm. I will elaborate later on some of the substantive points that Members have made, but I will make one point now. The Bill was not introduced by me alone but was approved by the Executive. Every Member who has spoken and raised concerns is from a party that has Executive members. I engaged with the Alliance leader on the Bill before we went through the Executive, and I engaged with Sinn Féin. The Bill is a product of the Northern Ireland Executive, on which your parties have representatives. That is the legislation. There was opportunity to seek change to the legislation and to have that change included in the Bill by your parties' members of the Executive.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Order.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Therefore, I say to Members —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Order, Minister.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

— that that is worth bearing in mind when you are criticising the Bill.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Minister. Order, please. Can we return to the substance of the amendments rather than focusing on issues that, either regrettably or successfully, were not selected? If you continue to do this —.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We are not.

A Member

We are not.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Paul, I will decide that. If you all continue to do this, we are going to have a very different debate this afternoon. I am just letting you know.

Sorry to cut you short. Question Time begins at 2.00 pm. After that you can continue your apparently very small point that so far has lasted five and a half minutes. We will continue the rest of your points after Question Time. Members, please take your ease.

The debate stood suspended.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Health

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We will start with listed questions. Question 11 has been withdrawn.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

1. Ms Bunting asked the Minister of Health whether the regional system for breast cancer referrals, announced in May 2025, is delivering the desired improvements. (AQO 2327/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am most exercised by the fact that, for far too long, patients have faced unequal access to timely breast cancer assessments. In one geographic part of the country, we were consistently meeting the 14-day target, while, in others, fewer than 10% of patients were seen within that time frame. The regional system was designed to eliminate disparities by pooling referrals into a single waiting list and offering patients the earliest available appointment, regardless of their home trust. We have taken a deliberate step towards fairness and consistency, and therefore the system is delivering on the promise of equalised access but is not delivering on the challenge of meeting the 14-day target. The current average wait is simply not acceptable. I have told officials that it is not acceptable to me and that I expect to see improvements.

We have allocated £5 million in recurrent funding through the elective care framework. That will support additional waiting list initiatives and the expanded use of the independent sector, while we work to increase clinical capacity in the trusts. A comprehensive review of breast services, meanwhile, is under way. I want to ensure sustainability and resilience in the years to come.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

I am grateful to the Minister for the answer. I am sure that he will be aware that this causes great distress not just to the women involved but to their families. What reassurances does the Minister plan to give women across Northern Ireland that they will, indeed, be seen within the target time for red-flag breast cancer referrals? The Minister said that he had made it clear to officials that the waiting times were not acceptable to him, but he did not outline the plan or direction given to officials to fix and resolve the issue for those women across Northern Ireland.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As I said to the Member, £5 million has been allocated through the elective care framework implementation plan. That will strengthen long-term resilience and reduce reliance on temporary measures. We must get rid of temporary measures and install resilience. On my actions to deal with the immediate pressures, the trusts have been instructed to prioritise red-flag referrals in the existing core capacity to ensure timely access for the most clinically urgent cases. The strategic planning and performance group (SPPG) is working with trusts on a plan to provide regular additional waiting list initiative clinics and mega-clinics. The independent sector will also supplement capacity in the short term.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The original question was about the plan to reduce waiting times. The target time for red-flag breast services is 14 days, and some women have waited for eight, nine, 10 and 11 weeks. It might be that, across the board, everybody has to wait, but that is no comfort to those women or their families. Some of the women have a family history of aggressive cancers that can deteriorate in a matter of days or weeks. What is the plan?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

An eight-, nine-, 10- or 11-week wait is not acceptable to me, patients or their families: I get it. However, the postcode lottery that was in place before I introduced the regional booking service was equally unacceptable. You could have been living a mile away from a trust that was seeing all or nearly all its patients within the 14-day target, while your trust satisfied only 10% of the demand. That was clearly inequitable and unfair, and we have successfully moved to do away with the postcode lottery. We now have to drive down the waiting times and meet the 14-day target. It is a big ask but one that those patients deserve to see delivered.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

I welcome the fact that action has now been taken to end the sheer inequity and postcode lottery for patients with suspected breast cancer. Does the Minister agree that, in a region as small as Northern Ireland, with a population of fewer than two million people, there should be no tolerance of such varying patient experiences not just of services for suspected breast cancer but of other specialities?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I absolutely agree with the Member. He will be aware that, during my time as Minister of Health, one of my objectives is to ensure that, whatever the condition or process or entry point for a patient or service user into our Health and Social Care (HSC) system anywhere in Northern Ireland, the patient receives a standardised, regionalised service. That is the ambition across the board.

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

Minister, it appears that, since the centralisation of services — that is what it has been — there has, in fact, been a deterioration of those services for many women who are deeply concerned about their health. What additional resources are being allocated to trusts and health services in order that people who are deeply concerned about their health can be seen as soon as possible?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The answer to your question is, as I outlined, the £5 million of additional moneys through the elective care framework implementation plan. I acknowledge that there are explanations — not excuses — for what happened. For example, it was over the summer, and the workforce was challenged because people need their summer holidays. A number of factors play into it. I stress this: explanations and excuses are different things. That is only an explanation; it does not make it right.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

2. Mr Brooks asked the Minister of Health whether any consideration has been given to developing a men’s health strategy for Northern Ireland. (AQO 2328/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Evidence suggests that men are disproportionately affected by certain conditions, such as some types of heart disease, and smoking; indeed, more men than women die by suicide. The inequalities in men's health are stark. On average, those in more deprived areas are much more likely to die early than those in the least deprived areas. The gap in life expectancy and healthy life expectancy at birth between men and women increases in line with greater levels of deprivation.

The Public Health Agency (PHA) supports a wide range of men's health initiatives. While there is no current plan to develop a men's health strategy or action plan for Northern Ireland, given the existing resource constraints, I want to ensure that, in the development of health-promoting strategies and plans, relevant actions target men and are included where there is a difference in behaviours or outcomes between the genders.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answer. The question comes on the back of some positive collaborative work being done in my constituency by a group of men's social and health groups in our community that come together through the East Belfast Community Development Agency (EBCDA).

In light of the concerns that the Minister has raised about the higher rates of preventable illness, mental health challenges and premature mortality among men, will he outline what actions his Department is taking to address health inequalities among men?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question, because it takes me to my Live Better initiative. When I took up post, one of the most shocking reports that I saw was on health inequalities. This year's health inequalities report is out. It confirms that the difference in healthy life expectancy between people living in the areas of most deprivation and those in the areas of least deprivation can be as much as 14 years. I find that shocking, given that we are a quarter of the way into the 21st century and in a First-World country, and I do not understand why we have tolerated it for so long. Live Better bundles together services that already exist, takes them into areas of deprivation and tries to get them as close to people's front door as possible, because all the empirical evidence suggests that, if you do that, uptake goes up.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Will the Minister provide an update on the prostate cancer screening evidence review undertaken by the UK National Screening Committee and outline any preparation that his officials have undertaken ahead of the recommendations from that review?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am aware of that research, and my Department has been looking at it. However, I will have to write to the Member with the detail because I do not have that off the top of my head.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Will the Minister provide an overview of some of the most pressing issues affecting men's health at this time in Northern Ireland?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. It is the first time that I have had the opportunity to welcome him onto the Floor of the Chamber.

