Northern Ireland Assembly, 13 October 2025

526 contributions from 64 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Before we begin today's business, it is important that I, as Speaker, recognise that last week was extremely disturbing, with the despicable events of the bomb attack at the constituency office of Liz Kimmins and then the mob that gathered at the home of Naomi Long. The Assembly was established on the principle that, whatever differences we have — we have plenty of them — we express them through the democratic process in the Chamber; not on the streets through violence, intimidation, threats or harassment. The Assembly should, therefore, stand as one to condemn attacks on constituency offices and intimidation at people's family homes. Politicians are as entitled to privacy and a family life as any other member of the community.

I wrote to Members on Friday about an event that I will be hosting with the PSNI next week to highlight its MLA safety strategy. Members will have the opportunity to seek advice from the PSNI and Assembly officials on the support available to them. I encourage all Members to take that opportunity. All parties agree that it is of serious concern that abuse and harassment and last week's extremist incidents have reached a point where they not only have an impact on serving Members but risk deterring people, in particular, women, from seeking election or re-election to this place.

I will conclude by saying that we have to challenge the notions that politicians should somehow be able to accept abuse, attacks and intimidation as a normal part of their job. It is not, and it cannot be allowed to be, the case. Thank you, Members.

Matters of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Eóin Tennyson has been given leave to make a statement on the intimidation towards Naomi Long at her home, which fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. If Members wish to be called, they should rise in their place and continue to do so. Members will have up to three minutes to speak. I remind Members that there will be no interventions.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I utterly condemn the disgraceful intimidation that took place at the home of Minister Naomi Long and Councillor Michael Long last week. I also take the opportunity to express my solidarity to Minister Liz Kimmins and Dáire Hughes MP on the foot of the disgraceful attack experienced at their office.

Last week was a shameful week for Northern Ireland. An attack on any politician from this Chamber is an attack on our democratic process. Naomi and Michael have been in public life for over 25 years. They are no shrinking violets. They have never shied away from robust debate, engagement with people from different perspectives and robust public scrutiny. When a mob of over 40 people — some of whom were in masks — gathered at their home in the dark of night, it was not protest or scrutiny. It was intimidation, abuse and harassment. The irony is not lost on me that many of those in that mob who intimidated a woman in her family home, a Minister with a stronger record than anyone in the Chamber on tackling violence against women and girls in our society, would have claimed to be defenders of women and girls.

It is also true that the scenes last week have not developed in a vacuum. We have seen the rise of far right misinformation and disinformation, driven by malign elements, over months and years. We also have a responsibility in the Chamber. The words uttered in this Building are not without consequence. We all must now reflect on the tone and tenor of our contributions to public discourse.

For our part, Alliance will not be deterred from working for everyone in our community and standing up for the shared, inclusive and united future to which I believe the majority of people in Northern Ireland aspire. My party is no stranger to intimidation and abuse. However, I am conscious that, in all those years of protests, attacks on offices and threats towards public representatives, a mob has never turned up outside the private sanctuary of one of our elected representatives. It is the first time that such an incident has occurred, and we must all resolve that it surely has to be the last.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I utterly condemn the actions that occurred outside the home of Michael and Naomi Long last week. It was a dark week for politics here: as Mr Tennyson and the Speaker have said, there were attacks on my colleagues' constituency office and then the mob outside Naomi Long's home. There is no justification for that. It is completely unacceptable. I hope that we never again witness the scenes that we saw last week.

Language and rhetoric have emanated from the Chamber in recent weeks that have not helped matters. Week in, week out, we have heard a bingo card of dangerous rhetoric from the unionist Benches. It is not enough to stand in the Chamber and condemn those recent actions. Condemnations with a "but" are not condemnations. What message are some Members across the Chamber sending out? Week in, week out, it is a message of fear and suspicion. Members have a responsibility to speak factually about the important issues that face our communities, not to send out lazy dog whistles. We have seen a rise in that over recent weeks and months. There can be no justification for the shameful actions that we saw last week. I hope that no one else, in the Chamber or anywhere else, has to suffer the attacks and abuse that our colleagues suffered last week.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I, too, condemn the intimidation that we all witnessed last week through not only the attack on Sinn Féin's constituency offices but the mob that turned up at a politician's private residence. Naomi and Michael Long have my sympathy, as do the Sinn Féin representatives. It is absolutely wrong to go to someone's sanctuary — their private family home. However, this is not the first time that it has happened. I recall when a mob surrounded the home of councillor Maurice Mills, a district policing partnership chairperson in Ballymena, way back in, I think, the late '90s. Sammy Brush is another person who comes to mind. No one has a monopoly on intimidation. Many unionist politicians from all ilks and parties have suffered intimidation. It is really important that the parties here do not use the atrocious behaviour of last week for political point-scoring. That is absolutely atrocious. Only last week, one of my colleagues had graffiti sprayed on his constituency office. That was not mentioned by this party. I was the victim of a libellous whispering campaign, also only last week. That was not mentioned in the Chamber. Why would I mention it? We all suffer the same activities.

Parties should be very careful not to exploit such atrocious actions for political point-scoring. Even today, when we have the opportunity to unite, we have had attack. That is horrific, and I will tell you why: it is the Chamber that should fill any void or vacuum. The Chamber is where we hold Ministers and politicians to account. The Chamber is where there must be robust debate. The Speaker is a champion of robust debate in the Chamber, as I am. No political party should seek to score political points in order to diminish our role as scrutinisers of this place, of Departments and of individual Ministers. That is what concerns me about what I have heard this morning from the two Members who have spoken. It is wrong to use that atrocious behaviour for a political point-scoring manoeuvre. I ask the Members who have spoken to consider their wording and remember that the Chamber that we sit in is the champion of democracy, and that there should be robust debate.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

Mr Speaker, I associate myself and my party with your remarks at the outset. Normally, on matters such as this, most Members say, "I would like to associate myself with the comments of all Members", but, unfortunately, on this occasion, I cannot do that. What we saw last week was wholly unacceptable. There is no justification whatsoever for it. The intimidation outside the Sinn Féin constituency office of Dáire Hughes MP and Minister Liz Kimmins was totally unacceptable. Those are actions of the past that nobody in this place wants to see happen now and many did not want to see happen in the past.

I thank the Member for submitting the Matter of the Day. When I heard what had occurred outside Naomi and Michael Long's home, I was appalled. I am not often on Twitter, for some of the very reasons that have been discussed, but I immediately took to Twitter to show my solidarity with Naomi and Michael. In this place, we often have robust debate, and that is what it is: robust debate. Ministers, Members and parties are held to account, but there is no justification for the actions that we saw last week. Those who were responsible should not only desist from but reflect on their actions. Anybody who attempts to justify such actions is plainly wrong, and I challenge them also.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Let me be clear: there is no place in our society, or in any democratic society, for threats, intimidation or harassment, especially against those who stand up and step forward to serve the public, and there never was. We may sit on different Benches and stand for different things, and we may disagree, often passionately, on direction, policy and approach, but there is and must always be one fundamental truth: violence and threats are not tools of political expression. They are tools of fear, division and destruction. Minister Long has shown strength, courage and dedication in her role. The recent intimidation of her at her family home and the recent intimidation of Minister Kimmins and her colleagues at their office are attacks not just on those people as individuals or on their political parties but on democracy itself.

We in the SDLP have always stood against violence and threats, and we stand firmly with our colleagues from different parties and their families. I call on everyone here and on every leader in our communities to stand united not only in condemnation but in action.

We must challenge the culture that allows and, sometimes, even encourages such behaviour to fester. We must ensure that voices of peace always shout louder than those of hatred. The Assembly must be a place of civil discourse even when our differences are huge. We owe that to one another, but, more importantly, we owe it to the people whom we represent.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I join Members in condemning the protest outside the home of the Justice Minister. Regardless of the public profile of any of us in the Chamber, we are all entitled to a private family life. There is a fundamental right to freedom of speech and to protest, and those are values that I will always defend, but I do not want to see protesters outside my house and will not defend anyone who goes to protest outside another politician's house.

Of course, one cannot comment on such an event without noting the irony of some who have commented on that protest continuing to defend the murder of Rev Robert Bradford MP, who was shot while sitting behind a desk at a constituency surgery. It is the height of hypocrisy for Mrs O'Neill to express concern about protests being directed at politicians while she continues to defend the murder of Rev Robert Bradford and similar horrors.

I must express my disappointment at the way in which the Alliance Party has sought to use the protest. As I understand it, the protest was about the housing of alleged sex offenders, yet the Alliance Party sought to use it to delegitimise criticism of their decision to side with Sinn Féin on the Irish language debate in Belfast City Hall and to attack those who pointed out their backing of an amendment in the House, tabled by the Old Bailey bomber, which removed from a motion the distinction between innocent victims and the Shankill bomber, who blew himself up. The incident outside Mrs Long's home was wrong, but it cannot be used to delegitimise and to silence criticisms in the Chamber. We have heard it from the Alliance Party today, and we have heard it from Sinn Féin — their little helpers — who like to try to use other means. I say this to the Alliance Party: what happened outside Mrs Long's house was wrong but do not bring in other decisions that you have taken in an attempt to muddy the waters.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

There is no doubt that the right to protest should be respected and protected for everyone. Protest is a human right and a vital mechanism for holding those who are in power to account. What happened outside the Justice Minister's house on Wednesday evening was no protest, however, and it was not legitimate protest. Individuals showing up in masks outside a family home is a blatant act of intimidation and harassment and should be condemned, as should the attack on the Infrastructure Minister's office last week.

Everyone has the fundamental right to privacy. That right should extend even to those with whom we have significant political disagreements. It should extend to Ministers, MLAs, councillors and, most importantly, to citizens. Acts of personal intimidation are completely unacceptable and clearly cross a line. It is worth commenting on the fact that some parties think that it is OK for the Alliance Party to be upset as long as they do not dare to mention anything political that is obviously connected to the attack. It is political — of course it is. Shame on those who try to limit the conversation.

We cannot ignore the role that far right agitators have played, in recent weeks and months, in whipping up fear and spreading misinformation in Belfast and beyond. A few ringleaders have repeatedly violated the right to peaceful protest in Belfast and beyond, going up to people's faces, filming them, jeering at them and harassing them in an attempt to provoke those peaceful protesters. They dox those protesters online and, quite often, publish personal information such as names and workplaces. That, again, is harassment and intimidation, and it needs to be condemned and called out.

Those who engage in racist, far right dog-whistling instil fear in those whom they claim to protect with their vigilante patrols and protests outside family homes in east Belfast and elsewhere. I fully condemn those anti-democratic, cowardly acts of intimidation. I also condemn those who lead people to the top of the hill with their hate-filled, aggressive rhetoric and then, when the full consequences of their actions become apparent, walk away and say that it was nothing to do with them, whether that be in Belfast, Ballymena or elsewhere.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I begin by expressing my solidarity with Minister Naomi Long and her husband, Councillor Michael Long. What happened outside their home last week was not a protest; it was intimidation, and it was wrong. A genuine protest is open. It is about conviction and ideas. Intimidation is about fear. When people cover their faces and target a private home, it is not about being heard; it is about silencing someone else. That is not democracy in action; it is an attack on it.

We need to be honest about how we got here, however. As a society, we have started to dehumanise politicians and to forget that behind every decision and debate is a person: someone who goes home to a family who did not choose public life and did not sign up for the abuse that their loved one gets. No one — indeed, not politicians themselves — should have to make that sacrifice.

I do not know a politician who came into this job without good intentions. We may disagree, sometimes strongly, but most of us are here to make things better from our perspective. When we strip away that humanity and start to see people as fair game rather than fair citizens, we cross a dangerous line. We have seen where that leads: the murders of Jo Cox and David Amess.

As chair of the Women's Caucus, I have taken part in discussions about the growing abuse and intimidation that faces those in public life, particularly women. Mr Speaker, I appreciate your acknowledging that in your opening remarks and facilitating those discussions. It should never be normal for elected representatives to require security measures at their home or their offices, but that is now our reality.

Across the world, politics feels angrier and more polarised. We need to take a collective step back, because, ultimately, most of us, from the left, right or centre, are trying to reach the same place, which is safer communities, strong services and decent lives for the people whom we represent. Those who resort to threats or intimidation do not defend democracy; they dismantle it. You can hold strong views and still show respect. That is what democracy requires: disagreement without dehumanisation.

Let us send a united message that intimidation has no place in Northern Ireland politics and that our differences must never be met with fear. Let us stand up not only for Naomi Long, Liz Kimmins and Dáire Hughes but for every person who believes that democracy should be a contest of ideas, not a battle of intimidation.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I also unequivocally condemn the terrible scenes outside the Justice Minister and Councillor Long's house, as, last week, I condemned the terrible attack at the constituency office of Minister Kimmins and the graffiti attack on Mr Frew's constituency office. I genuinely believe that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us in this place and that we all have a responsibility to defend democracy.

I am afraid, however, that democracy is under two attacks today: the attack from the mobs outside, and the attack from those in here who want to silence accountability and scrutiny and link the actions of a mob with the legitimate voice of people in the Chamber. That is shameful.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Dog whistle.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

When democracy is attacked, the answer is more democracy, more scrutiny and more accountability.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Not violence.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Let me address something. I know what it is like to be attacked in your own home and not to feel safe in it. I lived under serious threat. I lived behind armoured glass. Members of my family sent me messages this week saying that an Alliance MLA had blamed me —

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Grow up.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

— for what happened outside

[Interruption.]

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

There we go. Typical.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

We talk about civility in the House, and I am told to grow up

[Interruption.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

[Inaudible.]

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

No points of order.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

For me, as someone who has crossed the road to help people and who has had bones broken for helping people in need, to be blamed for bringing scrutiny and accused that my solidarity with the Justice Minister was somehow "feigned" — that is the language that a Member used — went against every fibre in my body. My nieces and nephews read those tweets. They read the responses to them. I express my full solidarity with the Justice Minister. The people who gathered outside her house were a mob. I am sure that the Ulster Unionist Party gets no support from them whatsoever. I know that some of the very same people were highly critical of my party's role during COVID, because many of them are anti-vaxxers. I condemn outright what happened outside the Longs' house. I condemn outright what happened at Minister Kimmins's constituency office.

Sinn Féin lectures us about our language and actions when it still defends the murders of thousands of people. Many people would have loved to have had only a protest outside their house instead of a masked man planting a bomb under their car or assassinating their father as he got into his car to go to work. Shame on you. We will defend democracy and challenge what happens out there, but we will also be robust in our scrutiny in this place.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That brings that Matter of the Day to a conclusion. I encourage Members to reflect on all the issues. We need to ensure that such things do not happen and that our constituency offices and homes are safe places. We also need to ensure that we are able to engage fully in the Chamber so that people outside do not feel the need to vent in some way. There is not any justification for people having engaged in what they engaged in last week. We have this place, our council chambers, Westminster and so on to which people can come and debate issues on behalf of the public who elected them. That is where such things should happen.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Member for South Belfast Ms Bradshaw has now left the Chamber, but, during Mr Burrows's contribution, I am confident that I heard her say, from a sedentary position, as Mr Burrows reflected on the terrorist threats that he had to endure that caused him to have to move house, the words "Grow up". Mr Speaker, if possible, I ask you to detect whether that was said, confirm that it was the case and then rule on whether it was appropriate language to have come from the Member for South Belfast.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The point has been noted. We will look at that. As we move forward, I encourage all Members to engage in a way that is constructive and, as far as is possible —.

[Interruption.]

Order, please. We are straying from the subject a bit here. I encourage all Members to engage in a constructive way. We do not want another week like last week. We need to send a very clear message from the Chamber that we do not want it and that it is not acceptable. We need to send a message to the community and to those who engage in such activity that it is not acceptable. That needs to be the clear message from the House today.

Before we move on to the next item of business, I welcome back our colleague Ms Nicholl, who was off on maternity leave. Congratulations on the birth of your baby. I trust that you will be able to settle in once again and that we will be able to get on with business with you here.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Timothy Gaston has been given leave to make a statement on the Gaza ceasefire agreement, which fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. The usual rules apply. If Members wish to speak, they must rise in their place, and they will have up to three minutes in which to contribute.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I welcome the fact that, over two years after Hamas started the conflict, which, my goodness, began with the biggest massacre of Jews since the Second World War, it is finally drawing to a conclusion. I commend the work of President Donald J Trump and his team, which was vital in getting us to this point. Although many in the Chamber have unjustly attacked him, with even the First Minister using Gaza as the pretext for skipping a state banquet that was held to mark his visit to the UK, it was his Administration, not speeches from Sinn Féin Back-Benchers, who got us to where we are today.

What has happened today? The hostages who remain alive have returned home to Israel. At the conflict's outset, Israel made it clear that that was her objective. She has certainly achieved it. Now, with the return of the hostages, the war is all but ended. Those who have sought to slander the world's only Jewish state by suggesting that it had a policy of genocide towards the Palestinians have been proved wrong.

However, while I welcome the deal, I want to make it clear today that I recognise that it is not easy. The calling of the ceasefire has resulted in Hamas terrorists, once again, openly taking to the streets of Gaza. Hamas is the only army in the world that wears civilian clothes during the war and then puts on uniforms during ceasefires. Perhaps that is why it finds favour with fellow travellers in the House, but that must be very galling to the innocent victims of Hamas terrorism. My mind also turns to those who, as a result of the deal, will see the murderers of their loved ones released from the jails in Israel. That includes Mahmoud Atallah, who was serving a life sentence for killing a Palestinian woman whom he suspected of cooperating with Israel, and the members of the Hamas terror cell who carried out multiple bombings circa 2002 in east Jerusalem and elsewhere, some of whom are convicted of murder amongst other things. That reality is shamefully airbrushed by many, but I say to our friends in Israel that your pain and the injustice that you feel with that element of the deal resonates with many of us here in this part of the United Kingdom.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

We must hope that the ceasefire announcement in Gaza will now mark a step change in guaranteeing a durable peace process for Palestine and the Middle East. It must open up a pathway to Palestinian self-determination and national sovereignty.

For two years, Israel has relentlessly bombarded the Gaza Strip, making it a graveyard for international law and the most dangerous place on the planet for a child to live. Israel has waged a genocidal war against the Palestinian people while being given political cover, funding and weapons by the US, Britain and other Western states. At the same time, annexation and ethnic cleansing are being systematically implemented in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. All of that must end if there is to be a permanent peace for Palestine and Israel. Therefore, the talks breakthrough presents a pivotal moment for the Palestinian people. It holds within it potential and significant challenges.

The immediate focus must be to alleviate the suffering and the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza. A potential opportunity now exists to establish a peace process based upon continuing negotiations that address all issues. New phases of talks must address the root causes of Israel's illegal occupation and apartheid system in Palestine and the creation of a permanent peace process, established within the framework of international law. Success will depend on all sides committing to negotiate with good faith. Agreements made must be honoured, and guarantees on implementation will be essential. That extends to all guarantors, holding Israel to its commitments and ensuring a withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the West Bank and from Gaza and the demilitarisation of the overall situation. In the meantime, increased global pressure to ensure compliance with international law is more urgent than ever. Multilateral institutions, the Arab world and progressive Governments and parties throughout the international community must act together and speak with one voice to ensure that the Palestinian people and their thirst for peace and justice and national freedom will finally be achieved.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We remember October 7, when thousands of Hamas terrorists invaded the state of Israel. Over 1,200 victims were murdered, slaughtered — women and babies — by terrorism. Hundreds were taken hostage, held captive in the dungeons of Gaza. Israel rightly responded and mobilised the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). To the men and women of the IDF, we say, "Thank you". Israel and the rest of the world owe them a debt of gratitude for the work that they have carried out. They have decimated Hamas, and terrorists such as Al-Zawahiri have gone to face judgement in eternity. The Iranian nuclear arms have been destroyed — thank you, Mr Trump, for Operation Midnight Hammer, which destroyed their nuclear facilities. The Houthi leadership has been taken out. Hezbollah bleeped into eternity when their pagers went off. Thank you to the IDF.

The lands of Canaan were given to the people of Israel by God. It is the Promised Land, surrounded by enemies, the only democracy in the Middle East. Dictatorship and authoritarian regimes abound in those Arab nations, which refused to open their borders to the people of Gaza to let them in. Israel, a diverse community — a pluralist, liberal community, because it is the only democracy in the Middle East — was failed by the United Nations. It was let down. It was let down by the Republic of Ireland and let down by the United Kingdom, who both recognised a Hamas-led Palestinian state. President Trump made the difference. He has delivered peace through strength. The operations in Iran, the work with the Arab nations — he brought them to the table and secured the concessions from Hamas. We now have hope for a better future for the people of Israel and a better future for the people of Gaza, free from the tyranny of terrorists who used their own people as human shields. There was no genocide. There was terrorism that used its own people.

We are commanded to pray for the peace of Jerusalem. There is a season for everything; a time for peace and a time for war. I trust that the time for war is over and that we will now have that time for peace.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

A Jewish woman approached me a few years ago and said, "What is happening in Gaza is not an orange or green issue: it is a humanitarian issue". As a mother of three children, when I started engaging in the conversations around what was happening in Gaza, the real turning point for me was the death of Hind Rajab. I think about that almost every week. I do not say, "Thank you" to the murder in a car of a terrified child who was waiting to be rescued. I do not say, "Thank you" to anyone who is responsible for the death of any person. You can condemn what happened on 7 October and condemn the genocide that ensued at the same time. It does not have to be either/or. What strikes me about this is that, so often in this Chamber, we hear about Christian values. I do not know, maybe I have not read the Bible that recently, but I learned from it about love and humility, not judging, and the importance of treating people with kindness and respect. There is no justification for what has happened.

I started chairing an informal working group with members of the Palestinian community and interested MLAs and activists well over a year and a half ago. I remember a man who had just returned from Gaza coming to talk to us about what he had witnessed. It was harrowing. He talked about walking down a street with a child on his back and praying that the child would not see the dead bodies along the way. What sort of world are we living in where that happens; where children are exposed to that? What sort of world are we living in when politicians justify any violence?

This is a moment of hope for Israelis and Palestinians. I watched on TV the hostages being released. I can only imagine what their families went through: the fear for their lives. I can only imagine what they went through. It is awful, but what has happened in Palestine — in Gaza — is also awful. We do not have to make it either/or; we can just make it about humanity.

Several Members and I went to a very moving house of mourning with the Palestinian community. It ended in Muslim and Christian prayer, because it is not only Muslims who have been killed; Christians have been killed as well. I hope that this is the start of better for the people in Palestine and Israel. The only way that we can have lasting peace is if there is a two-state solution and people work for our common humanity. There is so much division in our politics and world. We need to remember our humanity, and we need to do better.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Today — 13 October — is Hoshana Rabbah, the final day of Succoth. It is the day on which Jewish people everywhere pray and look to the fate of the new year. As we have seen from the joyous scenes in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, today is also one of significant hope. The 20 living hostages are being restored to their families, friends and loved ones after two years of horror, barbarity, torture, sexual abuse and mental torment. Their recovery will be long and arduous, but I am sure that all here will join me in praying for their eventual healing.

It is also a time of immense sadness, not only for the families of the dead hostages who were murdered by Hamas and other Palestinians but for the millions across the world who were affected by the barbarity of 7 October. For them, there is no joy of reuniting and the resumption of disrupted lives. Instead, there will be further mourning and pain. They, too, are at the forefront of our prayers, and my prayers, today. The murder of those people, including women and children, will forever remain a stain on the Palestinian terrorists and those in Gaza who facilitated their murder and torture and the desecration of their remains. It is also a stain on those useful idiots and fellow travellers who chanted for global "infitada" and rivers to the sea while giving agency to the global surge of antisemitism, no less than on this Island. As we can continue to see, those lies are not only unproven but a clear example of propaganda and add to the Jew hate, which, ironically, purports to be the truth for far too many in the Chamber and elsewhere.

For those who say that there was "no alternative" to terror, the reality is this: if 7 October had not happened, many thousands would still be alive. The paradox is that the Iranian-instigated Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, Sinn Fein's presidential-pick and friend, Assad in Syria and thousands of other useful idiots were all designed by Iran to destroy the Abraham peace accords and enable Iran to develop its nuclear bomb. Right now, Israel has restored deterrence; on 22 June, Iran's nuclear programme lay buried under 400 feet of rock; Hezbollah has been emasculated; the Houthi leadership has been destroyed; Assad, much to Catherine of Galway's chagrin, is gone; and Hamas has been crushed. However, more importantly, the restoration of the peace process and the normalisation of politics in the Middle East between the Gulf States and the Saudis has been achieved. That has been done by the support and help of one man: the president of the United States of America, Donald Trump, who several parties in the Assembly would not deign to meet during a trade mission. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Donald J Trump today.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

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

First, I pause and reflect on a moment of hope amid a world that is frightening, divided and full of destruction. The release of the hostages who are living, and, hopefully, the speedy release of remains, is something that any human being with an ounce of morality has to welcome. The actions of Hamas on 7 October were not just wrong but appalling and against the interests of the Palestinian people. I have no difficulty with saying that. It has to be said. However, some of the Members opposite who have made related points cannot bring themselves to acknowledge the more than 60,000 Palestinians, many of whom were children, who have been killed in the past two years. Frankly, I find it unconscionable that Members can fail to acknowledge those lost lives. We, as individual representatives, need to take a long, hard look at ourselves if we cannot acknowledge that scale of human loss.

The peace plan is welcome, but I will not say, "Thank you" to Donald Trump, as some Members opposite want us to. I think that President Trump is a force for destruction in the world. On this occasion, I welcome the fact that there has been specific progress in relation to peace, so I will not be churlish about that, but there is a long, long way to go. I hope that there is a glimmer of progress for peace and stability in that region and the pathway to a viable and just Palestinian state.

Lots has been said about the security of Israel. It is important to say, although it has not been acknowledged, that many hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been wholly opposed to the regime of Benjamin Netanyahu. They have dissociated themselves from the genocide that has happened by their state — they have called it a genocide, by the way — but, for them to live in security, alongside that, there has to be a durable Palestinian state, living in peace and justice in Gaza and the West Bank. Gaza has been reduced to rubble. There will have to be accountability for the war crimes that were perpetrated against innocent Gazans. The West Bank is being systematically hollowed out by settler aggression and terrorism. Those issues will have to be dealt with going forward.

Mr Givan was wrong, by the way, when he said that Hamas is in charge of the Palestinian state. That is incorrect. The Palestinian state is run from the West Bank and is led by Fatah, which is an entirely different political movement, but I am afraid that it just speaks to some of the misinformed polemic that we hear from across the Chamber when it comes to those issues.

I hope today that there is a moment of peace for all those tens of thousands of Gazans who have lost their lives. I am glad to see the hostages returned. They should never have been taken in the first place. Like others, I hope and pray for progress.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Despite the self-congratulatory scenes and the back patting in the Knesset, it is awful to see warmongers gloat and celebrate. It remains unclear, at this stage, whether it is a sustainable and long-term plan for peace and justice for Palestinians and everyone in the Middle East, but I hope that it is.

Despite saying it a thousand times, it is worth repeating that the violence in the Middle East and the problems in and around Palestine did not begin on 7 October. They began in 1948 with al-Nakba, or the catastrophe, and the decades that preceded it, with the colonial expansion, settlement and theft of land, which was not owned by people who came to Palestine. It was all backed by colonial regimes in Britain, France, America and elsewhere. No doubt, the Palestinians hope and pray that there will be a lasting ceasefire and justice. However, early indications show already that the imperial meddling that has caused so much devastation and destruction for decades looks set to continue.

The fingerprints of Tony Blair are all over the deal. He is a warmonger and should have no role in determining the future for people anywhere in the world, least of all the Middle East. In the hours after the deal was finalised, we saw Israel's intentions. Palestinians in Gaza who were relieved and celebrating the ceasefire were still being killed. We saw Palestinian journalist Saleh Aljafarawi slaughtered by Israel after the ceasefire was announced, bringing the total number of journalists killed to at least 223, which is higher than all journalists killed in all the wars combined in the 20th century. Journalists are killed because Israel does not want the truth to get out. On top of that, we saw 10 Palestinians killed in Gaza after the ceasefire was announced.

There are huge questions about what happens now in the West Bank. Will settlers be allowed to continue their violence and the stealing of land or will that stop? I hope that the ceasefire remains, and despite the genocidal denial going on in the House, hundreds of millions of people across the world will not go back into their boxes and will not go back into their homes. They are awakened to the fight to end apartheid and for a free, sustainable Palestinian state.

The Member to my right used the term "idiots". I would not be as ungracious to call anyone an idiot in the House, but I remind him that it is not "infitada". He should maybe go and learn some Arabic, as the word that he is looking for is "intifada", and it is Arabic for uprising, despite his propagation of mistruths.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

Like many across the Chamber, I welcome the reports of progress towards a ceasefire in Gaza. I do so cautiously, because hopes have been raised and dashed so many times that it is difficult to feel optimism without scepticism. However, if the agreement offers even the faintest possibility of ending the unbearable suffering that so many have endured, we must hold on to that hope.

I have never taken a side in the conflict because, in truth, I do not know much about it and, also, because I feel quite hopeless about being able to change anything. However I have always looked towards the inhumanity of what we have seen and been on the side of the children who have lost their parents; the parents who are searching for children; the children who have been emaciated; and the families, on both sides of the horror, who have been torn apart by violence. The brutal attacks and hostage taking that happened on October 7 were inexcusable and horrific, but so, too, is what followed: the relentless destruction, the displacement of a population and the denial of basic human dignity to millions of people.

When we look at the images coming out of Gaza, we are not watching a conflict between equals; we are witnessing people — men, women and children — who are trapped in a place where survival itself has become political. There are no winners in that, only loss. I give credit to the White House and others for the diplomacy that may have brought us to this point. It would be naive of any of us to think that the motives are entirely selfless, because geopolitics rarely is, but, if the consequence is peace or the beginning of it, that is a moment worth acknowledging. My hope, and the hope of all decent people, is that the ceasefire, if it holds, will be more than just a pause in violence and the start of a process that restores humanity; rebuilds lives; and allows Palestinians and Israelis alike to live free from fear and oppression and to build a future in which the atrocities that we have witnessed since October 7 are not repeated.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Like so many in the Chamber, I welcome the ceasefire in Israel and Gaza, and I hope for a long and lasting peace. Over the past week and, indeed, the past two years, my thoughts have been with many people. I still think of the people who were attacked by Hamas on 7 October 2023 — over 1,200 people were murdered and over 250 were captured — and the families who have suffered the pain and loss of loved ones. My thoughts are with the people of the West Bank, who have suffered racial oppression, discrimination and land seizure, which has multiplied since October 2023.

My thoughts have been with the aid workers, the journalists, the Palestine Red Crescent Society, which many of us know as the British Red Cross, and the health workers from around the world who flew to the war zone to help, literally running into the line of fire. I have often thought of the women who have waited, in their makeshift tents or lying on carpets on the road, for word from their families about whether they will return from trying to get a even morsel of food.

Mostly, over the past two years, I have thought of the children. More than 20,000 children's lives have been lost — deaths caused by guns, bombs and man-made famine. I think of the many children who have expressed a desire to go to heaven so that they can be fed. I think of those children and hope that they have lasting relief from war. Peace in the Middle East is often seen as unachievable — a dream — but we cannot just hope. For the future of humanity, decency and morality, it must be a long and lasting peace.

Members' Statements

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome the Western Trust's decision to end consultation on the permanent removal of emergency general surgery from the South West Acute Hospital (SWAH). The consultation was flawed from the start. It lacked real engagement and public confidence, and ending it was the right call. However, the uncertainty for our community continues. It is now nearly three years since emergency general surgery was temporarily withdrawn from the SWAH. There have been three years of anxiety for patients, families and staff, and there is still no clear plan for the future. The Western Trust's so-called vision plan contains no timeline, no detail and no urgency. The people of Fermanagh and of west Tyrone deserve answers, and they deserve them now. In the interest of transparency, the Western Trust should publish the independent analysis that, it says, shows improved outcomes since surgery was removed from the SWAH, as well as the data on efforts to recruit permanent consultant surgeons. The public have a right to see that evidence.

I welcome the confirmation that the SWAH will remain an acute hospital, with a type 1 — 24/7 — emergency department, maternity services, an ICU and full resuscitation facilities. That commitment is essential and must be backed up with real delivery. Yesterday, I was made aware of a response to an FOI request from the local lobby group Save Our Acute Services (SOAS), which revealed that 26 new emergency medicine consultants are taking up post in hospitals across the North. That is welcome news, but the SWAH's type 1 emergency department is the only one that will not be getting any of those new consultants. Statistically, the SWAH treats one third of all emergency department patients in the Western Trust area. If there are to be three new emergency department consultant posts for the Western Trust, one of them obviously should be allocated to the SWAH.