My number one for men's health is suicide. It is a major risk factor for men. Suicide is a major cause of death, particularly for men under the age of 50. Cardiovascular disease is also a contributory factor to poor men's health. Many conditions, such as heart disease, are preventable, as I know from my experience. There is the potential to do more on male cancers with early detection through the screening of testicular and prostate cancers. Men are also disproportionately affected by type 2 diabetes. Those are all critical areas where, as Minister, I want to put a focus.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

3. Mr Carroll asked the Minister of Health whether any assessment has been made of the impact that medical misogyny has on healthcare waiting times for women. (AQO 2329/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

In a recent response to a question for written answer from the Member on the same topic, I welcomed the report by the UK Parliament's Women and Equalities Committee on women's reproductive health conditions. It highlighted the fact that women often find that their pain is normalised or dismissed when they seek medical help from the NHS in England. I am aware, through qualitative feedback received by my Department, that some women in Northern Ireland have had similar experiences. Others have reported having a positive experience when discussing issues with their healthcare provider. I fully acknowledge the range of experiences. However, to the question of whether an impact assessment has been made, unfortunately you cannot readily assess something that is not well defined and measurable. However, I recognise the importance of clinical education and the need to listen to women in this area and ensure that appropriate referrals are made and treatment decisions are taken that best meet the needs of those individuals.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Minister, it would be remiss of me not to mention that this month is Gynaecological Cancer Awareness Month, but thank you for your answer.

Over the last few months, my office has engaged with quite a lot of women who have been failed by a broken medical system. They know what medical misogyny is. They have a problem not only with waiting lists but with dismissal of their health concerns. Have the Minister and his officials looked at Portugal, which seems to lead the way in providing extra days of leave and putting in place other support systems for women who experience particular healthcare issues?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am not aware of whether we have looked at the model in Portugal, but I assure Mr Carroll that we will certainly take that away. It may be of interest, as a bit of a tangent, that I was at a four-nations ministerial meeting on substance use last week, and the question of whether Portugal was leading the way in permissiveness in the use of drugs came up. The answer was that it was, but, because it is no longer putting resources into helping people who are taking drugs, those problems are re-emerging. I find that interesting.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Few factors impact on women's healthcare more than having a maternity and children's hospital that is unsafe for women and babies and that patients and staff are not allowed into. Will the Minister reassure the House that the Belfast Trust and his Department will continue to explore the issue of financial liability for that scandalous situation — I understand that the cost could be in the region of £9 million — and that there will be no compromise on the issue? Will the Minister also indicate why the review of who is to blame for the debacle over the handover of the maternity hospital has been discontinued?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On the first point, absolutely we want to get to the bottom of it and understand what happened, why it happened and who was responsible. However, I am not going to jump the gun. I assure the Member that, when we find out who is responsible, we will take the appropriate action.

As to the second part of the Member's question, it is my understanding — I await a formal briefing on it — that a couple of the workforce in the Belfast Trust were perhaps not as forthcoming as we might have expected them to be in their engagement in that review process. I await a formal briefing, and then I will make my decision. I assure the Member that it is not acceptable to me if a member of the workforce of the Belfast Trust or, indeed, of the Department of Health is not fully engaging in any review or investigation into what has gone wrong. It has cost an awful lot from the public purse and, more important, has delayed the opening of that maternity hospital, which is badly needed for the women of this country.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

4. Mr Durkan asked the Minister of Health to outline any action being taken to address the shortage in the number of psychiatrists in the Western Health and Social Care Trust (WHSCT). (AQO 2330/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am acutely aware of the workforce challenges in consultant psychiatry in the Western Trust and, indeed, across the region. A number of actions are being progressed. In response to action 32 of the mental health strategy, a mental health workforce review report was published in July 2023 that set out 18 recommendations to address workforce challenges across statutory mental health services. Work is currently being progressed to deliver a number of key recommendations on costing the proposed future workforce profile and on the development of a future recruitment and training plan.

In parallel, my Department has established a psychiatric workforce task and finish group to identify a range of actions to help alleviate the pressures in the psychiatry workforce in the short to medium term. As part of a significant package of training expansions, I announced in May an additional 26 new medical specialty training posts, including six in core psychiatry.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Earlier, he mentioned health inequalities. Although poor mental health does not discriminate, it is much more prevalent in areas of high deprivation. Does the Minister recognise the dire need for the Western Trust, where there are the fewest psychiatrists, to receive funding to employ more psychiatrists in order to ensure that the people there get the service and support that they require? He referred to some of the recommendations that are being implemented. Can he be specific about which of them will boost the workforce in Derry?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Given the focus that I have had, since being elected in 2011, on mental health and well-being and, since I took up post as Minister, on health inequalities, I will try to be a bit more specific about a range of actions that, at low or no additional cost, will potentially help alleviate pressures in the psychiatric workforce. We are doing an analysis of sick absence rates, an analysis of locum use, an assessment of the impact of existing and emerging workforce challenges, an assessment of the impact of reinstating mental health officers and an assessment of how best to promote Northern Ireland as a region in which to work. That is what we are doing as regards the workforce.

The issues that people face in the Member's constituency, particularly in areas of deprivation, are well known, and those things overlap. I am very much of the opinion that tackling health inequalities is not just for the Department of Health to tackle. Socio-economic issues are also involved, so the Department for the Economy is involved. It is about the environment and people's behaviour. Equally, we can look at educational underperformance and not just look to the Minister of Education to do something about that. We know that healthier children do better in school, so that is down to me. If we look at our shocking rates of economic inactivity, with 27% of people of working age neither in work nor seeking work, once again, when we look at the contributing factors, we see that it is not just about affordable and accessible healthcare but about poor mental and physical health. All those things need a whole-system, all-Executive approach.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Minister, I met the North's Royal College of Psychologists (RCPsych) here last week, and we had a very useful discussion about some of the problems, such as retention, recruitment and the lack of a permanent increase in the number of psychiatry training places here since 2007, all of which lead to unsafe staffing levels, workforce problems, problems with service provision and problems with the implementation of our mental health strategy. The Royal College of Psychologists detailed the use of locums, as the Minister has mentioned. Has he done any analysis of the additional cost of using locums to fill gaps in the workforce?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Absolutely. I will not quote figures to the Member, but we started with nursing and have reduced our reliance on agency nurses. Actually, we have cut it out. The focus now is on locums, who are very expensive, as the Member will be aware. We have asked one of the chief executives of the five geographic health and social care trusts to lead an investigation into ways in which to deliver a plan for doing the same with locums as we did with agency nurses.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Mental health must be prioritised. Will you outline the impact that the shortage of psychiatrists in the Western Trust has on patients? How does that compare with other trusts across Northern Ireland?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Obviously, if you need psychiatric help and it is not there for you, that can have a potentially devastating impact on your health. The number of psychiatrists in each trust will be determined by the population in the trust area and assessment of need, but the Member may find it very interesting to hear the number of vacancies across the five trusts. As of 30 June, there were 33 consultant psychiatrist vacancies across Northern Ireland. The Southern Health and Social Care Trust had the highest level of psychiatrist vacancies with 14, but the Western Trust was right behind with 13. The Northern Health and Social Care Trust had four vacancies, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust had two, and the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust had none. There is another massive postcode lottery.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

You outlined the steps that the Department is taking, which are commendable. Can you provide an update on the specific steps that the Western Trust is taking to address the challenges of consultant psychiatry pressures?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Following a formal application from the Western Trust, in August 2024, the Department approved a 10% recruitment and retention premium as an incentive in consultant psychiatry posts. Despite ongoing recruitment campaigns, no appointments, I regret to say, have been made to date.