The decision is deeply unfair to the SWAH staff, who continue to deliver an outstanding service under increasing pressure and sends entirely the wrong message about the future of our hospital. As the Western Trust's eagerly awaited vision plan is developed, the SWAH must be fully utilised as a cross-border acute hospital, as was originally intended. People in Fermanagh and in west Tyrone have fought hard for our hospital. We are proud of it, and we deserve a service that reflects that pride: one that is safe, sustainable and local.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Last week, we heard some deeply disturbing comments from the former Sinn Féin MP Michelle Gildernew, who stated on a BBC podcast that IRA murders were "justified". No murder is ever justified. Sinn Féin's relentless justification of IRA murders and its glorification of IRA murderers and terrorism is disgraceful and scoffs at innocent victims across this country. For the self-proclaimed First Minister for all to state that there was no alternative to IRA violence is pure hypocrisy. I apologise for quoting Sinn Féin member Michelle Gildernew, Mr Speaker, but, on the same podcast, she went on to say that Northern Ireland is a "shithole".

The mask truly slipped. Michelle Gildernew's outburst tells us everything that we need to know about Sinn Féin. The shock and disgust on the faces of the young people in front of whom she said that was clear. Her comment was unprofessional and disrespectful and showed outright hatred for our wee country, proudly spouted by a senior Sinn Féin member. It set out clearly what Sinn Féin thinks of this place and of the people here, including many of its own voters. Is that why its Ministers do not bother? Is that why the Minister for Infrastructure is happy to let the roads fall apart or why the Minister for the Economy fails to champion Northern Ireland, promote and support our businesses and celebrate their successes? Is that why the Minister of Finance sits back and blames British austerity for everything yet seeks to do little for people here himself?

Let me be clear that Northern Ireland is an amazing country, which I am proud to call my home. From its natural beauty to its boasts of amazing tourist attractions — the Mountains of Mourne, the Giant's Causeway, Titanic Belfast, the Fermanagh lakelands and many more — it is a special place with good people. There are many key facts that Sinn Féin chooses to ignore in its opinion of this place. In education, our pupils lead the way, outperforming their peers across Britain and the Republic. In healthcare, our NHS is free at the point of need, unlike in the Republic, where a visit to a GP costs €80. The Northern Ireland economy exported £65 billion worth of goods last year. It has attracted world-class investors and, with its strong agri-food sector, is leading the way in farming and fishing. Unemployment is Northern Ireland stands at 2·6%, which is lower than the Republic's 4·6%. Housing in Dublin is in crisis, while homeownership here is still within reach for our working families.

Northern Ireland benefits from being part of the world's sixth-largest economy, that of our United Kingdom. That is what Sinn Féin refuses to acknowledge. Northern Ireland works, and it works for everyone. I will always be proud to defend Northern Ireland and its place in our United Kingdom.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I will highlight road safety issues outside Downshire Primary School in Hillsborough. The Department for Infrastructure does not take a risk-management approach to road safety. Rather, it waits for something to happen and then reacts. Well, something happened near that school. A child who was hit by a car is now recovering, and we are so grateful for that, but the school community is rightly demanding decisive action not just for its school but for others across Northern Ireland.

In the past, parents vocalised the road safety risks at the school but concluded that it was going to take an incident to get change. We have now had a serious incident, but we cannot wait for a tragedy.

Active travel is a key objective for the Department, but, if we are to encourage more walking and cycling for our young people, it has to be safe. I hope that the Minister will instruct her officials to act with urgency to create a 20 mph zone at the school and to engage with the school, the PTA, the PSNI and elected representatives to deliver clearly marked and well-signposted pedestrian crossings near schools, parks and residential areas; lower speed limits in school zones and residential streets; the installation of speed bumps, raised crosswalks or other proven traffic-calming infrastructure; increased enforcement of speed limits and traffic laws during peak school commute hours; and prominent signage to alert drivers when entering areas of high child activity.

As a parent said to me, this is not simply a matter of convenience; it is a matter of public safety and moral responsibility. No parent should have to fear for their child's life while they are walking to school.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

The best place for the people of Northern Ireland is within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for our peace, prosperity, safety and security. That is something that the people of Northern Ireland need to hear more.

Members may have watched the recent BBC 'Panorama' programme that reported on how international drug cartels exploit the weaknesses of the Irish Defence Forces to flood Ireland and, by extension, the United Kingdom and Europe with cocaine. To hear the drug traffickers say, "Avoid British waters and focus on Irish waters, because the Irish have radios, but the British have ships", is a stark reminder of how vulnerable we and the entire west of Europe would be under a united Ireland. Thankfully, we have membership of NATO — the fifth largest military force in the world —— and we all live under the protection of our intelligence services, GCHQ and police services.

By being in the United Kingdom, we are safer from international terrorism, organised crime and, indeed, all the threats from countries such as North Korea, Iran, China and Russia. Furthermore, our peace is best protected in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland because there is an agreement that, largely speaking, has ended all violence. The republicans have given up and stood roundly defeated by the forces of law and order. Aside from the desperate remnants of dissidents, we now live in peace. To upset that by having a risky constitutional upheaval would be madness.

We are also better off as part of the UK with its big, deep and broad economy. The fifth largest economy in the world, it is a member of the World Bank and the IMF and is able to set its own interest rates and to deal with the shocks of things such as COVID or the credit crunch. That is why this country was able to give a preferential loan of £3·25 billion to the Irish Republic at a time when it needed it, which showed that we are always benevolent neighbours of the Irish Republic. The reality is that having a domestic market of 70 million people over a domestic market of five million allows the price of a chicken to be £5 in Northern Ireland and €8 in the Republic of Ireland. Young people were here with us earlier. In the Irish Republic, they would need an extra £25,000 to get on the housing ladder. It being 38% more expensive to live down south more than wipes out any increase in pay, and there is a huge risk of an economic shock from a united Ireland. As people begin to listen to the false narratives around a united Ireland, they will soon hear the facts that you are better off in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

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

This is Community Transport Week. Community transport is about so much more than a minibus. In rural parts of the North, distance can often be more than just miles on a map. It can mean the difference between getting the care that you need or going without. I will speak about those who bridge that gap: our rural transport organisations, in particular Armagh Rural Transport, which I visited last week. I give a shout-out to Dermot Mooney and Joanne Curran; two effervescent, relentless and determined live wires who make that organisation tick.

Every week, Armagh Rural Transport quietly ensures that hundreds of local people, many of whom are elderly, isolated or living with mobility challenges, can attend hospital appointments and GP visits and get vital treatments. For them, these are not luxury trips; they are lifelines. Without those services, many simply would not get there. We are talking about 8,000 trips in one year. Where would those patients, families and communities be without those trips? Imagine being an older person living miles from the nearest bus stop with no family care and facing a hospital appointment in Daisy Hill, Craigavon or Belfast. That is where Armagh Rural Transport steps in, with accessible minibuses and volunteer drivers offering door-to-door support, kindness and dignity. That is community spirit in action. It is people helping people. However, make no mistake: it is also healthcare delivery, because, when transport fails, so too does access to care. Missed appointments become missed diagnoses, health inequalities deepen and the cost, human and financial, rises. That is why we must say clearly that community transport is not optional. It is a cornerstone of an inclusive health system, yet many of those organisations, including Armagh Rural Transport, are operating under growing financial pressures, rising fuel costs, ageing vehicles and insecure funding streams.

Rural transport organisations need to be able to generate funds, and that can be done through group hire. They need sufficient capital funding to provide adequate buses, so, today, I make this call directly to policymakers and to the Executive parties: if we are serious about tackling health inequality, promoting rural inclusion and caring for all our citizens, sustainable funding for our community transport must be part of that commitment. Invest in it, protect it and build it into health planning, funding and rural policy, not as an afterthought but as a foundation. Funding levels must be increased to address unmet need, because every journey that Armagh Rural Transport and every rural transport organisation makes is more than a trip — it is statement that no one in our rural communities should be left behind.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Tá haemacrómatóis ghéiniteach orm, arb í an gearán géiniteach is coitianta i dtuaisceart na hEorpa í. Is féidir í a bhainistiú ach í a chóireáil in am. Ach tá mo dhála féin ar chuid mhór othar sa Tuaisceart, braitheann an cúram a fhaighimid ar an chód poist atá againn. Murab ionann agus i Sasana agus sa Bhreatain Bheag, áit a mbíonn coinní rialta ag othair le dochtúirí comhairleacha, níl aon chóras aontaithe sa Tuaisceart lena chinntiú go bhfuil maoirseacht rialta ó speisialtóirí ann. Tá maoirseacht rialta ó speisialtóirí ríthábhachtach le teacht roimh an ghalar, le deacrachtaí a bhainistiú agus le hothair a chur ar a suaimhneas.

Níl sin cóir, ceart ná inghlactha. Chuir an Deisceart samhail náisiúnta chúraim don haemacrómatóis i bhfeidhm, samhail lena gcinntítear go bhfuil rochtain ag othair ar sheirbhísí féithligin faoi stiúir dochtúirí teaghlaigh agus altraí. Is léir ón tsamhail náisiúnta na buntáistí a bhaineann le cur chuige atá in ord agus in eagar, rud atá fíorthábhachtach, ós rud é go meastar gur in iarthuaisceart na hÉireann — Tír Eoghain, Dún na nGall agus Doire — is mó agus is minice atá haemacrómatóis ghéiniteach le fáil.

Caithfidh an Roinn Sláinte samhail chaighdeánaithe don haemacrómatóis a bhunú anseo sa Tuaisceart. Ba chóir athbhreithnithe sainordaithe rialta le dochtúirí comhairleacha, conairí soiléire, agus teacht cothrom ar chóireáil chothabhála bheith sa tsamhail sin. Cuirfidh a leithéid de bhearta an cúram abhus ar aon dul le caighdeáin aitheanta ar fud na n-oileán seo, agus cuirfidh siad feabhas ar thorthaí sláinte fadtéarmacha. Bíonn athbhreithniú sainordaitheach le dochtúirí comhairleacha ann uair amháin i gceann gach aon trí bliana ar a laghad i ndlínsí eile. Creidim, ar mhaithe le sláinte an phobail, gur chóir dó sin bheith ina dhualgas orainn i dTuaisceart na hÉireann.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

The attack on the Irish language street sign at Shandon Park on Saturday was wrong and should be condemned. I say that without fear or favour. Attacks on all signs, and all criminality, should be called out at all times. I am able to say that, but other elements of the House, and, indeed, the media, seem not to want to say the same thing. They pretend that it does not happen and ignore it when it does not fit their narrow agenda.

In a podcast last week, a former Member of Parliament for Fermanagh and South Tyrone claimed with a straight face that she had never seen the blacking out of "London" on a Londonderry sign. I do not know whether she drives around wearing a balaclava, but I do not know how she could not have seen those defaced signs. Where are the police investigations, the media outrage and the political statements? Where are the police investigations, media outrage and political statements condemning bullet holes in the "welcome" signs at our international borders with the Irish Republic? There has been no comment from other political parties in the Chamber. My community sees the double standards in the House and the media, and we will call them out.

Just last week, the war memorial in Glengormley in my constituency was spray-painted and defaced. I am the only MLA who called that out. Where were the comments from the Member of Parliament for that constituency? Where was the media outrage? There was none. We see their double standards.

Last week, a former Member of Parliament and Sinn Féin Member called this country — the country that I love — a "shithole". Had I appeared in a programme and called —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member should take his seat for a minute. Another Member referred to that incident previously. That is not the language that we use in the House. If other people use it outside, we do not quote it. I urge both Members to find another means of expressing that.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Had I used such derogatory language about the Irish Republic, it would be front-page news. The BBC would hound me at my house, and Stephen Nolan would discuss it every single day. However, that passed off without comment from any of the parties opposite. Had I said that about the Republic of Ireland, the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin would call for my resignation. We see your double standards.

Later today, those parties can right their wrongs during the debate on our motion that calls for the removal of a discriminatory Irish language sign policy. The people of Northern Ireland will watch how their MLAs vote on that issue. The time for weasel words is over.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I take this opportunity to pay tribute to and congratulate Hazelwood Integrated Primary and Nursery School on its 40th anniversary. Hazelwood and Forge Integrated Primary School were two of the very first integrated primary schools in Northern Ireland.

Last Friday, I joined my colleague Councillor Sam Nelson in attending a fantastic celebration that was organised by the school to mark the occasion. It was also attended by some of the founding teachers and parents of children who attended back in 1985. Those parents and teachers demanded better for their children during what were some of the darkest days in the history of North Belfast and Northern Ireland. Local parents joined them and took inspiration from the bravery of those in South Belfast who had established Lagan College just four years previously. Asking for children from all backgrounds to be educated together was a bold move at the height of the Troubles. The founders chose the symbol of the dove to represent the peace and reconciliation that they hoped to be part of. That symbol is still part of the badge of Hazelwood Integrated Primary and Nursery School, and, on Friday, doves were released to mark the 40th anniversary of the school. Many in the community joined in that joyous occasion.

It was a bold move by the founders and parents back then to introduce integrated education to their local community. It feels as though the integrated sector should be further along than it is, 40 years later. That is the case not because of a lack of vision or lack of bravery from the many who took the step to introduce it in the early 1980s but because of a lack of support and vision from those in leadership. That is evidenced by the decision to turn down proposals for two integrated schools — Rathmore Primary School and Bangor Academy — despite 82% and 76% of parents, respectively, supporting the move. Integrated education plays a unique and significant role —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I remind the Member that that matter is in court and is potentially sub judice.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Apologies, Mr Speaker.

Integrated education plays a unique and significant role in bringing together children from all backgrounds. Friday was a joyous occasion that was celebrated by all the children and the school itself. I pay tribute to all the teachers, past and present, at Hazelwood Integrated Primary and Nursery School and to the principal for continuing to stand up for our community 40 years on.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

In our darkest moments, we all search for light, but it is a rare and extraordinary thing when someone takes their own darkness and heartbreak and uses them to help others to find their light. Following the sudden and devastating loss of his wife, Zipporah, Bernard Branagan was left to raise seven young, beautiful boys, with the eldest being just 10 years old and the youngest only five months old. It is impossible to imagine the pain and the weight of that loss, yet, in the midst of his grief, Bernard has found strength not only for himself and his family but for others who are walking the same difficult path. Rather than retreat from the world, Bernard chose to reach out. He decided that no one should ever feel alone in their grief. I have no doubt that Zipporah would be immensely proud of the strength that he has shown, the love that he continues to pour into their children and the compassion that he is now sharing with others in her memory.

Out of love, loss and incredible resilience, Bernard has created an event, Let's Share Grief, which is taking place on Tuesday 28 October in the Burrendale Hotel, Newcastle. The event will bring together people from all walks of life — people who have lost loved ones, people who are still trying to make sense of that loss and people who simply want to listen and support. It will be a safe, gentle space where stories can be shared. I know from my experience that grief changes you forever and never fully leaves, but, in time, you can learn to carry it differently. When you meet others who understand that journey, it lightens the load just a little. That is what makes Bernard so special. He is creating a space where people can find comfort, connection and courage in one another.

I have often heard it said that grief is the price that we pay for love, but, through Bernard's vision, we see that grief can also be a new source of compassion, connection and hope. The slogan for his event — "Let's turn grief into power" — is both powerful and profound. Those words capture the very essence of what Bernard has done. He has turned unimaginable pain into purpose. He has taken personal tragedy and transformed it into a movement of empathy, solidarity and healing. That is what true community looks like. Bernard is a beacon of light for so many, not because he has avoided pain but because he has embraced it with honesty and courage and shown that, even in loss, there can be life. Today, I pay tribute to Zipporah, Bernard and his children and to everyone who will gather at the Let's Share Grief event.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

This is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and it was a true joy to attend Cancer Focus' Pink Run yesterday. Well done and congratulations to all who were involved in that.

Today, I commemorate those who fought bravely and lost; congratulate those who have come out the other side; pay tribute and give heart to those who are currently in the fight; and send my best wishes to those who are waiting for appointments or results to find out whether they, too, must enter the fray. While every journey is different, and some are more severe than others, each one is a warrior in her own way. Credit, too, to their families and loved ones, who swallow their own thoughts, fears and worries for those they love in order to better support them by keeping a positive outward appearance. They are the people who carry us through. I express gratitude to those in healthcare and the various charities and volunteers who conduct research and provide support and guidance to the many women and, indeed, some men who are afflicted by this horrible disease.

Most importantly though, I want to call on all women and men, regardless of age, to check themselves. Do not wait until you are apparently the right age for a mammogram; build those checks into your routine now without delay. Get in the shower, lather up and start at your collarbone, feeling in small circles with your fingertips, including under your arms. Do not just feel the surface; press in, push and feel. You are checking for something that may feel like an apple or an orange pip. Pay attention to your body, and look to see whether there are changes to your nipples. Look for inversion, difference in shape, discharge, blood or even a persistent itch. If you notice any of those or find a lump, contact your GP immediately. Time is of the essence. There is no shame or embarrassment in being checked. In this case, it is absolutely better to be safe than sorry. Delay could mean the difference between having a lump removed or losing your breast or, indeed, your life. Forget about embarrassment or causing inconvenience to hard-pressed medical professionals. They have seen it all before, and they want people to come quickly. Delay could cost you dearly, so do not delay.

I went to an information evening in the East Belfast Community Development Agency that taught us how to feel for lumps and check ourselves, and, honestly, that may well have saved my life. I never checked myself before that. I was too young for a mammogram, and, like we all do, I did not think that it could happen to me. It was a pure accident that I found my lump, but, by the grace of God, I did, only because of its location. It did not show up on mammograms, and that, alone, demonstrates the need to check.

Members know, I hope, that it is not really my thing to share very personal things. The only reason that I ever have done so is to raise awareness about breast cancer. If, by sharing, I can encourage people to check themselves and it makes a difference to even one person, it is worth letting people know. Please, please check yourselves, and do it regularly. It could make all the difference in the world and save your life.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Tonight is not just another game. It is not just 90 minutes of football in Belfast. No, tonight, under the floodlights at Windsor Park, we welcome giants of world football, Germany. They are the 12th highest-ranked team in the world and have been world or European champions on seven occasions. They have done it all. Indeed, I read last night that Germany have lost only four of 107 World Cup qualifiers. However, let me say this: they have never faced the full-throttle passion of the green and white army in such a key game on our home turf. Germany will face our pride, and they will face serious noise — a noise that Windsor has never experienced before. Germany will walk out to a wall of green in Belfast.

While we are not the biggest country in world football and do not have the biggest-name world stars, my goodness, we have the biggest hearts. Full credit to Gary McAllister and the Amalgamation of Official Northern Ireland Supporters' Clubs, who are campaigning to drive home the importance of our doing our bit tonight by wearing green and turning up the noise. I have experienced German fans at home and away games, and, to their credit, they have been nothing but friendly. While we go into battle on the pitch, our fans will again show that there is mutual respect off it.

Our wee country has had highs and lows. We have seen lean years, cold nights and empty seats, but the green and white army never stopped turning up; they never stopped singing. Then, the magic started to come back. Having previously qualified for three World Cup Finals, at Euro 2016 in France, there were those goals against Ukraine — from Gareth McAuley's header and then Niall McGinn — the pride, the tears and the memories that live long. Tonight could be another of those nights — one of those games that you talk about for years. We go into the game with no fear. From Michael O'Neill, who will take charge of the national side for the 100th time, and from the lads who will wear that shirt — a shirt that we are so proud to wear all over the world — all we ask for is fight, belief and the never-say-die spirit that makes this place so special. Germany may bring the superstars, but we will bring something that cannot be trained for. We will bring spirit and the kind of fight that does not let up. As the hours count down to what is a David and Goliath moment, all that I have to say from the House to the changing room at Windsor Park is this: come on, the green and white army.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Robbie Butler to move the motion on behalf of the Business Committee.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move

That Standing Orders 10(2) to 10(4) be suspended for 13 October 2025.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Before we proceed to the Question, I remind Members that the motion requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That Standing Orders 10(2) to 10(4) be suspended for 13 October 2025.

Speaker's Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I wish to let Members know that I am speaking at a private engagement later this week. I will be travelling to it tomorrow, so I will not be in the Chamber.

Executive Committee Business

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move

That the Final Stage of the School Uniforms (Guidelines and Allowances) Bill [NIA Bill 12/22-27] do now pass.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

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

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am pleased that we have now reached the Final Stage of the School Uniforms Bill. I thank each Member who contributed to its scrutiny. Even before I introduced the Bill on 18 February, the need to take action to address the affordability of school uniforms had been expressed from all sides of the House. Despite any misplaced narratives about a diluted Bill or missed opportunities to be prescriptive, the Bill that I commend to the House is strong and appropriate. Once again, I record my thanks to the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) for its diligence and for the significant work that it put into the Bill. I make no apologies for my confidence that the Bill is a strong Bill that will make a difference for parents.

At Second Stage, I set out the level of support for the proposals that underpin the Bill that was expressed through a policy consultation, which received over 7,500 responses. I repeat my thanks to those who responded to it. I thank the range of stakeholders that contributed at Committee Stage. Their voices are important, and I assure them that all voices have been heard. The principles of the Bill were agreed by the Executive prior to its introduction and then approved by the Assembly at Second Stage. Nothing since then has weakened its provisions.

I know that the Committee for Education wanted to take more time to deliberate over the Bill, but the amendment that my party colleagues tabled on the timing of Committee Stage was important, and the fact that it was agreed to means that, subject to the voting today, the Bill can be in operation in time to make a difference for the 2026-27 school year, which is next year. Without that amendment, the Bill would still be in Committee for up to another two months. There would have been no benefit for parents from the legislation for a further school year. I therefore make no apology for putting the needs of hard-working parents before a leisurely analysis by the Committee, which I do not believe would have resulted in a materially different outcome. I repeat my thanks, however, to the Committee for reporting before the summer recess in the end. I know that Committee members took their scrutiny role seriously.

No further amendments can now be made to the Bill. Either Members vote to support it as it stands and therefore help families that are struggling with the cost of school uniforms or they do not. That is the decision for the House to make today. Last week, the Committee discussed introducing an amending Bill, without its members taking on board any of the legal information that was provided throughout the process, without their understanding what the Bill enables guidelines to address and without their monitoring the impact of the guidelines once they are introduced. I am content that the Executive's Bill can deliver on the ambition that we set at the beginning of the process.

I fully appreciate the Bill's impact on timing, given that school prospectuses will be published in the coming months. I wrote to the Committee to remind it of that. Whether its members are disgruntled about not having seen the draft guidelines, the guidelines will be shared with schools in the coming weeks as a matter of urgency. Guidelines follow the law. Today will determine whether the School Uniforms Bill becomes law.

To be clear, I would not have introduced the Bill if I was not determined that the guidelines would work. I am absolutely satisfied that the Bill gives everything needed for the guidelines to work. Nothing is lacking in the Bill. No one should rush to judge its outcome without having the guidelines in operation first. That serves no one well, including parents.

Let me take Members through what the Bill will do. I will be brief, but it is important for Members, even at this late stage, to understand it. The Bill will make the departmental guidelines statutory. It will place a duty on schools not merely to have regard to the guidelines but to adhere to them. It will give a legally enforceable power of direction to the Department should any school decide not to materially follow the guidelines or decide to discipline or exclude its pupils for non-compliance with the uniform policy when they may not be able to afford it. I assure Members that, despite some suggestions to the contrary having been made at Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage, there will be no hesitation: where a direction is needed, it will be given. I trust in the professionalism of our schools. I know that schools want to do the right thing for their pupils. The guidelines that the Bill requires will be strong, and I trust that schools will follow them fully.

The concern about pupils not meeting the full uniform requirements because of cost should not be an ongoing issue. The Bill requires guidelines about school uniform policies to explicitly address a range of matters. That will result in there being more affordable uniforms, designed in consultation with those wearing them and those paying for them. The Bill requires that parents and pupils must be consulted by a school when its uniform policy is being devised, that guidelines must specify how often the policy is to be reviewed and that that, again, requires consultation. All existing human rights and equality legislation applies to how the Department writes the guidelines and how schools implement them. The Bill requires that "unfair costs aspects", which it defines, must be addressed. That is explicitly set in the context of affordability for lower-income households. There should be no doubt that the Bill addresses affordability. That is fundamental to how it has been drafted.

The Bill also requires that the comfort, practicality, nature and adequacy of clothing being required for a range of school-based activities must be addressed. Uniform policies must address value for money, the lending of uniform and the use of clothing banks. Uniforms must be available from more than one supplier unless evidence is provided that a single-supplier agreement secures value for money for parents. A range of information must be published so that transparency is secured. That will include the rationale for uniform design, the cost of uniform items, where the uniform can be purchased from and a range of other matters.

The Bill allows for a cap to be set on the number of branded items and/or the cost of uniform items or the total uniform. I have made it clear that further consultation on those details will take place and that the outcome of that consultation will inform the setting of any cap. That is to ensure that any cap is agile and fit for purpose and will remain so. In addition to a cap, the Bill allows for uniform guidelines to set out what is reasonable or unreasonable for branded items, limited or single suppliers, daywear and PE kit and allows for differentiation to be applied by school type, year group and Key Stage. That is all set out in the Bill's provisions.

To say that the Bill has been "diluted" or is a "missed opportunity", as some Members have done, is to misunderstand the strength of the legislation and what it can deliver. The Bill extends eligibility for the uniform grant to pupils in independent schools who cannot currently receive it. It future-proofs, through draft affirmative regulation-making powers, so that, if needed, guidelines can be applied to preschool providers. Guidelines will be laid before the Assembly, and a report will be completed at least every three years.

Members can be assured that, even without the provisions, I and my Department will monitor the impact of the Bill. I have worked to make a difference by introducing the legislation. Monitoring the impact of the Bill and the associated guidelines is critical to making sure that that happens. I return to my earlier point, which is that I am confident that the impact will be positive for parents. The Bill delivers. My confidence is based on legal expertise: not mine or any other Member's but professional expertise. The School Uniforms Bill is strong and will be effective. If Members vote to support it, it will take effect from the 2026-27 school year. I am also confident that every Member wants to see that for every family in their constituency.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I will contribute to the Final Stage debate first in my capacity as Chairperson of the Education Committee, and then as an Alliance Member.

After the Bill passed its Second Stage in March, with broad welcome from across the House, albeit with caveats around the need to get into the detail of what the Bill would deliver, we moved into Committee Stage, where the detailed scrutiny work began. I take issue, probably on behalf of the whole Committee — it may be that we all agree on this — with the characterisation of there being a desire to have a "leisurely" Committee Stage. That is not an accurate reflection of the situation. I think that the Minister knows that every undertaking that the Committee gave was around wanting to deliver the Committee Stage as quickly as possible, while building in the time required to ensure that proper scrutiny was done. We never set a date for the conclusion of Committee Stage with the intention of it being a target to be reached; we were clear that the Bill needed to be delivered quickly. It is a clear principle — there are precedents for this — that a Committee decides the time frame and parameters for its work and creates its own framework for engagement with the people whose lives will be impacted on the most by the proposed legislative change. That is a Committee's statutory responsibility, and it must be given the time that it needs to report on its findings, fully satisfied that the appropriate level of scrutiny has been applied.

In the case of this Bill, there seemed from the outset to be an interest from the Minister and the Department to attempt to directly influence the timescales for Committee scrutiny. As Chair of the Committee, I find it regrettable that a decision was taken, at the outset of the Committee's work, to so significantly reduce the timescale for Committee scrutiny of the Bill. It was put to the Committee by the Minister that it was vital that the Bill be enacted in time for the deadline for schools to publish school uniform policies in their prospectuses, and the date of November was repeatedly highlighted in that regard. The Minister raised that again today, yet we are in the middle of October, and schools have had no sight of the promised guidelines that the Bill will give rise to. That is, ultimately, the legislative effect of the Bill: to create guidelines to which schools must adhere. All Committee members felt that the timescale for scrutiny was, ultimately, curtailed, whether or not they felt that it was justified — there were different opinions on that. I take the view that a more rigorous Committee Stage could have been delivered, had we had more time. I reiterate, for clarity, that the Committee never sought to delay or obstruct the timescales for moving the Bill through the Assembly. The Committee understood the absolute imperative to deliver quickly for parents. If the cost of moving quickly is a Bill that does not deliver effectively, however, we must ask whether we have carried out our role as effectively as we could have. In any case, with the changed timeline, the Committee maintained its engagement with stakeholders and acted as an honest broker for their concerns. Without sight of the guidelines, the Committee gave a clear steer on what members felt the content of those guidelines should be. The Committee completed its task with full transparency, so the public is aware of the issues that the Committee sought to prioritise in the future guidelines and of what is in the final Bill. The Committee for Education took its task seriously. At times, it felt like many aspects of its work were being frustrated. Regrettably, the Bill that is before Members today does not reflect the majority of the Committee's priorities or the amendments that it worked on, and I suggest that the Bill is the poorer for it.

All Committee members absolutely and unequivocally agreed that uniform should be affordable and that the cost of attending school should not be a barrier for any pupil, regardless of what school they seek to attend, in which sector, or where they are in Northern Ireland. A uniform is to be worn every day, so it should be suitable for all school activities and should resist wear, reducing the need for additional clothing to be purchased. At its best, uniform can give pupils a sense of community and belonging, creating a level playing field for learning on an even footing, regardless of economic background.

On affordability, the Committee was very clear that there was a need for clearer interventions. Challenges were identified with implementing a cost cap, with limited evidence being available on how it would operate in practice. It is regrettable that the Committee's attempt to amend the Bill to mandate the Department to limit branded items, rather than to create an enabling power, was unsuccessful. It is those branded items that are seen by many parents as a real cost driver. It is regrettable that that did not make its way into the Bill. We are left simply with enabling powers, which may —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order, Mr Mathison. Please take your seat. You are coming very close to challenging the authority of the Speaker. I will say this before the House: I have been here considerably longer than anybody else in this room. I have dealt with more legislation than anybody else in the Building, let alone in the Chamber, having been a Minister in four Departments. If you want to challenge my authority, go ahead, but there will be consequences. That applies to all Members. Continue.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Affordability is at the heart of the very idea of school uniform and of the Bill, but, in the Committee's view, uniform should also be seen to change with the times, so the Committee prioritised listening to the views of the people who wear school uniform: young people. Young people were very clear in their evidence to the Committee on their experiences of how school uniform can impact on different aspects of school life. They were clear about the things that were priorities for them. They were concerned with issues of equality, comfort and practicality, and it is deeply disappointing that the Minister's Bill did not take those issues forward. Youth engagement is not just about listening to young people, ticking a box and then doing what was originally planned regardless. Many young people will be disappointed that their evidence was not taken up by the Minister, as it seems that the Bill reflects very few, if any, of their concerns.

The Committee heard from young people on a range of issues connected to uniform, covering a desire not to limit choice based on gender; sensory issues arising from special educational needs; the higher cost of uniform for girls than for boys; period dignity; uniform that makes PE participation accessible; warmth and comfort; access to outdoor learning and play — the list goes on. Young people consistently raised those things with us as being important to them. I sincerely hope that some of those themes will be addressed in the — I trust — soon-to-be-published guidelines, but that is ultimately entirely in the gift of the Minister.

One of the Committee's concerns throughout the process was that the Bill as drafted, and as it has come before us today, ultimately leaves all that at the will of the Minister in deciding what goes into the guidelines. I will be clear: I want the guidelines to be effective. The Committee was clear that it wanted the guidelines to be effective, but we do not know what they will look like or whether they will address any of the issues that young people raised.

It is over to the Minister now to assure the Committee and the Assembly that the guidelines will make a real difference on not just cost but the wider issues that the Bill strays into. It was never just about affordability. The explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) for the Bill was clear that issues of comfort and practicality were also to be considered. The Bill before us today has not addressed those issues as comprehensively as it could have done.

It is worth noting in particular that the Committee heard evidence from primary-school children who were award-winning activists, describing their campaign for school uniform policies to allow girls to wear trousers. We hoped that the Minister would take up some of that evidence and reflect at Consideration Stage or Further Consideration Stage on whether there was scope to bring forward a proposal on that, but, ultimately, we have not landed in that position. We also heard from Menstruation Matters. Its evidence pointed to some issues of self-consciousness and potential school withdrawal and of attendance at and participation in PE that can arise from school uniform policies not taking proper account of period dignity or other menstruation issues. Again, we do not see the Minister's taking any of those issues forward today. I hope, again, that the Minister can assure us that the guidelines will address some of those concerns.

The Committee was cognisant of gender budgeting issues. While the period poverty legislation made in the previous mandate is one helpful measure to remove some of the systemic barriers from girls' equal access to education, dropping the requirement to wear skirts and allowing girls to wear trousers would certainly have been another. Again, I am keen to hear from the Minister about the guidelines: perhaps he can give us some assurance and confidence that we will see in them a really progressive intervention in that space. I acknowledge Claire Sugden's contribution to the debate on that issue in particular. Witnesses across the spectrum went further, saying that uniform options should be capable of being worn regardless of gender. Again, we do not see that in the Bill.