In response, the trust submitted a further application seeking an enhanced rate of up to 20% for a mental health liaison team, crisis mental health services, including for inpatients, psychiatry of learning disability and community recovery teams. The Department approved that application on 22 August last. That agreed rate is up to 20% of a consultant's starting salary as a recruitment incentive, and, as I say the trust requested it.

We in the Department remain committed to supporting equitable access to mental health services, and we continue to assess and respond to workforce pressures in collaboration with the trusts and our other stakeholders.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

5. Ms Ferguson asked the Minister of Health for an update on a winter preparedness plan for 2025-26 to improve patient flow and reduce waiting times at emergency departments. (AQO 2331/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Earlier this year, under the leadership of the Chief Medical Officer and the Chief Nursing Officer, we brought together senior leaders from across the health and social care system to learn from last winter and plan for winter 2025-26. I was clear that I wanted a blank sheet and a whole-system approach to look at what could be achieved in advance of the winter and in the longer term.

That process identified the need for a particular focus on interventions to improve the care of older people who are living with frailty, who have been identified as some of the most vulnerable to the risks that are associated with the winter period. Seven improvement projects have been established. They focus on reducing hospital demand by supporting older people to stay well and receive appropriate care in the community. That includes improving the use of advance clinical care planning and enhancing pathways for patients, ensuring that the right care is delivered in the right place the first time.

I hope to publish my winter preparedness plan in the next couple of weeks and, as in previous years, will again call on the public to do everything that is possible to help protect our system, including utilising community services where available and getting vaccinated if eligible.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister, for the update. I welcome the seven improvement projects. However, as of last Wednesday, 133 people were waiting for treatment in Altnagelvin Hospital's A&E department, and 49 were awaiting admission. What can you say to reassure the people who are seeking emergency care and to our staff who are working in A&E in Altnagelvin that things will change for the better?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I cannot say to anybody that things will be perfect, but I believe that the four sessions that we had — we called them the "big conversation" — which will lead to the plan for winter preparedness for 2025-26, will help. The urgent care offer at Altnagelvin has helped, and the respiratory offer has helped — we are increasing the availability and accessibility to the respiratory offer. Those things mean that you have pathways by which you can avoid having to go to ED.

I visited EDs last January. Of the seven that I visited, it is the visit to Altnagelvin that sticks. It is the oldest of the type 1 EDs in Northern Ireland, and you can tell that it is, but things are being done. The trust is doing things, even with seating accommodation, to try to ease the pressures. However, until you get a new ED, which is several years away, nothing is going to be perfect. We are only going to be doing continuous improvement.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Last November, the chair of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine called the Minister's winter preparedness plan "too little, too late". Will the Minister give a timeline for the release of this year's winter preparedness plan and outline the lessons learned? How will it improve the ability of A&E departments and our hospitals to cope with the predictable annual increase in pressures across the health service and reassure patients and staff that this winter will be better?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As stated, I hope to be publishing that winter preparedness plan in the next two to three weeks. Certainly, the four sessions are over. I was very pleased with how the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Nursing Officer went about their business. I was extremely pleased with the appetite among stakeholders to attend those briefings; in fact, there were waiting lists for some of those sessions. I will not list the seven areas, but top was identifying elderly people with frailty issues. Clearly, if we can keep them out of an emergency department, we should be doing that. The Member is a nurse: he will know the pressures and how difficult it is. There are also vulnerable people for whom the noise and lighting in the EDs are not suitable. I visited those seven EDs in January and talked to people who were in the same chair, waiting for treatment, for four days. Please do not think that making steps towards making things better is anything but a real area of focus for me.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I hear what the Minister says about keeping people out of EDs, but we are all alive to the fact that the EDs are full today, have been for some time and are under pressure now. What confidence does the Minister have that the plan will make things any better come the winter? In the Minister's response to the original question, he talked about keeping the elderly population well. One thing that he did not touch on in his answer is access to GPs. They cannot get to their GP, so they are turning up at A&Es.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On that point, when I visited the Royal Victoria Hospital, more than one person in the urgent care unit — it is on the first floor, from memory — had a flask and packed lunch with them. I asked if they had been sent by their GP, and they said, "No, we didn't bother trying to phone our GP. We came straight here". They knew that they would be there for a number of hours, so they brought their food, drink and podcast and were happy to wait for a while.

These issues have been growing for a very, very long time. I absolutely agree with the Member that it is not about just winter pressures. In fact, going through last winter, I said to colleagues in the Department, "Please stop talking about winter pressures. We should be talking about additional winter pressures, because, sadly, the pressures on our emergency departments are 365". That has been very obvious, even over the summer. Here we are in mid-September. I have no doubt that, if we took ourselves to Derry/Londonderry and visited the ED at Altnagelvin, we would see a very unbecoming sight.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

6. Mr Harvey asked the Minister of Health whether he intends to increase the number of nursing posts available to ensure all local graduates can avail themselves of a position. (AQO 2332/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Health and social care trusts are responsible for staffing. The regional recruitment of newly qualified nurses is therefore led by the trusts, in partnership with the Business Services Organisation (BSO). It takes place twice per annum. The most recent regional recruitment exercise for newly qualified nurses received more than 700 applications for band 5 posts across the five geographical trusts. Those applications are ongoing. The availability of posts during any one exercise is based on current vacancies and anticipated staff turnover. That can change almost daily.

It is also important to recognise that not every job offer made to recent graduates will be accepted by them. Individuals may choose to refuse the offer of a post based on a number of factors, including location, working pattern and the clinical environment.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We do not have time for a supplementary, so we will move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr McGrath asked the Minister of Health whether the Finance Minister has offered him any funding to enable him to close the pay gap for nurses. (AQT 1531/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

No.

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

I am told that the Finance Minister has washed his hands of the issue by telling health unions simply to contact the Health Minister, while the Executive Office will not even reply to correspondence from the health trade unions or me requesting a meeting. Does that not show that, whilst the Finance Minister, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister are more than willing to stand beside nurses on pickets, they are unwilling to stand up for them where it counts, namely in the Executive, and pay them what they are owed?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I will diverge from the Member's assessment and analysis of where we are. I understand that, as a spokesman for the Opposition, he comes at it from that angle. I do not see a fix for this outside the Executive working collaboratively, so I am not in the business of pointing a finger at any other Minister. I have made the point repeatedly that I understand that every Minister and every Department is suffering huge financial pressures. I believe that the pressures on Health are absolutely unprecedented: we are talking about a funding gap of around £614 million, and there is a question about whether is it unmanageable. Of that amount, £200 million is for nurses' pay.