Not for the first time, the Committee reflected on the potential for policies that address the needs of minority students to improve conditions for all students and considered a whole range of inclusive options with that end in mind.

I feel strongly that, ultimately, we have potentially done our young people a disservice, as the evidence that we heard and discussed does not seem to have been reflected in the legislation that we are debating. I hope that, in the Committee Stage of future Bills, young people will still have the confidence that the evidence that they give and the time that they take to make their views known will actually be taken on board, and that it will not just be the adults in the room nodding politely, patting them on the head and then continuing to do what they had already intended. I think that Committee members across the board would not want to be in that space when we deal with draft legislation in the future. We all know that, on the Education Committee, essentially anything that we do is likely to impact on the lives of young people in school, so it is important that we get that right. I am really keen to hear the Minister provide clarification as to what will be done with the Bill beyond affordability — we all know that that is important — to try to address those concerns for young people.

The Committee saw sustainability as another aspect of the affordability issue. Just as schools should facilitate the provision of second-hand or hand-me-down uniforms, and also that that practice should be encouraged within families, the Committee was clear that, by reducing the gendered aspects of uniforms, you could encourage that practice rather than restrict it. It was also clear that school communities should facilitate the reuse of uniforms by providing uniform banks that parents and pupils could access without feeling any shame or stigma for doing so. It is important to put on record that we know of many excellent examples across the school system where those schemes are run very effectively. The Committee welcomed the explicit reference to that in the Bill but had hoped for a clearer requirement for schools to participate in such a scheme, not just that it would appear in the guidelines in some form, because, again, we are not sure exactly how that will look.

It is a shame that the Bill, in its final iteration, does not reflect the views or needs of the stakeholders who gave evidence at Committee. I am pleased, however, that the principle of one key Committee amendment has made it into the Bill, which was highlighted by the Minister in his opening remarks; namely the principle of reporting on the progress of the legislation to deal with affordability and accountability on the impact on the cost of uniforms, the need to review that regularly, and to review regularly the need to implement a cost cap. That, at least, ensures accountability even if, ultimately, members may be sceptical about the clear effects of the Bill on parents' pockets and on the young people who wear the uniforms.

I have no doubt that my Committee colleagues will have more to say about all those issues, as we covered a huge amount of ground in the evidence sessions on the Bill. I will conclude my remarks as Chair simply by saying that I want the Bill to deliver. I think that everybody in the Assembly wants to the Bill to deliver. We all have parents in our constituencies who need it to deliver. I hope that it does not prove to be a missed opportunity where improvements that were considered did not end up being reflected in the legislation. We need to ensure that the Bill is genuinely impactful. That will be in the detail of the guidelines. We all await those with interest and hope that their publication happens quickly.

I will now make remarks in my capacity as an Alliance member. As you have already highlighted, Mr Speaker, I am a newly elected Member to the Assembly, and this was my first run through legislation at Committee Stage. It was my first opportunity to see a Bill go through each stage of the process. When I came into the Assembly, I had originally intended to table a private Member's Bill on the school uniforms issue. However, the Minister was there with the Bill early on when the institutions were restored, so I did not have the opportunity to bring my proposals forward in more detail.

We all know that the cost of school uniforms has been highlighted repeatedly as causing significant financial strain on families. I do not need to rehearse those arguments or convince anybody of that fact. That was clearly amplified when we began to hear directly in Committee from those who are most impacted on by the cost-of-living crisis. Parents get into debt in order to pay for school uniforms. Parents will talk about skipping meals in order to be able to afford something that is required simply for their child to be able to attend school. That cannot be an acceptable state of affairs. The Bill was our opportunity to ensure that parents did not have to face those kinds of scenarios again — it does not matter which school their children go to, or in which sector: the uniform should be affordable — and to ensure that effective and robust measures were introduced not only to support families but to ensure that schools could be held to account for their approach to their uniform policies if they did not prioritise driving down costs.

We are all aware that the Bill will create guidelines that schools must adhere to and that those will be the instrument by which changes can be introduced. However, without sight of those guidelines and while we wait for the Minister to publish them— I know that this is rehearsing things that have been raised in the Chamber and in Committee on many occasions, but it does bear repeating — we remain largely in the dark. I do not doubt that the Minister wants a Bill that is effective; I do not know any Minister who sets out to deliver legislation that will not deliver. However, at the moment, we just do not know what those provisions are, so we are operating entirely on trust. I wait with anticipation, as I am sure all colleagues do, to see exactly how the guidelines will deliver on the promise to reduce costs. While there is a fair bit in the Bill, ultimately, when you strip it back, what the Bill does is create guidelines that schools have to adhere to. Until we see those guidelines, we will be guessing about what the impact will be. I know that parents will be watching with the same anticipation to see what the guidelines actually say. For the school that their child attends, which sets the cost of the school uniforms that they have to pay, what will the guidelines actually do? It is vital that we do not let them down, because they are watching.

While circumstances have meant that the Bill is not what some Committee members would have wanted, I want to go back to one of the amendments that I referenced in my remarks as Chair: the amendment on accountability. As I have said, parents are watching. They want to know, clearly, what it will mean for them. After the Bill passes Final Stage, lots of statements will no doubt be made that we have now dealt with the cost of school uniforms and we can close that chapter. However, parents want to know what is actually going to change. In that scenario, where there has been some doubt about and a question mark over what the change will look like, it is essential that there is a mechanism to create really clear accountability mechanisms in the Bill. I am pleased that that is in the Bill today, so that we know that the Assembly will have to be updated routinely — at least once a mandate — on whether the Bill has delivered or not; told whether a cost cap will be introduced or not; and, if it is not going to be introduced, told why not. A cost cap is the key mechanism that will deliver meaningful change in this area. It is the Department that has the resources and the ability to deliver that sort of radical legislative intervention. I hope that the Department is taking that work forward meaningfully and seriously.

During the Committee evidence sessions, as I referenced in my remarks as Chair, certain school uniform policy themes came through repeatedly. I want to go back to the issues that were raised by children and young people. I will not go through the areas that they highlighted, but I want to address some of the things that have been said in other debates on the matter. It has been said that it is a distraction to talk about SEN and the impact of uniform on young people who experience discomfort; about whether or not girls should be assured of their right to wear trousers rather than skirts; or about issues concerning the outdoor curriculum. On whatever issue, arguments were put forward that that is a distraction and not what the Bill is about. However, the Department's own explanatory and financial memorandum for the Bill states:

"The aim of the Bill is to ensure that school governing bodies put affordability, comfort and sustainability at the centre of their decision-making when they set their school uniform requirements."

Therefore, as soon as the issue of comfort was introduced, we were quite right to ask questions about what makes a school uniform comfortable and sustainable — affordable, yes, but also comfortable and sustainable. As legislators, it is our job to listen to the evidence and act on it. Again, I urge the Minister to keep in mind, when the guidelines are being drafted, the evidence that the Committee heard. The Bill remains light on detail of how those aspects, which were raised particularly by young people, will be reflected in the guidelines. It is light on that detail, and I am really keen to hear more from the Minister on that.

The issue of timescales has been raised, and I want to revisit how the Bill progressed through the Assembly. The Committee was, undoubtedly, put under significant pressure from the Minister around our timescales for scrutiny. The Minister made it very clear that he wanted us to work to a timescale in order for the Bill to be completed before November of this year, and that is where we are. It was always highlighted that that was because of the key date of when schools publish their prospectuses. November was highlighted repeatedly as the critical date by which schools needed to have that work done.

Alliance was the only party in the Assembly to question the Minister of Education's assurances on the timescales and their deliverability. Others fell into line and backed the Minister without question, but Alliance was always sceptical that that date would be deliverable, and I am keen to be proved wrong. We are in the middle of October, and the Bill has reached Final Stage. That is welcome. Parents, who are keen to see interventions in the affordability space, will be pleased to see that we are here on this date and not waiting for another year. We are, however, also in a position in which November is just a couple of weeks away, with still no clarity for schools on what will change next year. We were told that November is a critical deadline. Schools will be writing and publishing their policies, so I ask genuinely — I am not attempting to score a political point — whether the Minister can clarify what schools are meant to be doing in this scenario. Can he provide clarity on when they will get the guidelines? I ask that because, once they are published, schools will need to start thinking about consulting parents and pupils and about engaging with their suppliers. Suppliers will have to start looking at their arrangements and at the uniform stocks that they hold. We are being told that the new policies are deliverable in the prospectuses in November. I would love that to be the case, but I want to hear how the policies will be delivered, because —.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I will give way.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I indicated in my remarks that the guidelines will come within weeks. I also said that my permanent secretary will be issuing communications in anticipation of the Bill's being passed today. What the Chair of the Committee is not highlighting, however, is the fact that the lengthy Committee Stage process was not due to be completed for another number of months. He is holding me to account by saying that I need to get the guidance out right now, yet his Committee's own timescale was to kick the Committee Stage two months down the road. I welcome the challenge that I need to get the guidelines done now, but that was not the degree of urgency that the Committee was looking for when it set out its time frame. I welcomed Sinn Féin's supporting me when the amendment brought forward the period extension.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I remind the Chair that we have to start Question Time at 2.00 pm, so I will interrupt you about 30 seconds before then to allow Dr Aiken to take the Chair.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I may be able to get through my contribution before 2.00 pm regardless. I thank the Minister for his intervention. Yes, I was concerned about the timescales but simply because, as I highlight now, if the guidelines arrive in the next two or three weeks — we are being told that November is the key date for their publication — it seems unrealistic to expect schools to implement a significant policy change in that time. My point when we looked at the timescales was always about how on earth we could ask schools to turn it around in that time frame. It therefore does not feel deliverable to me. I sincerely hope that it is, however, because we need to see the costs dealt with.

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

There was an insistence that that quick turnaround was needed. Undoubtedly, it impacted on the timescale that we had in which to scrutinise the legislation. I therefore hope that the rush to deliver the legislation does result in a positive impact and not in a scramble, in which schools are put under pressure to come up with new policies overnight just to meet the imposed timescale. We all want costs to be dealt with, but they need to be dealt with effectively and in a way that will result in the right impact on parents. Parents desperately need to see costs come down. I hope, come September 2026, that that is what we will see, but the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Assurances from the Minister that the Bill delivers will be meaningless if parents do not see a change in the money that they need to spend in order to send their child to school.

Briefly, I put on record some concerns that local suppliers have raised with me about the slightly complex position in which they find themselves. They are already facing increasing pressures from their suppliers to commit to orders for next year so that they can secure the best possible prices. Again, the rush that there has been to deliver the guidelines within a timescale of what I can only assume is weeks is potentially putting those businesses under pressure, and their relationships with schools as a result of the need to deliver on policies could be put under threat. Again, I would like clarity from the Minister on that.

I will conclude by saying that Alliance will support the Bill at Final Stage today, as we will not countenance blocking any intervention to bring down costs. It is now over to the Minister, however. The Committee worked harder, as the Minister urged us to do. We listened to the evidence. The processes have brought us to this stage.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I ask the Member to draw his remarks to a close.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I will be very, very brief, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

You will have to be very, very brief, Nick. Go for it.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Minister, this is your Bill, and it is you who will be held to account for delivery. I hope that you make the most of this opportunity. The guidelines must be robust and effective, and, for parents, they cannot come soon enough.

The debate stood suspended.

Oral Answers to Questions — Justice

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

We will start with listed questions. I call Claire Sugden. Claire, over to you.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

1. Ms Sugden asked the Minister of Justice to outline the internal policy and legislation that facilitates emotional support animals in Northern Ireland prisons. (AQO 2506/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The provision of emotional support animals within Northern Ireland Prison Service establishments is an operational matter for the Prison Service. It is more than 20 years since the service introduced support dogs into the prison setting, and it is not aware of a single occasion when a dog has been placed at risk. Support dogs are highly valued and well-cared-for team members and have helped countless prisoners who have been in crisis. That is the same for all support animals within prisons.

Every day, prison officers perform their roles with judgement, diligence and care. I have been disappointed and surprised that others think that those same officers are not up to the job of introducing an emotional support dog at Magilligan prison. If a policy is required to satisfy the ongoing interests of all animals within prisons, I am certain that Prison Service and its staff have the measure of that task. However, that work will be appropriately prioritised among the many other challenges that face the service at this time, not least the rising prison population and the increasingly complex needs of that population.

Legislative matters relating to animals are not the responsibility of my Department.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister. We made a mistake in respect of the dog that has been in the news recently: that dog should not have been in the prison. Its placement did not fall within the policy and legislation, which, I believe, needs to be reviewed and updated. The Minister received correspondence, as recently as this morning, in which concerns relating to how we dealt with that particular animal continue to be raised. Will the Minister give a commitment that that will not happen again and that she will review what is happening operationally within the Northern Ireland Prison Service? I appreciate that it is not directly her responsibility, but it falls within her remit.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I disagree entirely with the picture that has been painted by the Member when she says that the way in which the situation was dealt with by the Prison Service, originally, was wrong. What is scandalous is the whipping up of false information, misinformation and disinformation in the public domain — in social media and the wider media. The truth is that, when the dog was inspected in place, it was found to be in excellent condition, happy, well adjusted and enjoying the work that it was doing. Sadly, because of the hysteria that was whipped up outside, a threat was received regarding Bailey, and he was removed from the prison for his own safety, because, let us be clear, the welfare and safety of the animals in our care are our primary concern in all these matters.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Does the Minister not have any concern that, after 20 years of putting dogs in prisons, there is no legislation; no definition of what an emotional support dog is; no pre-suitability assessment was done of that particular dog; and there is a made-up policy of putting a pet dog in prison without any safeguards? That was confirmed to me by the director general of prisons in Northern Ireland and the prison governor at Magilligan.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

My greater concern is the amount of time that has been consumed by Prison Service staff in responding to an issue that was based on nothing but lies and smears. In fact, the Member himself had to admit in public that he had not even read the independent welfare report, despite tweeting consistently and persistently about the matter for, I think, over three weeks.

If we want to be serious about our concern for animals, the first thing to do is to look at what the animal welfare experts said about Bailey. They said that he was a dog in excellent condition, well adjusted and well cared for. These are not working dogs in the traditional sense. The training that goes with them is for those prison officers who deploy them in certain circumstances. They are treated, for all intents and purposes, as a family pet would be treated. That is why we are able to do this. To say that there was no pre-assessment of suitability is, again, factually incorrect. There was one issue around whether the dog was well socialised with men, and that was dealt with before the dog was selected and brought to the prison. Those are further facts relating to further misinformation, and they show the further inability of some to accept a detailed and evidence-based response and to take it into account.

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

I am in solidarity with you, Minister, following the mob at your house, last week. We are all thinking of you.

Following up on the previous questions, will the Minister confirm whether emotional support animals, particularly dogs, receive specific training before being placed in a prison? Do prison officers receive any kind of specific training regarding being assigned responsibility for caring for an animal?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

As I have just said, prison officers are trained in the deployment of emotional support dogs, which is pretty much like looking after any other dog in that environment. The dogs are not there for protection, for guarding or to work as sniffer dogs, where there is a particular skill engaged in training the dogs and a particular level of vigilance required of the dogs. The dogs are simply there to show companionship to prisoners. The dogs do not need specific training, but they need to have a particular temperament. They have to be good around people, and they have to be calm and assured. Bailey fitted all those categories. Sadly, now, his life has been disrupted due to a threat received from outside the prison. If anybody actually cared about dogs and their welfare, they would not want to see a happy, well-adjusted and well-cared-for dog taken out of its routine environment.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

2. Mr Durkan asked the Minister of Justice to outline the powers that the PSNI has in relation to the drinking of alcohol in public places. (AQO 2507/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Police powers around drinking in public in Northern Ireland derive from a mix of local by-laws and broader public order legislation. Councils can prohibit drinking in designated public areas by way of local by-laws made under the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972. Consuming alcohol in those areas is an offence. Police can take an offender's name and address. However, prosecutions are brought by councils. The PSNI can address several alcohol-related public order offences via penalty notices for disorder provided for by the Justice Act 2011. That allows officers to quickly address offences such as being drunk in a public place, disorderly behaviour or conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace. In addition, the Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 gives police the power to require those under 18 to surrender alcohol in public, with refusal constituting an offence.

I am aware that there is a desire for the legislative framework to be updated, and, as that is likely to be a cross-cutting issue, my Department is working with the PSNI and the Department for Communities to ensure that it is fit for purpose, with a view to bringing forward legislation, if needed, in the next mandate.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I also express solidarity with the Minister.

Parts of Derry city centre at times now resemble the Wild West, with groups of vulnerable individuals drinking and engaging in antisocial behaviour. It is not only putting them at risk; it is impacting negatively on locals, tourists and the local economy. Police have lamented the lack of legislation that would permit them to confiscate alcohol from adults and believe that that would be a game changer in tackling the issue. Will the Minister update us on the work that she and her Department are doing with others to close that legislative loophole?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Conversations with partners are ongoing. The previous joint consultation with DFC on the issue indicated a strong desire for change. We are proposing providing PSNI officers with the additional power to seize and dispose of alcohol in exceptional circumstances, such as certain public order situations. We are also exploring whether any other agencies may wish to use enforcement powers, although it is important to note that any power of seizure would be limited to the PSNI. The overall aim is to deliver a modern, enforceable and proportionate framework that balances effective enforcement with individual rights and signposting to support services. There is no desire to penalise vulnerable individuals. However, as I said, it will be a cross-cutting matter, given that the powers lie between legislation that we can create in the Department of Justice and work that can be done by the Department for Communities.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Will the Minister outline the role that policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs) have in tackling drinking in public and alcohol misuse?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Policing and community safety partnerships are jointly funded by my Department and the Policing Board, and they lead on the Department's operational response to specific concerns at a local level. They work with designated partners, local statutory bodies and agencies, and the voluntary and community sector to tackle community safety issues right across the community. They can fund and support initiatives such as awareness campaigns, diversionary programmes for young people and local addiction initiatives. In a number of areas, PCSPs also help to fund community safety wardens to help ensure that our towns and cities are safe. Through those PCSPs, communities have a direct voice in shaping responses to alcohol misuse and ensuring that local concerns are reflected in practical actions.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

3. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister of Justice to outline any differentiation in the nature of support that her Department provides to innocent victims and the perpetrators of crime for accessing justice via the courts. (AQO 2508/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

My Department funds support services to assist all victims of crime on an equal basis. The entitlements and services that victims of crime in Northern Ireland can expect to receive from criminal justice organisations are set out in the statutory Victim Charter. The Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service is responsible for administering the courts. It is impartial in upholding the rights of all to seek justice through the court system.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I put on record my utter condemnation of the incident that took place at the Minister's home last week. There is no justification for that kind of intimidating behaviour. Private homes must be off limits.

I thank the Minister for her answer. The Minister will know that the victims' campaigner Ann Travers has asked for a public apology to innocent victims for the removal of the word "innocent" from the recent motion in the House. Does the Minister understand the hurt and anger felt by the families of innocent victims, and will she take the opportunity to apologise?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I certainly understand the hurt felt by victims' families and the sensitivity of the issue, which is why it is particularly disappointing that there has been so much politicking, particularly around the interview that I gave after the event. What I said has been thoroughly and deliberately misrepresented. To provide reassurance, I will put on record what I actually said about the difference between victims. I will read the part of it that was curiously edited out of what was shared on social media:

"It doesn’t change the moral authority around whether or not what somebody did was right or wrong. That’s unquestionable. If people were doing things that were wrong, they should be held to account for that, and we’re clear about that".

Hopefully, that provides the reassurance that Members and families are looking for. Nothing that we did in that debate, and nothing that we voted for or against, in any way changes our view that those who go out with the intent to cause harm should be held accountable for their actions, and that there is no moral equivalence between those who go out to cause harm and those who are harmed by their actions. I was simply pointing out a matter of fact: at different points in a person's life, they can be both a victim and a perpetrator. It is important that we provide trauma-informed support based on what will lead to reconciliation and recovery and will end the cycle of intergenerational trauma that blights this community.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Minister, will you outline the support that your Department provides for the victims of sexual offences?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

We provide over £2·4 million of funding for the general work that we do to support victims, and to ensure that victims and witnesses of crime can access the support services that they need. Those services are delivered by Victim Support NI and the NSPCC's young witness service. Through the witness support services, victims and witnesses get emotional support, information and practical assistance, which helps them to give their best evidence. It includes opportunities to visit court before giving evidence; an explanation of the court process; accompanying the victim or witness into the courtroom, live-link room or remote evidence centre; and offering the opportunity to talk to someone when the case has ended. In addition, for those who are victims of specific sexual offences, we have sexual offences legal advisers and child sexual offences legal advisers, who can give pre-court and pre-trial legal advice to victims to help to guide them through the many requests that they will face around issues such as disclosure.

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

Minister, you mentioned ending "the cycle of intergenerational trauma". What about ending the trauma experienced by victims who were maimed and attacked in their own home by the IRA but cannot access the pension scheme because they were maimed and attacked by members of their own community? What is your assessment of that reality? How does that level with ending intergenerational trauma and the trauma experienced by the victims?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have raised the treatment of those people, particularly in cases of paramilitary-style attacks, in writing with the UK Government and the president of the Victims' Payments Board. Shootings and beatings by paramilitary organisations, whether they are intra-community or inter-community, need to be addressed in the same way. Unfortunately, that is not how the legislation sits. It would require amendment at Westminster. However, I have raised my concerns about the differentiation between victims who were beaten by people who ostensibly came from the same community versus those who were beaten by people viewed as being from a different community.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

4. Mr Delargy asked the Minister of Justice to outline any work her Department is carrying out to tackle sectarian hate crimes. (AQO 2509/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

There is no place in society for that type of hate. Every person and every family, regardless of religion or background, is entitled to feel safe and free from threat or intimidation. My Department is engaged in a wide range of work to respond to sectarian hate attacks and to strengthen support for victims of hate crime or for people who feel vulnerable to attack, whether at home, in school, at work or on our streets.

What is always evident is that sectarianism, racism and paramilitarism do not help our communities. Paramilitary organisations are an unwanted relic of a troubled past and hold no legitimacy. As I have said many times before, they should disband and allow our communities to move forward. It can be difficult to draw a direct evidential line between paramilitary groups and hate crimes, but let us be clear: communities know what is going on and who is involved. They feel it and see it, and that speaks to the coercion that paramilitary organisations and those who are linked to them still choose to force on people and communities who want nothing to do with racism and hate.

Legislative provisions in the proposed sentencing Bill and victims and witnesses of crime Bill will modernise our hate crime law in Northern Ireland and will provide a more robust system to sanction offenders. Direct support for victims of sectarian hate crime is provided though the hate crime advocacy service, which supports victims through the criminal justice process and signposts them to relevant support services. Sectarianism and racism are two sides of the same coin. The work of PCSPs includes actions to tackle hate crime at that local community level.

The question of addressing sectarian hate is, however, not solely the role of my Department. That also requires sustained cross-governmental action beyond the criminal justice system if we are to prevent harm from occurring. We all need to redouble our efforts to tackle not just hate crime but the attitudes and language that are the root causes of hate and prejudice and to promote more positive community relations proactively.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I begin by offering my solidarity to the Minister and her husband after the incident outside their home, which was completely wrong and should never have happened. Our thoughts are with you today.

I thank the Minister for her answer. We are hearing that when people report those crimes, there is often little or no outcome, which is quite worrying for them. What can be done to make that process more accessible and to ensure that sectarian behaviour, from wherever it emanates, is challenged?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Like many other crimes that are committed by cowards under cover of darkness to intimidate and threaten, it can be very difficult to identify the individual perpetrators or actors in those situations. I encourage people to continue to report, because patterns of reporting can, in themselves, help the PSNI when it decides where to deploy resources, where needs more attention in order to protect the public and what may be able to be done.

It is important that people report crime, because without those reports we are unable to measure what is happening. I understand the Member's concerns, given the rate of hate crime in his city, and particularly around the increase in sectarian hate crime. It is not acceptable. It is completely unacceptable in today's society that people still find themselves intimidated because of who they are or how they are perceived by others. Unless we are all consistent in that message and unwavering in our condemnation, there is no point in us telling victims to have any kind of confidence in the system that, ultimately, we are the face of.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I extend my best wishes to the Minister and her husband, Michael, after what happened last week, which was disgusting.

In a general sense, Minister, what is your assessment of how closely the far right and paramilitary groups are working in unison to harass and intimidate people? You said that sectarianism and racism are two sides of the same coin. That is right, and those who perpetrate one are doing the other.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The PSNI's assessment is that, whilst there are individuals who are connected to existing paramilitary organisations and are engaged and active in a number of those protests, there is less evidence to substantiate any claim that those organisations are orchestrating or organising those protests. In addition to the more traditional actors in that space, groups of people are being radicalised online by far right organisations and networks. They are often lone actors, who do not have a network of support or a traditional base in Northern Ireland, but they are being activated online and are finding their community there and acting in that sense. There are two separate dynamics happening, particularly with the far right threat. It is far more likely that somebody will be radicalised individually, in the privacy of their own home, than in a more public way. Undoubtedly, however, both will take to the streets, and both will use muscle to intimidate people who are vulnerable in the community or those who dare to have the audacity to speak up on their behalf.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

It was interesting to hear the Minister speak about the tightness of resources in the context of what we have heard in the past day about the PSNI opening a hate-crime investigation into damage to a sign at Shandon Park. Can we be assured that there will now be investigations into any similar damage to signs across the country, including at the PSNI's initiative?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Damaging street signs in general is one of the most petty and childish acts that a person can undertake. If you cannot drive past a sign that you do not like without feeling the need to take an angle grinder or a bucket of paint to it, you need to take a long, hard look at yourself. I will not be providing any assurance in the Chamber as to how the PSNI will prioritise investigations. As you will be well aware, it is for the Chief Constable to direct the resources of the PSNI, not me as Minister.

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

Minister, it goes without saying that I and my party stand in solidarity with you. Democracy means you being robustly held to account in the Chamber, and you are more than able to deal with that. However, what happened was contemptible. A family home is sacrosanct, so we stand in solidarity with you.

In relation to sentencing provisions in the Bill, are you and your officials looking at the intersection between racism and the continuing prevalence of paramilitarism? Will there be an attempt to create compound sentencing provisions and aggravating factors for membership of proscribed organisations? What message is being sent by the continued engagement of your ministerial colleagues with organisations such as the Loyalist Communities Council?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Intersectionality forms part of the hate-crime legislation that we hope to bring forward, and there will be aggravating factors where a hate-crime motive for the signalling offence can be proven. We will also prosecute those as stand-alone offences so that, if a hate-crime motivation cannot be proven, a person can still be held accountable for their crime.

Membership of a paramilitary organisation is a criminal offence. It can be prosecuted, and jail terms for it are available in legislation. If somebody is arrested for a hate crime, and they are also proven to be a member of a paramilitary organisation, there is nothing to preclude the two offences from being taken through the court together, as is the case in circumstances where somebody is arrested for an offence and there is also a paramilitary link to the crime.

We will also be bringing forward, through the Bill, additional means of sentencing and additional offences around participating in and directing organised crime. That is important because, whilst all paramilitary organisations have a finger in organised crime, not all organised crime organisations are involved in paramilitarism. We need to untangle all that, so it is important that we look at those issues as well.

When it comes to my views on the legitimising of illegal groups by those kinds of engagements, whether of other Ministers or an interlocutor appointed by the two Governments, I have been clear that that is unhelpful. The confidence of a community is shaken when they see people being treated as the spokespeople for a community but that community sees those people very much as having a jackboot on their neck.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

5. Mr Stewart asked the Minister of Justice for her assessment of the criminal damage compensation scheme. (AQO 2510/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The criminal damage compensation scheme provides important financial support to victims where there has been physical damage to a property or a vehicle in Northern Ireland and where it can be shown that the damage was caused unlawfully, maliciously or wantonly by an unlawful assembly of three or more people or maliciously by a person acting?in connection with?an unlawful association such as an act of terrorism. Compensation may also be payable for agricultural property or property that is free from rates, if the damage was caused maliciously or deliberately.

Most commercial insurance policies should cover businesses for damage to their premises, including interruption to business operations. Some policies will also cover businesses that are not damaged but whose trade is affected in the aftermath. Where insurance is in place, companies will be available to provide immediate support to victims of criminal damage. If unable to secure support from an insurer, the criminal damage compensation scheme provides an important source of assistance for victims. As with all schemes, it is important to keep them under review. Consideration is being given to the need for any changes to the scheme to ensure that it meets the needs of victims. Any proposals for change would be subject to consultation.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

I echo the comments of others, Minister, by saying that our thoughts are with you. What happened last week was totally disgraceful and unacceptable.

Minister, in the past 18 months, several people whom I represent in my constituency have been victims of a confirmed hate crime. Their property has been damaged, and the incidents have been deeply traumatising for them. When, however, they have sought compensation, which you referred to in your answer, they were unable to claim it, because the police could not confirm that three or more people were involved in that hate crime. That is unacceptable. A hate crime is a hate crime, regardless of how many people are involved. Will you look at changing the policy so that those people can claim compensation?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I understand the Member's point, because it has been raised with me before. We have to go back to what the purpose of the compensation scheme is, however. It was introduced at a time when businesses and individuals were often unable to get insurance because of the level of property damage that was being inflicted during the terrorist campaign here. Compensation Services was therefore designed to deal with such incidents, as opposed to incidents of simple criminal damage or even simple hate crime offences. For example, for the civil disorder in Ballymena, 27 claims were submitted to Compensation Services. Of those, one claim has been paid out, one has been withdrawn, 15 are awaiting police reports and 10 are awaiting further documentation that is needed to support the claim. Compensation Services does all that it can to progress such claims as expeditiously as possible, but, when it is waiting for police reports, information from the applicant or further evidence such as deeds, insurance information and any business interruption information, that is often outside its control. Some cases will not meet the threshold of three or more people being involved, but the scheme is meant to cover "riotous assembly". If it is not proven that that was the case when the criminal damage happened, it will therefore be down to the individual insurer for that particular business or home to step in.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

6. Ms Forsythe asked the Minister of Justice for her assessment of the 'Domestic Abuse Incidents and Crimes Recorded by the Police in Northern Ireland' bulletin, published in August 2025. (AQO 2511/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The most recent PSNI bulletin, which was published on 28 August, shows that, in the 12 months up until 30 June 2025, 29,740 domestic abuse incidents and 18,246 domestic abuse crimes were recorded. That represents decreases of almost 7% and 5·5% respectively on the previous year. Although those reductions may appear encouraging, they should be treated with caution. Recorded statistics reflect only those cases that were reported to the police, and reporting can be influenced by a range of factors, including whether victims feel able to come forward and have confidence in the system. A fall in recorded incidents and crimes does not necessarily mean that domestic abuse is happening less frequently. What is clear is that domestic abuse continues to take place on a significant scale. Tackling it cannot be achieved by the Department of Justice alone. A cross-Executive and community-wide response will be required if we are to prevent abuse, protect victims and, ultimately, reduce the harm caused across society. The domestic and sexual abuse strategy provides us with a cohesive direction by enabling the necessary change to happen through partnership working.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Like others, I send my best to the Minister and her husband following the absolutely appalling attack outside their home. I offer my continued support to her for her strong work on the abuse of elected representatives, particularly female ones.

Minister, in light of the figures, some support groups recently expressed concern at the all-party group (APG) on domestic and sexual violence — you touched on this — that the PSNI's reporting of a reduced number of offences is painting a picture that the number of incidents and the number of crimes have reduced, yet agencies and groups such as Women's Aid are reporting higher numbers of self-referrals. Minister, is there any forum in which we can bring together the different support groups, alongside the PSNI, to paint a full picture of what is happening here?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

That is difficult, because the bulletin looks only at reported incidents and reported crimes, yet we all know that there will be instances in which those crimes are not reported. Many victims, for good reason, will choose not to present to the PSNI. Although I always encourage people to report crime, I understand the complexities involved in doing so in a domestic violence context, because most people's priority is simply to extract themselves and their loved ones from a dangerous situation. We have the opportunity, through the work that we do with partners in the community and voluntary sector, to get some sense of the direction of travel, but it is hard to quantify that in a way that is robust enough for us to provide formal statistics. We will continue to explore doing that with our partners, because, again, we know that there will be under-reporting for a number of reasons, and even those who make initial contact with charitable organisations may not follow through on it later. Some of those reports may be —.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Minister, will you draw your remarks to a close? Thank you.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Some of those reports may be as a result of other family members who are raising concerns.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

That ends the period for listed questions. We move to 15 minutes of topical questions. Topical question 2 has been withdrawn.