After the last Executive meeting, I happened to have a meeting with the Royal College of Nursing. Its chief executive, Nicola Ranger, had flown in from London, and she made it very clear that nurses had had enough. She also made it clear that they felt that they were too soft the last time that they went on strike, and that their message did not land properly. The Royal College is balloting its members on strike action — not industrial action but strike action specifically — and have said that, if nurses go out on strike again, there will be no derogations and no mitigations this time. I am afraid that, unless something changes, we have to anticipate nurses on the streets by mid-November. For the waiting-list initiative in the Programme for Government and the delivery of health and social care, that is just massive.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

T2. Mr McMurray asked the Minister of Health, noting that people in his constituency are very anxious about ambulance waiting times for transportation to hospital, what action he is taking to improve C1 and C1T response times in the South Eastern Trust. (AQT 1532/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I understand that the Member is geographically wedded to the South Eastern Trust. My focus, of course, has to more broad and on the whole of Northern Ireland. Yes, we are absolutely looking at ambulance waiting times. One of the other things that we are doing though — I am doing it with the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Minister for Infrastructure, across the three Departments — is looking at alternative ways of getting non-emergency patients to and from hospital, such as by community transport.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

I thank the Minister for that answer, which leads in to my second question. What assurances can he give that the Department is investigating ways to improve hospital transport provision for less urgent and outpatient appointments?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As I said, we are trying to drive down the waiting times and handover times for all ambulances going to acute hospitals. For some time, there has been a cross-departmental working group that involves the Department for Infrastructure, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and my Department. We escalated it to a ministerial meeting just a few weeks ago because I certainly — I think that my colleagues agreed with me — felt that we were, perhaps, not getting the sort of outputs that we were looking for. We therefore asked them to refocus on their work, and we expect them to do just that and get back to us in short order with some actual proposals for how we can use community transport and other initiatives to improve delivery.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

T3. Mr McHugh asked the Minister of Health what percentage of nursing graduates of all disciplines, from Queen's University Belfast and Ulster University, have secured full-time, permanent employment in health and social care trusts in each of the past three years. (AQT 1533/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am sorry, the Member might be confusing me for a walking encyclopedia. Those are statistics that I do not have to hand. There are many statistics on health and social care. Those are important ones, and all I can say to the Member is that I will find that out and write to him.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat.

[Translation: Thank you.]

I appreciate that. I understood, when asking the question, that that would be the likely response.

Minister, what steps are you taking to improve the terms and conditions for staff in Health and Social Care? How will the strategy specifically reduce the service's reliance on agency staff?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As I said, we are at the point where we can say that we do not use agency nurses. We are now addressing locums, because using them is a very expensive way to do business. That is not to say that locums do not have their place — of course they do — but we have become over-reliant on locums and are not using them for the original purpose for which they were intended.

When it comes to what I am trying to do to make the nursing role more attractive, the first thing was to give them the 3·6% pay rise that was recommended by the independent body that made the recommendation for Agenda for Change staff, which includes nurses. However, I acknowledge that nurses would, perhaps, like to negotiate separately from the other Agenda for Change categories. We need to look particularly at promotion from band 5 to bands 6 and 7, because you can qualify as a band 5 nurse, have a long and very successful career and retire as a band 5 nurse. We have to look at ways of promoting nurses from band 5 through to bands 6 and 7. There is a whole basket of issues beyond money. It is about job satisfaction.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

T4. Mr Donnelly asked the Minister of Health, given that he will be aware of the benefits to disabled people who were able to qualify for the independent living fund before it was closed in 2010, and given the research showing the economic benefit of more than £10 of social value of return for every £1 invested in that fund, whether he plans to reopen it to new applicants and give disabled people in Northern Ireland the freedom to live independent lives. (AQT 1534/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

In an ideal world, absolutely. In the current world, with a £614 million gap in funding, it is simply not possible. I have had to stop going to my permanent secretary and saying, "What do you think about reopening this or putting a bit more into that?", because the answer is, "I am the permanent secretary and the accounting officer. If you tell me to do that, I will have to write back to you and say that we cannot make any argument under 'Managing Public Money Northern Ireland', which is the keynote strategy, to justify that". I have to live with the cloth that I have been cut, I am afraid.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thanks to the Minister for that answer. I know that that will be disappointing to people. Given that the number of people who benefit from the independent living fund in Northern Ireland is reducing, will the Minister commit to keeping the same number of places open and open them to new applicants?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Yes, I can commit to saying that we will not cut the budget. I do not wish to cut that budget, but one of the frustrations is that, every week — maybe not every day but certainly multiple times a week — people come to me and make the argument, "If you invest a bit of money in this, you will get a great saving", like the one that the Member has detailed regarding the independent living fund. However, the money to pump-prime it does not exist. As an Executive, we have to sit down and think about this a bit more, because if we do not take those steps to save the money — there are big savings and better outcomes to be derived for patients and service users — we will continue to be in a financially challenging position and will not take the logical steps to get ourselves out of the mess.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T5. Mr Delargy asked the Minister of Health, having noted that he had answered the question in some detail in relation to other constituencies, why the average waiting time in Altnagelvin Area Hospital's emergency department is (ED) more than twice the average of other emergency departments in the North. (AQT 1535/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

It is partly to do with the environment in which people are working. Two of the seven emergency departments that I visited — the Ulster Hospital in Dundonald and the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast — were very modern. When I go to a really busy ED where the waits are measured in days rather than hours, I notice that nurses, doctors, clinicians and healthcare professionals know the right thing to do for a patient, but they end up having to decide on the least worst option so that they can move on to look after the next person. It is partly the environment and partly the demand. It is a cocktail of reasons. Again, that is to explain it without justifying it. I want to see it fixed.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

We are aware of your longer-term plans to invest in and, hopefully, build a new emergency department at Altnagelvin, but people need to see immediate action today. You talked about the fact that we are coming into additional winter pressures, and I appreciate that that has been acknowledged, but what immediate action are you taking to ensure that the waiting times, which are already twice as long as those across the rest of the North, are not repeated and do not worsen this winter?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I say gently to the Member that it is not me who takes steps; the Western Health and Social Care Trust has to take steps. The trust is very aware, as are the other trusts, of my opinion on how we need to leave no stone unturned in trying to address waiting lists in those EDs. That is well understood. In the short term, the scope is limited by geography and budget, but that is not to say that we do not do everything that we can. To my mind, it is not just about the patients. While that is critical, it is also about the nurses and doctors and the moral injury that they feel because they are not permitted to make the best decisions that they know they can make.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