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

T1. Mr McGlone asked the Minister of Justice, having condemned outright the disgraceful behaviour outside her home — any Member who has been in politics for a while and has seen intimidation and crime of that nature knows that it is abysmal that it should happen to her, an elected representative, outside her home, which should be private to each of us — having expressed solidarity with her and condemnation of the thugs who stood there and tried to intimidate her as she went about her normal daily work, and having listened carefully when the Minister mentioned the types of measures that could be taken by her Department and in collaboration with other Departments to help to tackle the scourge of extremism, which often manifests itself as right-wing, sectarian and racist, how she sees the increase in sentencing and the collaboration with other Departments panning out? (AQT 1651/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

There are two elements to it. The degree to which sentencing is a true deterrent is questionable, because most people who commit crime never consider being caught. Many of them do things on the spur of the moment without giving any due regard to what the outcome for them might be, and many are completely reckless with respect to their own behaviour. I hear Members chunter from the sidelines that that is nonsense, but, if you talk to those in the legal profession, they will tell you that that is part of the problem. However, with the right sentencing framework in place, we can show, when those cases come to court, that we are serious about tackling it. That is an important message. The law will not change people's minds, but it will change their behaviours over time.

We need to identify much earlier, before harm has been caused, the issues, means and methods that are being used to radicalise individuals. We need to seek to intervene much earlier in the chain, before those individuals themselves become radicalised and end up undertaking actions that will bring them into conflict with the law and place others in the way of harm.

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

I thank the Minister for that. I agree that sentencing is one part of it. Minister, you mentioned the radicalising of individuals. Could you elaborate on how you see your Department working, perhaps with other UK Departments, to stymie the influence particularly of social media on radicalising people who, previously, may well not have been radicalised and got themselves into such a mess?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Online Safety Act is but one of the tools available, and, obviously, my Department has made representations to the Home Office, which leads on communications and telecommunications because it is a reserved matter. We continue to feed in our concerns in that space.

Through the tackling paramilitarism programme, we are about to trial some desistance programmes for people who have already been radicalised into either paramilitary or organised crime but, we believe, are still reachable and teachable in that space, to get alongside them in order to start to change their attitudes and to offer them an alternative route forward at the very earliest stage of conflict with the justice system. That is one of the things that we can do.

We also look at what is available in other places. There is a suite of interventions that are available when young people become radicalised. Where it differs from the traditional radicalisation that we have seen in our community over many years is that those individuals tend to be lone actors and radicalised in their own home. Therefore, it is only when their behaviours reach a certain level of danger that we become alert to their involvement or, alternatively, when they have undertaken an offence, which makes it slightly more complicated to address. One of the things that we need is for not just my Department but Education, Health and others to look at it as part of our wider safeguarding approach. The other thing to say is that many of the people who are being radicalised are very young.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

T3. Mr Mathison asked the Minister of Justice to provide an update on her plans to uplift criminal legal aid fees by 16%. (AQT 1653/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I remain committed to delivering the uplift to remuneration that I set out in the Chamber in December last year. Officials across the Department are continuing to progress the business case with the Department of Finance that covers the wider enabling access to justice programme, not just the increase in legal aid fees. Progression of the business case was delayed to enable further amendments to legal aid fees that have been developed through the criminal legal aid working group that was established in March to be included in this round of change, and it was further impacted on by the fact that officials had to react to the impact of some emerging issues on the wider reform programme. However, I expect the legislation to be brought forward immediately once the business case is completed and to come into effect within six weeks, respecting the legislative process. In anticipation of the introduction of those new rates, the Legal Services Agency (LSA) has updated its case management system to ensure that the increased fees can be claimed as appropriate from the date on which the fees come into operation. It is also looking at how it will then be able to process, without requiring application from the practitioners, the additional back payments that I promised to the date in December last year.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for that update. Can she provide a further update on the progress in increasing the fees that are payable under the County Court scale?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The County Court rules committee has proposed a 23% increase to fees under the County Court scale to address inflation's eroding their value since 2017. The proposed amendments have undergone consultation, economic appraisal and policy screening, with no anticipated impact. The draft rules are subject to negative resolution procedure and are scheduled to be considered by the Justice Committee on 16 October. Pending the outcome of that, we will take them forward, as is appropriate.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

T4. Mr Clarke asked the Minister of Justice, after, like other Members, condemning outrightly what happened outside her house last week, which, although not the first attack on a politician, demonstrated that things have stooped to a new low, to state, in light of the fact that quite a lot of Members are starting to receive correspondence from police officers about this year's pay rise, when the negotiations are likely to conclude. (AQT 1654/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Like the Department of Health and the Department of Education, the Department of Justice has a projected overspend. There is a deficit of around £23 million for the PSNI. Until we have a plan in place to deal with that, a pay rise has been deemed unaffordable, although it has been approved in a value-for-money business case. At the moment, I am working through that with my Executive colleagues so that there is a consistent approach to pay. I set aside 3·5% for pay at the start of the year in order to ensure that that money was available. However, the recommendations that came to me were between 1% and 1·5% higher than that, which means that there is still a shortfall. I know that some other Departments did not ring-fence anything for pay at the start of the year. We did, but affordability will still be a challenge. The contractual element of the pay went ahead, as it should, at the start of October. I am hopeful that we will get to a point where we are able to pay the rest of the pay as soon as possible, as I say, subject to affordability. We will, sadly, be starting next year's pay round pretty soon, so, hopefully, we will be able to move that forward.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. I note from her answer that, unlike the other Departments, your Department set aside 3.5%. Is that included in the £23 million overspend, or is that money still protected? When are officers likely to know the outcome of the pay rise?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The money was set aside and ring-fenced at the beginning when I was budgeting, which is why, at the beginning, I had quite limited budgetary concerns. I have had to take some fairly difficult decisions to live within the budget. My overspend at the moment is pretty much entirely with the PSNI. That is where the majority of DOJ's overspend is happening. We are working with the PSNI to try to find ways of managing that overspend. We have already reduced it by about half, but we need to reduce it further still for the Department of Finance to judge it as being affordable. I will continue to work with colleagues to find a way through. Just because police officers and, indeed, prison officers do not go on strike does not mean that they should be any less worthy of receiving their pay when it is due. They do a difficult job and should be remunerated fairly.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

T5. Mr Donnelly asked the Minister of Justice for an update on her speeding up justice programme. (AQT 1655/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The programme is an example of cross-justice collaboration to try to resolve what is a key issue. The Criminal Justice Board comprises all the senior leaders in the justice system, and they have prioritised that programme of work. It takes a whole-system approach; focuses on reducing avoidable delay, reducing demand, freeing up capacity and facilitating more proportionate and effective responses to offending behaviour; and aims to take advantage of technological developments to improve operational processes and communication between criminal justice organisations.

Funding of £20·5 million from the public-sector transformation board is enabling work to progress on early engagement and out-of-court disposals. There are regular updates to the Criminal Justice Board, as well as interim updates to the programme board, about how we are making progress. Given the existing financial pressures, that funding is a boost and will enable us to do some essential work to progress efforts and reduce avoidable delay. Part of that will be the work that we are doing around collating responses to the out-of-court disposals consultation. We will publish the findings of that and recommendations in due course. There is an early engagement project, which has seen the commencement of a gateway initiative to seek to enhance communication and file-preparation quality between the PSNI and the PPS at the earliest point in a case. There is also work towards a pilot of new case-management processes for courts. In addition, work is continuing on the implementation of a second phase of committal reform — direct committal — which is planned for November 2026.

There is still a lot more to be done, but what we are seeing in departmental statistics is that the average or median time taken for a case to be dealt with from the date on which the offence is reported to the police was 189 days in the most recent bulletin. That was an 8·3% improvement over the past two years, and will be a key measure of how the system is performing overall and a sign that efforts to speed up justice are having an impact.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she provide an assessment of the impact that budgetary pressures are having on justice system transformation?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

There is a long-standing and ongoing funding challenge for Justice, which is well recognised by everyone in the House because I repeat it frequently enough. It will undoubtedly impact on what we can deliver. The DOJ's share of the Northern Ireland block grant has fallen continually over the past 14 years, from just under 11% in 2011-12 to just over 8% in 2025-26. That underfunding hampers our efforts to do transformation as funding is, quite rightly, prioritised to demand-led front-line activities, including policing, prisons and courts. We have less than 0·5% of discretionary spend, which makes it increasingly difficult for us to engage in that kind of system-wide transformation. There is an appetite, however, for change right across the justice system, and so bids to initiatives such as the public-sector transformation board are crucial because they will allow us to fulfil that appetite to fund some of those endeavours and, hopefully, make further savings in the future if we can make those changes. All of us around the Criminal Justice Board table recognise that there needs to be transformation for us to be more effective and efficient. That investment now will help us to save money in the future.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

T6. Mrs Dodds asked the Minister of Justice, after, as other Members have, expressing her solidarity with her and condemning what happened at her home last week, whether, given that she is committed to the strategy of ending violence against women and girls, and given that we have had a huge number of women murdered in Northern Ireland, and that many of those cases have taken a very long time to come to court, there is anything practical that can be done to ensure that families who have suffered the most awful of harms in the death of their loved one can see justice at an earlier stage. (AQT 1656/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have just set out the work that we are doing on speeding up justice. One of the particular reasons that we are looking at, for example, changes in the jurisdiction of the courts, as well as more out-of-court disposals for lower level offences, is to ensure that court time at the High Court is reserved for the most serious of offences, which will allow us, hopefully, to move more swiftly. Committal reform, for example, has already delivered hugely for victims of sexual offences and domestic abuse cases, whereby they do not have to give evidence potentially twice, which is a deterrent to people's coming forward. We have also used the remote evidence centre; there is a judge-led pilot there, which has domestic abuse contest cases heard. In the first tranche of eight cases that went through, all eight victims turned up and gave evidence, and all eight perpetrators were happy to concede guilt at the outset, so, just by the victims being there and having the confidence to come to court, the perpetrators pled guilty. We have seen that repeated. In domestic abuse contest cases where victims are able to give remote evidence, the success rate is well over 90% conviction. There are things that we are doing that will speed up justice and also make the process better. Finally, every domestic homicide is a tragedy.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. Will you draw your remarks to a close?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I will. We are also looking at domestic homicide reviews. I am happy to provide the Member with further information on that.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Can I make a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker?

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Not at the moment.

Minister, while we wait for the next Minister to come in, I put on record that my personal thoughts are with you and Michael following the horrible attack your home. That should not be the case for anybody. Indeed, it is important that we recognise that.

On a slightly lighter note, there seems to be an acoustic anomaly in the Chamber today. Yes, you two, esteemed Members from the SDLP: please be aware that your voices carry from that particular corner and that that can interfere with other Members' contributions. You have ample opportunity to contribute at any given time.

Oral Answers to Questions — Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

We will start with listed questions. Questions 1, 6 and 9 have been withdrawn.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

2. Ms Murphy asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs how he will ensure that the proposed £150 million budget for Shaping Sustainable Places will be distributed equitably between urban centres and remote rural areas. (AQO 2522/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

At the outset, I record my concerns about recent events concerning public representatives and my complete solidarity with Naomi and Michael Long, my ministerial colleague Liz Kimmins and Dáire Hughes MP. It is important that we all stand full square in defence of democracy in this place and that all Ministers record their support for their colleagues who have faced appalling intimidation.

My Department previously supported regeneration activities in rural settlements with a population of 5,000 and below on behalf of the Northern Ireland Executive through successive European Union rural development programmes. Following the UK's decision to leave the European Union, I have welcomed the opportunity to collaborate with the Department for Communities, as lead for regeneration policy, and the Department for Infrastructure, as lead for active travel, in the proposed Shaping Sustainable Places programme. Together, we are collectively implementing a long-term, community-led approach to support regeneration initiatives in our village, town and city centres across Northern Ireland. My intention is to propose that my Department invest £50 million into the £150 million fund that will be earmarked for spend to support regeneration activities in rural settlements with populations of 5,000 and below to ensure that no rural community is left behind.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his answer. I notice that the consultation documents mention of the possibility of a "Centre First policy". How does that align with your responsibilities in DAERA for rural affairs?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

We are very conscious of our lead responsibility on rural affairs. I am proud to hold that Ministry and have that lead responsibility. Each Department has a duty to serve rural communities in Northern Ireland. It is a demonstration of how we can collectively come together and ensure that the needs of rural communities are reflected. We have lost out through the loss of the rural development programme, but, hopefully, we will see a new approach to ensuring that people in rural areas are properly served through Shaping Sustainable Places and other initiatives that will flow from the new rural affairs policy, on which we will consult early in the new year.

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

Does the Minister agree that, in addition to rural and urban balance, there needs to be regional balance in the allocation of that £150 million? What will he do to ensure that that happens, given the fact that it is a joint scheme with the Department for Infrastructure and the Department for Communities?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Councils have a key role in that. They play a central role in identifying and prioritising regeneration initiatives. I fully support the empowering of councils to lead that effort. They have been encouraged to take a strategic, place-based approach and to work closely with local communities in order to shape proposals that reflect local aspirations and challenges.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

3. Ms Brownlee asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, given the concerns regarding pollution in Belfast lough, whether he will commit to expanding formally identified bathing water sites to include areas such as Carrickfergus, where open water swimming is becoming increasingly popular. (AQO 2523/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I share the Member's concern about water quality in Belfast lough. I am also aware how popular sea swimming has become, which is why I formally identified seven new bathing water sites on 1 June this year. I have recently committed to a new bathing waters policy review for Northern Ireland, which will commence shortly. The review marks a significant milestone in our ongoing commitment to safeguarding public health, enhancing water quality and protecting our natural environment. New bathing water sites will be considered as part of the review. The review will also look at the length of the bathing season, as I recognise that a lot of bathing takes place outside of the current bathing season, which runs from 1 June to 15 September.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister. Sea swimming is incredibly popular in the likes of Fisherman's Quay. We have a triathlon, sea swimmers, sea dippers and everything in between. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council nominated Fisherman's Quay, but the Department turned it down. Areas such as Carrickfergus are being left behind in that regard. What more can the Minister and the Department do to ensure that that area is included and safe for everyone to use?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Cheryl. I understand that there were lots of nominations during the previous review. As an MLA for North Down, I nominated areas, as did many other Members. The new review that is coming up will be an opportunity for us to take forward nominations, but it is crucial that we work in conjunction with councils on that, because they have a responsibility for it. We will work closely with councils. We have ongoing engagement, and it is important that we look not just at which sites are designated but at the season, because we are seeing a lot more people swimming outside the designated bathing season.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Minister, what action are you taking to address waste water pollution in Carrickfergus and Belfast lough?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you very much, Stewart. Waste water pollution is of significant concern to me. I have responsibility for regulation for and enforcement on pollution. I am on record and will say again that it is unacceptable that a separate arrangement is in place for Northern Ireland Water whereby, since 2007, it has, in many instances, got a bye ball when it comes to pollution. I will be taking proposals to the Executive on that, because it is important that we regularise enforcement on sewage pollution in Northern Ireland.

The other issue is the investment that is required for waste water infrastructure. I will be really honest with Members: I am fast losing patience over the need to take tough decisions on waste water infrastructure. It impacts not just on our environment but on housebuilding and economic development. As Minister, I am taking the tough decisions and putting my head above the parapet to turn around the situation in Lough Neagh, but others need to do the same, particularly the Department for Infrastructure. Mountains of reports are gathering up about the inadequacy of our waste water infrastructure. We need to turn the sewage pollution tap off, take brave decisions and end sewage pollution not just in Belfast lough but in many other waterways across Northern Ireland.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

I share my colleague Cheryl Brownlee's concerns about Fisherman's Quay not being selected by the Department.

Minister, you have talked about the impact of the horrendous amount of waste water that is being pumped into Belfast lough and have said that it is the next Lough Neagh waiting to happen. That is deeply worrying. What conversations have you had with Northern Ireland Water to see what more it can do to reduce the waste water that is being pumped into Belfast lough? What further investment and projects need to happen to protect that vital asset?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

My role as Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs includes regulation and enforcement. I have made it clear how I want to strengthen the sewage pollution situation. I want to end Northern Ireland Water largely getting a bye ball, if that is due to historic underinvestment. The issue is that we need to face up to tough decisions about our waste water infrastructure. As an MLA for North Down and as Minister, I know the dire state of Belfast lough, and I am taking action, for example, on the designation of sensitive areas (SAs) that require more investment. I have also set out more on the statement of regulatory principles and intent (SORPI), but, fundamentally, the issue sits with the Department for Infrastructure. If Members want to improve water quality, we have to face up to the issues and look at how we fund our waste water infrastructure in the future. The current situation is not sustainable.