T6. Mr Robinson asked the Minister of Health to update the House on details of the COVID-19 vaccination booster programme roll-out for Northern Ireland. (AQT 1536/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am aware that we are going to have a booster programme this winter. It will be linked in with the influenza vaccination offer as normal. I am not across the detail, so I will have to write to the Member.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister. Will he also detail the steps that his Department is taking to address public concerns about vaccines?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

We are aware that there is vaccine hesitancy. I am not sure that the research suggests that it is quite as embedded in the societal psyche as some people think. We are not currently spending money on paid-for advertising such as TV promotions, but we will work with the primary care sector to encourage people to take up the boosters. Certainly, I get a message every year from my GP surgery, encouraging me to come along and book a session for the two jabs, which I get on the same day.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

T7. Mr Martin asked the Minister of Health to consider whether his Department, alongside Translink, will fund an arrangement to ensure that there are public transport connections from North Down to the Ulster Hospital. (AQT 1537/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Those public transport arrangements are a matter for the Department for Infrastructure. As I have said, Minister Kimmins, Minister Muir and I discussed community transport and how we might better realign it to get the sort of outcomes that we are looking for. At this stage, with the resource and financial constraints that are upon me, I cannot commit to doing it, because if I were to do that for the Member's constituents, I would have to do it right across Northern Ireland. There certainly is not the budget or the resource available to do that.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

As the Minister will be aware, a decision was taken to close minor injury units (MIU) in Bangor and Newtownards, albeit quite recently, and to relocate them to the Ulster Hospital. Does the Minister agree that, for people who have no car and have to rely on a taxi to get to the ED at the Ulster Hospital, it is an expensive trip?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I absolutely acknowledge the challenge that it creates for people who do not have ready access to their own transport or to transport laid on by relatives or friends. We have to live in the real world, however. The minor injury unit at the Ards Community Hospital was closed and the service moved to the Ulster Hospital, 4·6 miles away on a dual carriageway. I do not think that that was a particular issue for the majority of people. That delivered better outcomes, because the MIU was then situated beside the ED, X-ray machines, CT scanners etc. I accept, however, that, for a minority of potential patients, a distance of 4·6 miles is an issue. I continue to look at it with Executive colleagues.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That concludes questions to the Minister of Health.

Oral Answers to Questions — Infrastructure

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

1. Mr Kingston asked the Minister for Infrastructure for an update on any plans for a new pedestrian crossing on the Crumlin Road, Belfast, in the vicinity of Cambrai Street and Flax Street. (AQO 2341/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I can advise that the most recent assessment for a pedestrian crossing in the vicinity of Cambrai Street and Flax Street was carried out on 11 October 2022. The assessment placed that location sixteenth on eastern division's prioritised list of potential sites that have been surveyed and assessed for a controlled crossing. One of my party colleagues, namely Gerry Kelly, has also raised the issue. As the Member will be aware, the Department has been operating in a difficult financial environment for many years. While there are many locations across the North that would benefit from investment in enhanced pedestrian measures, such as controlled crossings, owing to the limited budget, schemes are taken forward through the prioritisation of those deemed most in need of intervention. The prioritised lists for pedestrian schemes are live lists and are kept under review.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her answer. She may be aware that there have been a number of developments since 2022, with the reopening of Flax Street, the filling of retail units at Hillview Retail Park, the new Eurospar at Edenderry garage and busy bus stops on both sides of the Crumlin Road. There is cross-community support for the pedestrian crossing. Will the Minister ask her officials to reassess that potential new crossing's priority? It should be moving up the list.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I will take on board what the Member has said. Generally, officials revisit a location like that one only if there has been a major infrastructure development in the area or if considerable time has passed since the initial survey. There are no current plans to carry out a review. I will, however, go back to officials and discuss with them whether there is any potential for a review, given some of the enhancements to the area that the Member has mentioned.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Can the Minister provide an update on the Knockbreda Road crossing in South Belfast?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member will be aware, I recently met her and some of her council colleagues. I can advise that my officials continue to progress the development of the Knockbreda Road crossing following receipt of representations from a further consultation carried out by Belfast City Council. Work on the design of the scheme remains ongoing.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

2. Ms Egan asked the Minister for Infrastructure to outline any steps that her Department is taking to improve road safety on the A2 West Circular Road, Bangor. (AQO 2342/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

First, I extend my sympathies to the family of the young girl, Jaidyn Rice, who tragically lost her life at the junction of West Circular Road and Clandeboye Road on 8 July. My thoughts are with her family. What they have been going through in the aftermath is unimaginable.

I understand that the PSNI is leading an investigation of the collision. On completion of that investigation, my officials will liaise with the police to obtain further information relating to that collision and others in which injuries were sustained. At that point, officials will consider any emerging road safety factors that are relevant to my Department. As I have said, although there have been a number of injury collisions along the route, the majority were at the signal-controlled junctions, and no common causation factor has yet been identified that could be improved by additional safety measures. However, officials routinely review injury collision cluster sites from the data provided by the PSNI, and, if appropriate, an assessment is undertaken. What comes out of the investigation will be critical in informing our approach and next steps.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate your words of condolence for Jaidyn's family. Her loss was absolutely horrendous and tragic for her family. Will you give a commitment to Jaidyn's family and the community in Bangor that their voices will be heard, that the incident will be taken seriously in your Department and that you will do everything in your power to ensure that we do not lose another life there?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Absolutely. When any tragic incident such as that occurs, we have to take a step back and look at it to understand how and why it happened and at what we can do collectively to ensure that no other family goes through that. I have met lots of families who have been through similar incidents, so I would welcome that opportunity. I have spoken to a DUP Member about a potential meeting with the family. I am keen to have that meeting, and I am willing to hear from everyone.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Minister, my supplementary question goes a little beyond the A2 West Circular Road and back towards Belfast. A number of years ago, your Department introduced speed cameras on that road that measured average speed being driven between them. There was a public perception that the cameras were a bluff and did not work, but they had and still have a perceptible impact on speed on that road.

Another problem on that road that I have seen recently — it is endemic — is motorists jumping red lights. I am not sure whether your Department has access to any detection mechanism that would deter that practice, because it is only a matter of time —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Right. We have got the question, Mr Chambers.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

— before there is a serious collision because of that.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for pointing that out. It chimes well with what the Department has been saying about the onus being on all of us to tackle driver behaviour. That is the main cause of all collisions, regardless of whether they result in a fatality. We constantly look at what we can do to improve road safety. I attended the road safety roadshow hosted by Newry Chamber of Commerce and Trade just over a week ago. Most important in all such cases is that the onus is on each one of us. We are all road users, be that as a driver, pedestrian, cyclist or whatever we may be, and we have our part to play. It is about doing anything that we can to increase awareness and help people to think differently and be safer on our roads. That protects everyone. To quote one of our campaigns:

"to everyone else, you are the 'someone else'."

Whilst we all think that we are great drivers, to somebody else, you could be the reason why there is a collision.

I will take that on board. It is probably more of a policing issue, because it is about enforcement, but I can ask officials to see whether there is anything that we can do.

When I was on the road this morning, given the conditions that we were driving in, some of the driver behaviour that I witnessed as I was coming to Stormont was absolutely horrendous. There is something in that for us all to take away as we try to make a difference.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Minister, I know that, along with my party colleague Councillor Ian Milne, you met a lady in my constituency, Stella McGinn, whose daughter, Caitlin-Rose, tragically lost her life getting off a school bus. I thank you for doing that. Will you outline the steps that you are taking to improve road safety, particularly for children?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for raising that, and I pay tribute to Stella for her efforts after what can only be described as an absolutely horrendous incident with the loss of her beautiful young daughter. She has used that to focus on how she can protect other children getting to and from school in particular. I have met Stella twice now, and I have so much respect and admiration for her and what she is trying to do.

As the Member and the Assembly will know, road safety is a high priority for my Department, and I am committed to working proactively to make our roads safer for everyone. I am acutely aware that children and young people are among the most vulnerable groups using our roads. As Members may be aware, I recently announced an extensive package of road safety measures aimed at safeguarding schoolchildren, particularly when they travel to and from school, including on overtaking school buses. Officials have provided advice on that, and I am considering the best options to take forward.

Recently, I met the Education Minister, and we agreed to collaborate on an initiative aimed at increasing awareness of school bus safety. I look forward to seeing how that will progress. Again, it goes back to education and awareness and thinking about all those factors. Whilst we are still in the early stages, our shared goal is that we work directly with schools to ensure that pupils, staff and parents are better informed about the risks and responsibilities associated with school transport. We are exploring the most effective ways to engage with schools and the broader community, whether through targeted campaigns, educational materials or pilot programmes. The bus-rear and on-street school bus safety advertising is currently running: it was reinstated at the start of September in order to align with the start of the school term. Additionally, the road safety teaching-aid calendars have been electronically issued to over 760 primary schools for the new school year.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up, Minister.

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

I will be brief. Minister, you were asked about the Knockbreda Road crossing: that is hugely critical to the community in Rosetta, which has been waiting for it for years. It is also critical for school safety. There are half a dozen primary schools and three post-primary schools in that area. You said that that would happen in due course: can you be more specific? When will the Knockbreda Road crossing, which will open the back entrance to Cherryvale park, finally be completed?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I recognise the importance of that, and I know that it is a huge issue for the area. I was pleased to be able to say that that project will be taken forward. As I said to my colleague in my previous answer, we are going through the design stage at this point, so, when that concludes, we will have a better sense of a time frame for its implementation.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

3. Miss McAllister asked the Minister for Infrastructure to outline why her Department changed its definition of active travel spend between February 2024 and June 2025 and reclassified £37 million of existing expenditure as active travel spend. (AQO 2343/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Section 22 of the Climate Change Act 2022 states that my Department:

"must develop sectoral plans for transport which set a minimum spend on active travel from the overall transport budgets of 10%."

My Department has not changed what it considers to be active travel, which is travelling by physically active means, such as walking, wheeling or cycling. What has changed is that, for the first time, there is a need to capture and report the overall spend on active travel funded from overall transport budgets across my Department in line with section 22 of the Act, rather than just reporting the new active travel projects being delivered and the spend on those fantastic projects, such as the cycling proficiency scheme and the Active School Travel programme.

As, I am sure, Members will agree, active travel is not single, discrete activity in my Department. Many different sections routinely carry out work that greatly benefits pedestrians and cyclists. For example, the provisional out-turn for 2024-25 shows that almost £12 million has been spent on maintaining existing assets, whether that is fixing trip hazards, cutting back vegetation or resurfacing old, uneven footways, all of which play a part in ensuring that we have accessible and usable active travel routes.

Similarly, while I recognise the role that street lighting plays in road safety for motorists, its primary purpose is as a safety amenity for pedestrians. The majority of street lights are in built-up areas, and they clearly play a significant role in making people feel more comfortable and secure if they are walking or cycling at night. That being the case, we have attributed 50% of the overall cost of street lighting towards our calculation of active travel spend.

Let us not forget, however, about investment in new infrastructure for active travel. I want more people to feel comfortable and safe when walking, wheeling or cycling, and that is why I am increasing capital investment to develop our active travel networks. I want to emphasise that active travel is not as straightforward as building a new footpath or cycle lane. We have to ensure that they are safe and accessible for everyone, and that forms part of that overall spend.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her answer, but there seems to be a redefinition of what constitutes active travel. It is rather disappointing that fixing street lights is included as showing a commitment to active travel when we know that in some constituencies — in my North Belfast constituency, in particular — we really lack new active travel infrastructure. What impact does the new definition or new way of thinking have on the overall spend on active travel in comparison with the previously used understanding of active travel?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I reiterate that it is not a change to the definition. I am now required to calculate that overall spend and report how it is made up. That is all that has changed. I am required to do that. We cannot say that we are spending x, y and z on active travel while excluding the maintenance of the new infrastructure elements or the existing infrastructure that is important in allowing an active travel route to be used. I need to be clear about that. We are not fixing street lights and saying that that is active travel; we are doing that on specific active travel routes to ensure that we capture the facts and what is required.

If we do not ensure that those routes are up to standard, people will not be able use them in the way that they were designed to be used. We talk about ending violence against women and girls. There is no point putting footpaths and other infrastructure in place if women do not feel safe to use them.

There may be a little bit of a grey area here in that it is not a change in the definition; it is just what I am required to do given my responsibility to outline what is included in that spend. That is part of active travel infrastructure. If you are developing any piece of infrastructure, that spend would be included for the new road or whatever it may be.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, can you provide an update on the active travel delivery plan?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Public consultation on the draft active travel delivery plan closed on 28 February this year. I am pleased with the level of engagement on the plan, with over 330 responses having been received. My officials are reviewing all the responses and preparing a final plan, which they aim to present to me for consideration in the coming months. I hope to be in a position to publish the final plan before the end of this year. Once complete, the active travel delivery plan will complement the Belfast cycling network delivery plan and the strategic plan for greenways to provide a firm basis for the prioritisation and delivery of active travel infrastructure for the next 10 years and beyond.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Minister, active travel schemes are obviously to be welcomed. How will you get the balance with new schemes and keeping existing footpaths clear? There are loads of footpaths in my constituency that people cannot even walk on, yet I see new ones being built to nowhere — literally nowhere. How will you get that balance right?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

We had this conversation in Committee as well. We have to recognise the importance of adequately maintaining our existing network. That means looking at the overall budget and how we allocate it. There will always be difficult decisions to be made around prioritisation. Like I have said in response to other questions here today, including the question that your colleague asked regarding pedestrian crossings, decisions are made based on the prioritisation of those schemes. That question could apply to any aspect of the work that I do in my Department or that the Health or Education Ministers do in theirs. We have to prioritise things on how adequate they are and the needs that they present. The same applies to existing infrastructure and how we ensure that the worst issues are dealt with and worked through as soon as possible.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