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

Minister, sea swimming is popular in my constituency from Portrush to Coleraine, Benone and beyond. We even have groups such as the Menopausal Mermaids and Salty Sea Sisters. What action are you taking to maintain areas that are used for bathing? Have you identified any parts of the North that do not have any and, if so, how we can improve things to have more?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Councils often manage areas where people bathe. That is why we have a partnership arrangement with them for water quality, testing and all the rest of it. It is therefore important that people engage with their council. Some areas, such as Crawfordsburn Country Park, sit under the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA), and we have management responsibilities for such areas. Often, however, they are, as I said, councils' responsibility, which is why we want to work in partnership with them.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

4. Mrs Mason asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline the steps that his Department is taking to tackle the impact of bovine TB (bTB) on farmers and the wider agri-food sector. (AQO 2524/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Since becoming Minister, I have been clear that we must do more to reverse the increase in bovine TB in Northern Ireland. In January, in response to a recommendation from the Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO), I established a TB partnership steering group — a new body that is made up of farming, industry, veterinary and environmental stakeholders — to work with my Department to develop the actions that are needed to get rates of the disease to fall. I was therefore very pleased to endorse the group's agreed 'Bovine Tuberculosis in Northern Ireland — Blueprint for Eradication', which was published in April. The blueprint document sets out the necessary priorities under three key themes: people, cattle and wildlife. My Department has a new TB eradication transformation programme in place to deliver the actions in the blueprint. Initial priorities include work on wildlife intervention options. I have therefore asked officials to prepare a new public consultation on options.

Other priority work streams include work to ensure that TB testing is carried out to the required standard, work to progress a potential regionalisation pilot, work to provide on-farm biosecurity advice and work to expand the use of the supplementary interferon-gamma (IFN-g) blood test. I am committed to progressing the new measures in order to tackle the disease as quickly as possible. It is clear that only by working together can we tackle all the factors that contribute to the spread and endurance of that costly disease.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I appreciate that answer, Minister. I have written to you on the subject, and I appreciate your response and the fact that you sent out the Chief Veterinary Officer. Farmers tell me that they are heartbroken. While their herds are being wiped out, they feel very left behind, and their families face huge mental and financial strain. I understand that many of the farmers who have been directly impacted on feel that their voice is not being heard on the stakeholder engagement group. Minister, will you commit to holding meaningful engagement with farmers on the ground, as they want to work with you to help out?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I fully understand the challenges that bTB presents for farm families in Northern Ireland. It creates mental anguish, but there is a cost associated with it as well. Although the Department is upholding the 100% rate of compensation, I understand that that does not reflect the whole associated cost loss. I will continue to engage with relevant representatives. I thank people for taking part in the stakeholder forum, as it is important for finding a way forward. The issue is not confined to Northern Ireland. Rates of infection pose a challenge in England, Wales and the South. Fundamentally, the only way through this is to work together, and that is what I am committed to doing.

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

Minister, you mentioned the transformation programme. Can you give us some detail on its specifics and on what targets it will set to address the awful scourge of bTB that affects livelihoods and infects herds?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

We are under obligation to work towards eradication, and I am keen to do that, but it will take time. Fundamentally, as I said, it is based on the three pillars of people, cattle and wildlife, and that is what we are investing in. It is important that we take forward those actions. My Department bid for some of the transformation funding that is available in Northern Ireland. We were not successful in the first round, but we have submitted a second bid. It is important that we support that work so that we can drive down rates of infection, not just because of the impact that bTB has on farm families but because of the impact that it has on my Department's budget. That is why we want to turn the situation around.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

The Minister mentioned infection rates in other jurisdictions. We share a border with the Irish Republic. What engagement has he had with the Irish Government on working collectively to eradicate bovine TB on the island?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I have spoken to Minister Martin Heydon on the issue, as I did to his predecessor, Charlie McConalogue. It is a key topic in the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) work plan, and I look forward to having continued engagement.

I note with interest the publication of the robust new TB action plan from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) and its proposed additional measures. On Friday, I was pleased to announce, alongside Minister Heydon, a new cross-border project as part of the Shared Island initiative to tackle the growing impact of bTB on farms in a pilot area. That new cross-border initiative is aimed at taking a regionalised approach to tackling bovine TB.

Both Departments will engage in developing the overall approach for the cooperation project, which is to focus on implementation of measures on a coordinated regional basis to support reduction of bovine TB incidence and transmission.

I am glad that we got that over the line: we will continue to work on roll-out, and I am confident that it will make a tangible difference in what is a key issue for farming communities, North and South.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Minister, given that scientific evidence from other jurisdictions shows that culling wildlife has a positive impact on the reduction of bovine TB, what consideration have you or the partnership group that has been set up to look at eradicating bovine TB given to that?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

There is no primary or secondary legislation in operation that explicitly provides for the culling of badgers in Northern Ireland. Following the judicial review decision, there is no departmental policy in place on wildlife intervention. I assure you that I will proceed with a consultation on potential wildlife intervention measures as soon as I can. I advise Members that the judicial review was split into two parts, the second of which was on the legislative basis for wildlife intervention. Officials are therefore exploring all potential avenues that may form part of the legislative basis for any wildlife intervention in order to ensure that our position will be robust in any future legal challenge.

Any decision that I make on wildlife intervention will include preferred legislative means and be based on science and evidence. We need wildlife intervention, but it is important that we do it right.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Minister, it is past the time for honeyed words and more talking shops about an issue that affects people's livelihoods. If the science points to a badger cull, will you introduce the necessary legislation to put it in place during your time as Minister?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I have been consistent, unlike many others in the Chamber, in respecting science and evidence. We will follow a process; we will do this right. We will consult on the wildlife interventions, and we will take decisions on the way forward. We have to learn lessons from how we did it previously, and we have to respect the science and evidence, not, as some people have done, cherry-pick.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Following Friday's announcement on the cross-border initiative, will the Minister be more explicit about the target zone for the pilots? Will there be a regional assessment, or will it be in the border regions?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

We will continue to work through that. The announcement was significant and something that I was keen to achieve. We now have to work together, North and South and with stakeholders, on where that will be. It is likely to be in a border area because it is a Shared Island initiative. It is a good example of where we can work North/South to deal with something that is a challenge in both jurisdictions.

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

5. Mr McNulty asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline any guarantees contained in the Dilapidation Bill [NIA Bill 21/22-27] that will avoid local councils being left with costly and lengthy legal cases when recovering money spent on repairing or demolishing derelict properties. (AQO 2525/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Whilst the Bill does not specifically contain such guarantees, the provision of robust and effective measures to ensure that the appropriate person or organisation pays for the necessary remedial actions is key to minimising cost to the public purse. Councils will not be expected to take remedial action in every case. The Bill seeks to ensure that those with an interest in a property take on the liabilities associated with it.

Councils will need to use a common-sense approach on a case-by-case basis in deciding whether to begin enforcement proceedings if the likelihood of recovering costs is minimal. It is considered reasonable to assume that a council would adopt an approach that does not put its finances at risk and that ensures that it maximises its success in the interests of its ratepayers. The Bill will also give councils the power to put a charge on the land where costs cannot be recovered immediately, ensuring full cost recovery.

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

Minister, you seemed to outline a take it or leave it approach there. The Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum says:

"It is not anticipated that the Bill will have any financial effects on the Department."

Does the fact that no funding is attached to the Bill not mean that councils will be reluctant to spend their scarce resources? Will you consider a small budget to support councils?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Justin, for your question. I take a more positive approach to life when it comes to this. The legislation will give councils the power to act, and it will be up to them to decide. There are many examples of where the power will allow councils to take action and say to the owner of the building, "You fix it, or we will fix it, and we will send you the bill". It is good legislation. It is going through a scrutiny process, which I welcome, because it will allow us to tease out some of the issues that we are getting feedback on and to understand whether we will want to table amendments at Consideration Stage or Further Consideration Stage.

I want to work with people to make sure that this makes a difference. It has been a long time coming, and, hopefully, we will be able to get it scrutinised and on to the statute book.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, given the hugely central role of councils in the Bill, can you give a firm guarantee that your Department will consult councils, NILGA and other stakeholders during the legislative process?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Declan. My officials have liaised with councils throughout the policy consultation process. Since the restoration of the Assembly, several councils have contacted my Department asking for updates on the Bill. My officials have also contacted the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE) on the Bill's progress. SOLACE has confirmed that local government remains supportive of the Dilapidation Bill's introduction to the Assembly. Draft statutory guidance has now been shared with SOLACE and the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) for comment. The permanent secretary has reached out to SOLACE and offered a meeting to discuss any concerns that it has. We need to work with people on this, and that is what we are committed to doing.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

In a similar vein, how will the Minister ensure that any legislation that is brought forward is operable and workable with local councils?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

We will take into account the feedback that has been received, particularly by the Committee as a result of its call for evidence. I have been looking at some that has come back. Councils have it coming onto their agendas, so I look at their reports. I have also looked at the RaISe report that the Committee commissioned. We will take all that into account and try to find a way forward that assures councils that the draft legislation is going to enable them, because revitalising our villages, towns and city centres and dealing with dereliction is good not just for the residents and businesses of those areas but for the council's rates base. If an area is dilapidated, the rates base is not what it should be. It is a good opportunity for everyone.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

First, thank you, Minister, for joining me to visit the Antrim Arms Hotel in Ballycastle during the summer to see just how much impact dilapidated buildings can actually have, particularly on small rural towns. Secondly, I agree with your positive outlook on life, so do you agree that the Dilapidation Bill will make a significant difference to people who live with the consequences of derelict buildings?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Sian. Yes: there is far too much negativity in the Chamber. We need a bit of positivity.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

What a good answer, Minister.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Yes. We need to show people in Northern Ireland that this can be a place for good. Far too often, and even from the start of today's business, there has been negativity. We can scrutinise and examine, but we also need to show people a bit of hope. This legislation will allow councils to have the powers to intervene, and often in a situation where that dilapidation is just starting. It will allow fixed penalty notices to be issued that will incentivise the people who own those buildings to address their condition. I visited Ballycastle and could see places where it would help. You want people to be able to invest in areas and have confidence that, where dilapidation is starting to occur, councils have the powers to intervene.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

7. Mr Chambers asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline his strategy to prevent pollution in Belfast lough reaching the levels being experienced in Lough Neagh. (AQO 2527/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I recognise the critical importance of safeguarding water quality in Belfast lough and affirm my strong commitment to implementing comprehensive measures to improve water quality in Northern Ireland's water bodies. My Department's corporate plan 2025-27 contains a specific pledge to deliver an improvement in water quality. Significant pressure in Belfast lough's catchment is from waste water. Although waste water infrastructure falls within the Department for Infrastructure, my Department is engaging with it and Northern Ireland Water to enhance the regulation, monitoring and treatment of waste water. I am progressing plans to identify inner Belfast lough as a shellfish water protected area — that is a sensitive area that I referred to earlier — under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2007, subject to Executive approval. Additional waste water treatment will be required as a result of the identification. I am aware of the need to progress that important area as a matter of urgency. Above all, addressing the issue depends on proper investment. I will continue to support the need for investment in waste water infrastructure in Northern Ireland and take the tough decisions that we need to take to ensure that we have sustained long-term investment.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Last November, I brought to your attention in the Chamber, Minister, a whistle-blower who had reported to me that Belfast lough had the potential to become the new Lough Neagh within the next 10 years. Part of your reply to me that day was this:

"I feel that, sadly, we are on course for seeing Belfast lough become our next Lough Neagh, with serious and substantial water quality breakdown." — [Official Report (Hansard), 4 November 2024, p28, col 2].

Is that assessment still your position, or are things improving?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

As a Minister, and also as a representative for North Down, I am very worried about the state of Belfast lough and where we are heading. That is why I am losing patience over the need to take difficult decisions on investment and waste water infrastructure. We cannot dodge tough decisions in this place. I am prepared to take them, and I am taking them, but they need to be taken across the Executive. The situation that is unfolding in Belfast lough is a real concern. I will take whatever actions I can on regulation and enforcement to make it clear that it is not acceptable, but I find it strange that other people do not show that level of concern. We are pumping sewage into Belfast lough and other waterways, and we are seeing the consequences of that with the pollution that is occurring.

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

Minister, I share your concern about a lack of clarity on investment in NI waste water, which is why I hope that you and your party will support our Opposition motion tomorrow on the need for an investment strategy to deal with these things. Another document that was published very quietly on Friday a week ago was the legislation programme for 2025-26. Your Department has only one Bill proposed in it. That goes right up until the end of 2026, so, presumably, that is the last iteration of current Executive legislation. It says that there will be a fisheries and water environment Bill. It does not specifically say that that will include provision for an independent environmental protection agency (EPA), but, presumably, that will be the last legislative vehicle for such a body to be created. Can you confirm whether the ship has now sailed on an independent EPA's being legislated for in this mandate?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

We have progressed or are progressing three Bills. The Agriculture Bill is now in law as the Agriculture Act, and the Dilapidation Bill is progressing. The fisheries and water environment Bill will strengthen regulation and enforcement around water pollution. It is out for consultation, so, if you have any views, please do feed back. It will allow us to issue fixed penalty notices and to increase the maximum fine from £20,000 to £50,000. It is an important piece of legislation.

I commissioned a panel to look at the issue of an independent environmental protection agency, and it will report back very shortly on that. When the opportunity came up to legislate for that through an amendment that was tabled to the climate change legislation, your party did not even turn up. Decisions are made by people who turn up, Matthew.

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

This mandate. You are the Minister. I am asking you about this mandate.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Matthew, behave. I call William Irwin. William, much better behaviour, please.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his responses so far. We are aware of the reports that thousands of tons of raw sewage has been pumped into Belfast lough. Does the Minister agree that that is totally unacceptable and that something needs to be done as soon as possible?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I entirely agree.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Minister, I share your concern about the unacceptable levels of pollution in Belfast lough. Will you provide an update on the investigation into the sources of pollution in Ballyholme bay?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Northern Ireland Water initiated work with the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) in May 2024. Samples were collected from over 20 stations covering the marine environment and the catchment. There were approximately 15 sampling points along the Cotton river. Northern Ireland Water agents also found a number of unidentified pipes discharged into the Cotton river by walking its length. That has revealed a large number of misconnections in drains that should contain only surface waters. That typically happens when householders retrofit a downstairs toilet to an existing property and connect to the surface water drainage system rather than the sewer.

Initial observations are that Northern Ireland Water assets along the Cotton river are operating as intended and are overflowing only in extreme conditions. Event and duration monitors have been installed at those sites. Northern Ireland Water has advised that misconnections have been investigated at 164 properties in total. Seven misconnections have been confirmed, and a further 34 sites have been classified as highly likely. All those have now been referred to the Northern Ireland Water misconnections and blockages team. Misconnections to a DFI-culverted stream were also detected and have been reported to DFI Rivers. Other observations from the data are that ruminant influence is strongest at the top end of the catchments and that the human signal increases as the eastern and western tributaries move through the town, as would be expected.

We need to raise awareness of the implications of misconnections. Two pieces of legislation are being progressed: the Water, Sustainable Drainage and Flood Management Bill, which will help to deal with misconnections, and the fisheries and water environment Bill.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

8. Mr Tennyson asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs how the RV Jocelyn Bell Burnell will assist the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute in carrying out research into the marine environment. (AQO 2528/22-27)

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Minister, you have 30 seconds.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The research vessel Jocelyn Bell Burnell will give AFBI a step change in how it observes and protects the marine environment. It will be able to gather high-quality data and samples across the marine environment whilst reducing disturbance to marine life and lowering emissions. It will strengthen AFBI and DAERA's ability to understand marine ecosystems, detect climate signals and help the marine industries to adapt. It will also help us join up land and sea, recognising that what happens on land also affects the ocean, and that a healthy ocean, in turn, supports our coasts, climate and economy. With a 30-year design life, the ship equips the next generation of marine scientists and secures the long-term evidence base needed to make sound decisions.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. That ends the period for listed questions. We now move on to 15 minutes of topical questions. Topical question 1 has been withdrawn.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

T2. Ms Flynn asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, given the British Government's potential to rethink inheritance tax changes, to ensure that the specific needs of farmers in the North of Ireland are fully taken into account in any revised tax proposals. (AQT 1662/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I have been consistent in my opposition to the family farm tax because of the disproportionate and detrimental impact that it would have on farmers in Northern Ireland. As a result, I have made representations to the UK Government on multiple occasions. I will, again, make representations to the UK Government this week because it is important that they listen to farmers on the impact that it is going to have. A useful report came from the Centre for the Analysis of Taxation (CenTax), an analysis and tax advisory centre. It has a lot of merit, and I wish that the UK Government would take that up.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for that response. He touched on my next question: does the Minister accept that, without changes to the British Government's inheritance tax proposals, the future sustainability of family farms here could be undermined? Will he give that commitment to continue to press the British Government to rethink those plans?