Minister, out of this year's active travel budget, over half a million pounds of taxpayers' money has been squandered on a six-foot fence along the Loughshore and Whiteabbey promenade, one of the lovely coastal views that we have in East Antrim. Nobody wants it. It is totally excessive. I have raised the matter with you and your officials. Will you undertake to review that and try to sort it out for the local residents?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I said before, we have reviewed it, as the Member is aware. The bottom line is that there is a standard that we have to meet. The Alliance MLA for the area has also met me on the matter. I have a responsibility to meet the standards that are set — not by me but for me. The alternative that we offered was to remove part of the fencing: that was as far as we could go given those standards. I accept that it is not what people want, but, at the same time, if someone is hurt or injured as a result of our not meeting the policy, that falls to me. We were keen to find a balance so that we addressed our responsibilities and took into account the views of the local community.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

4. Mr Martin asked the Minister for Infrastructure to outline any steps that her Department has taken to ensure that the budget for road maintenance is distributed in a fair and equitable way throughout Northern Ireland. (AQO 2344/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Allocations for road maintenance activities are made to my Department’s four Roads divisions on the basis of need, using a range of weighted indicators tailored to the particular repair or improvement intervention. In distributing the resources available for structural maintenance activities, such as resurfacing and surface dressing, those indicators take into consideration criteria such as carriageway area, traffic and road condition. For essential maintenance activities, such as patching and grass cutting, the factors taken into consideration in distributing the available funding include defect information, areas of grass and numbers of gullies.

The capacity of our internal contractor is also a factor in the allocation of funding. Where our internal capacity cannot fully deliver the current requirements, my Department’s divisions or section offices must engage the services of external contractors. That cost will differ across council areas depending on relevant capacity and external contract rates. My Department’s four Roads divisions broadly use the indicators that I have mentioned when apportioning their allocation across council areas to ensure, as far as possible, that there is an equitable distribution of funds. However, it is important to say that the exact combination of indicators and metrics used in each Roads division will vary and be tailored to the individual needs and circumstances in that division at that time. Yearly allocations vary to reflect funding pressures in section office areas and are influenced by specific allocations for high-priority works such as trunk road resurfacing schemes and structural stability schemes, including coastal defence repairs. On that basis, it can be assumed that no section office or council area will receive a fixed percentage of the available allocation each year.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her answer. She will be aware that I would like to see more money go to North Down for road maintenance and footpath repairs. My office has done a lot of work in that area. Over the summer, I certainly saw examples of pavements that are, frankly, dangerous for the elderly in areas where lots of elderly people live. My understanding is that there is no money. Will the Minister commit to sending some of her senior officials to North Down to meet me and the section engineer there to look at specific areas and to see whether something can be done?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Absolutely. If road surfaces, footpaths or any types of infrastructure pose a risk to the health and safety of anyone in our community, they need to be looked at. If the Member writes to me, we can ensure that a site visit is arranged.

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

Minister, how have you responded to concerns that were tabled by the Mineral Products Association's highway maintenance and construction group in a series of meetings with you in June this year on the 2025-26 road maintenance budget, which, potentially, will put 500 jobs at risk and leave roads in the North in an even worse condition?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I share the Mineral Products Association's concerns, and I have outlined that clearly. The reality is that the budget is nowhere near enough for me to do everything that needs to be done. In fact, as I communicated to the representatives when I met them, the reason that my budget took so long to agree is that I was trying to squeeze money from wherever I could to ensure that we could put more into structural maintenance. It is just not possible at this point. That is unfortunate, but it is the result of over a decade of underfunding through Tory austerity. Everyone in the House knows that and agrees, because we all agreed that we did not get the Budget or the funding that we needed.

The Member's colleague can make comments in the background, but I am sure that his colleague who was previously the Infrastructure Minister would agree with me, because she faced the same challenge. Let me tell you this: I will do everything that I can to ensure that we get fair allocations for our roads, particularly rural roads, which are in the worst state that we have ever seen. Take this as a strong commitment from me: I will continue to fight for more money to look after our roads and bring them up to the standard that is acceptable to all.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

5. Mr Kelly asked the Minister for Infrastructure to outline how the increase of £1.5 million in road safety funding will be spent. (AQO 2345/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I have said in previous answers, road safety is a priority for me, which is why I have increased the road safety advertising budget by over £1·5 million to £2·4 million. With that, I will reinstate a programme of campaigns addressing the main causes of road traffic collisions. I have prioritised the reinstatement of pedestrian and motorcyclist safety campaigns, as both are vulnerable road user groups — those will go live as soon as possible — and I will commission a new anti-drug-driving campaign to address the increase in drug-driving, which is a key area that needs to be looked at.

The Member will be aware that I am looking at a number of things as part of that programme. We constantly review whether we are doing enough and whether we can close the gaps. I mentioned earlier the campaigns about school buses; I have also done campaigns on fitness to drive and awareness of medical declarations and similar issues. I am working with officials across my Department and the Department of Health to look at how we can further widen that work to protect more people — some suggestions have even come up during Question Time. It goes back to the point about the need to address driver behaviour in everything that I look at. I have increased the budget because I recognise that, if we can get that message into people's minds, we could make a real difference.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister, I understand that you want to speak directly to the Member, but it will be helpful if you direct your comments to the mics so that Hansard can pick them up.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire.

[Translation: I thank the Minister.]

She has probably answered the supplementary question that I was going to ask, but I thank her for taking up the issue of the Crumlin Road crossing. To add to what Brian Kingston said, it is a very fast road. There is a huge retail park there now, and lots of people have to cross to it from the other side of the Crumlin Road.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Can the Minister inform the House how much of this money, if any, will be spent on implementing fresh road safety measures on the A5 to prevent further loss of life?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member will be aware, we are in the process of appealing the ruling on the A5. At present, that is my focus and that of my officials. As I said, however, all improvements to existing road safety infrastructure remain under review. We will continue to do that, but I do not have a figure for any of that at this time.

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

6. Mr McNulty asked the Minister for Infrastructure for an update on the Newry southern relief road consultation launched in January 2025. (AQO 2346/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The public consultation exercise for the Newry southern relief road concluded on 4 March 2025. I have received a comprehensive report from my officials covering the many detailed representations that were received as part of the process and am giving careful consideration to its contents. My Department’s major project portfolio is complex, with a range of projects at various stages of development and delivery. Every project will have its own specific considerations. In common with all Departments, I am mindful of the impact of the judgement on the A5 project, which was extremely disappointing and against which, as Members know, I have lodged an appeal. It would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail on the judgement while the appeal is live, but, as my officials work hard to prepare for the appeal hearing, I will take the necessary time to carefully consider the potential impact of the judgement on other projects, including the southern relief road, as they move through the next stages of delivery.

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

I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, it is reassuring that you are on the record as saying that there should be a lifting bridge to accommodate tall ships coming into the Albert Basin in Newry.

On the consultation, will you confirm and reassure residents from around the Flagstaff Road, Barracric and Ellisholding that their views on the environment around Benson's Glen and the tie-in points with Ellisholding Road at the A1 will be listened to?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

My position on the road is absolutely on the record, and I will never move from that position. As a Minister, I have to consider all the responses to the consultation and be impartial. My officials are working through that. The voices of everyone who has made a representation will be heard and the issues that they have raised will be considered as part of that process.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Minister, you have set out your position on this and the depth of feeling in the area. How many representations were received and what was the nature of those representations?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

A total of 214 responses to the consultation were received, which shows the depth of feeling in the area and that people want to be a part of the process. That consultation was held between 21 January and 4 March 2025. Of those representations, 154 were objections, 55% of which cited the inclusion of the fixed bridge as the reason for their objection. There were 15 responses supporting the proposed scheme, 24 general comments and 21 responses that were not applicable to the scheme.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

What is the expenditure to date on the southern relief road?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I do not have that figure to hand. I can give an idea of the overall cost, and, if the Member wishes to write to me, I will be able to provide a more up-to-date figure for the costs incurred so far. There is already a shortfall of approximately £22 million funding for the scheme overall, and a lot of work is still to happen. I can come back to the Member with the figure as it stands.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

7. Mr Dunne asked the Minister for Infrastructure for an update on her Department’s new road maintenance strategy. (AQO 2347/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I fully recognise the importance of the road network and the vital role that it plays in connecting our people and communities as well as in supporting the wider economy. As I have said, my Department has operated within a constrained maintenance budget for many years. That has resulted in underinvestment in our infrastructure and deterioration in the condition of our roads. That is why my officials have been working on the development of a new road maintenance strategy and a new approach to dealing with road maintenance.

That approach will focus on delivering higher-quality repairs instead of spreading resources too thinly, ensuring a more reliable and safer road network where we intervene. It will be data-driven and supported by sound engineering judgement and address the problem in a more meaningful and sustainable manner. Officials are finalising work on a draft road maintenance strategy that I will then be able to share more widely. As Members know, public finances are limited, and we have a lot to do to make up for the years of austerity and underfunding, but I am committed to ensuring that people are at the heart of funding decisions and that we do all that we can to be efficient and effective in delivering public services.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

You do not have time for a supplementary question, Mr Dunne. We now move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr McNulty asked the Minister for Infrastructure, having said that the A5 project has become a shameful embarrassment and that families are still burying their loved ones while her Department ties itself in knots with delay after delay, legal wrangling and failure to deliver, how the project has ended up where it is at and whether that is the result of systemic incompetence in her Department or whether responsibility for the calamitous failure lies with her or her Sinn Féin ministerial predecessor, John O'Dowd. (AQT 1541/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Let me be clear: the A5 has been an issue for many years, as the Member rightly pointed out. I will not say that that is because of the incompetence of officials, because I know that they have been working extremely hard. Many of them live in or are from the area and are passionate about the scheme. The Member's colleague can shake his head all that he wants, but have respect for the people who have put their heart and soul into delivering the scheme.

The reality is that we are into new territory with the Climate Change Act. Despite what people have said, I work closely with my colleague in DAERA. Prior to my involvement, officials had been meeting him frequently and dealing with the scheme as comprehensively and robustly as possible. My focus now is on delivering for those families, on delivering for the communities in and around the A5 and on working with counterparts in the South. I have met representatives from across the island who all have a passion for the project and want to see it delivered. That is what my focus is on, and it is what I continue to work towards. I will not be distracted by petty party politics. A number of Ministers have been involved with the scheme, not just those from Sinn Féin.

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

Mainly from Sinn Féin.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I am not too sure what role your Minister played, but I will not get into that. The priority for me is to deliver the scheme. Let us work together. Let us work collaboratively and get it over the line. That is what I am determined to do.

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

Minister, you are the responsible for delivering the project. With respect, you have not answered the question. Families do not want more excuses; they want accountability. Who is responsible for the failure? When will you finally guarantee delivery of the A5, without further mess-ups from you and your Department?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

If the Member can point to the mess, I will happily look into it. The judge's comments were very clear. He recognised that every effort had been made to get the scheme delivered. It is an issue that we have to look at, and that is why I am going through the appeal process. I am telling the Member now that I am determined that we will deliver the scheme.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

T2. Mr Blair asked the Minister for Infrastructure, as we move into autumn, whether she will consider trialling a flood protection scheme for commercial properties, similar to the homeowner flood protection scheme that is already in place. (AQT 1542/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As the Member knows, I am taking legislation on flood management through the House. Maybe we can have a discussion as part of that process. At present, as the Member knows, we have a scheme in place for homeowners. I am happy to have a conversation to see whether one for commercial properties is something that we can do in the Department and whether Departments can work together. As the Member also knows, the Department for the Economy has stepped in previously to assist in the aftermath of flooding, so there is definitely a conversation to be had. Through my Department, there are flood alleviation schemes in place for town and city centres to try to address the issue. I will, however, consider anything more specific that is brought to me.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that. I assure her that I would welcome such a conversation, having previously raised, on a number of occasions, flooding in Antrim town and the flood risk on all stretches of the Sixmilewater river, for example, which affects residential properties and, indeed, commercial properties. Is the delivery of the flood alleviation plans in a timely way any closer than it was the last time I asked?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Having had similar issues in my constituency, I know how important that is, particularly as we move into autumn. We have seen how heavy the rain has been over the past few days. It is anticipated that the feasibility study for the scheme will be completed by summer 2026. If you write to the Department, I will be happy to provide further details about the scheme and the next steps.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

T3. Mr McAleer asked the Minister for Infrastructure to provide an update on the A5 appeal. (AQT 1543/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

As I said, that is evidently a key issue not just for me as the Minister but for everyone involved. It is no surprise that the outcome of the ruling was extremely disappointing — that is probably an understatement — not just for me and the Department but for everyone involved, including the local representatives who have long supported the project.

As you know, we lodged the appeal, which is now due to be heard in December. That is necessary in order to resolve the important points of law that will affect all the concerned parties. While my immediate priority is the preparation of the most robust appeal that we can submit, as I have said previously, my ultimate aim remains the delivery of the A5. I am fully committed to doing all that I can to ensure that we get to that point as quickly as possible. At present, we are working through the appeal and the legal case, and it would be remiss of me to say more than that at this stage.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, given the huge importance of the project for the north-west of Ireland, for no one more than the families who have tragically lost loved ones along the route, will the Minister agree that it is important that we all work together to make sure that the scheme comes to fruition?

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Absolutely. We all want to see the same thing and get there as quickly as possible. Any more time without the new road means a risk of more lives being lost. The judge said that lives would be lost if we did not get the scheme delivered as soon as possible. I have engaged with groups such as the Enough is Enough campaign and have worked closely with representatives from the area, because I recognise that, if we work collaboratively, we can achieve exactly what we want to achieve.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

T4. Mr McReynolds asked the Minister for Infrastructure what road safety legislation her officials are working on, given that, in her response to Mr Kelly, she mentioned that road funding had been increased and will be used to reinstate campaigns. (AQT 1544/22-27)

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I mentioned the school bus legislation, and I indicated earlier this year that I am keen to introduce legislation on overtaking school buses. We are working through that, and I am being provided with advice on the best way forward. We are looking at areas such as the use of mobile phones when driving and drug-driving and drink-driving penalties, to name a few. If the Member wants more detail on that, I am happy for him to write to me on anything that I have missed.