Northern Ireland Assembly, 10 November 2025

531 contributions from 69 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move

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

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

As the motion has been agreed, the Assembly can sit beyond 7.00 pm, if required.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The next item of business is a motion, signed by at least 30 Members under section 30 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, on the exclusion of the Minister of Education from office.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I beg to move

That this Assembly, under section 30(1)(b) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, resolves that, further to his recent visit to Israel, the Minister of Education no longer enjoys the confidence of the Assembly, because of his failure to observe paragraphs (cd) and (ce) of the Pledge of Office, relating to his duty to uphold and support the rule of law; and his failure to observe paragraph (g) relating to his duty to comply with the ministerial code of conduct; and that he should be excluded from holding office as a Minister or junior Minister for a period of 12 months.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Before I call Gerry Carroll to speak, I want to make a few remarks. I am conscious that we had heated exchanges during the question for urgent oral answer on these matters last week.

I understand there are strong feelings throughout the House on these matters. Members know that I will uphold everyone's right to scrutinise Ministers and hold them to account, and I welcome robust debate. I remind Members, however, of our standards of debate of good temper, moderation, courtesy and respect. Robust arguments can be made on the issues in a respectful way without being disorderly. I also remind Members that, if there are lots of points of order during the debate, I will hold them all until the end of the debate, as they will interfere with the running of matters.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

It is clear that the Minister of Education has lost the confidence of the majority of parties and MLAs in the House. I thank the parties who have supported the motion today — Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance, as well as the independent MLA, Claire Sugden. The Minister has lost the support of tens of thousands of people outside this Building, including the teaching unions and many who work in education. He has brought his Department into disrepute, failed to uphold the Pledge of Office and failed to comply with the ministerial code of conduct.

I wish to set out with the utmost clarity the case for Paul Givan to resign as Minister of Education. Paul Givan stated that he travelled to Israel in his capacity as an individual MLA. That was found to be untrue. He later admitted that it was his idea and decision to make the trip relevant to his role as Education Minister. Minister Givan claimed that the trip came at no cost to the public purse. That was also untrue. The visit to the school was publicised using departmental resources. In the House last week, the Minister stated that he had meetings with his officials in the Department to discuss the trip. That also has a cost attached to it.

The Functioning of Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021 states that a Minister who holds an official meeting must ensure that a civil servant is present. That did not happen, even though Paul Givan said explicitly that the school visit was directly relevant to his ministerial portfolio. Despite the Minister's bluster and mudslinging, there is no doubt that those meetings were official meetings. Paul Givan said that the parts of his visit pertaining to his role as Minister were totally non-political. That, again, is not true. He visited the Israeli Parliament, where he was listed not as an individual MLA but as the Minister of Education. He shared an overtly political social media post about the event, insinuating that Israeli parliamentarians think that the North should remain a part of the UK.

Paul Givan claims that his trip to Israel was an objective, fact-finding mission. Indeed, the principle of integrity in the ministerial code of conduct states that those in public office should not have financial or other obligations to outside organisations that could influence their official duties. That rule was clearly flouted. The visit was a propaganda junket funded by the Israeli state. There can be no other way to describe it, hence the huge outcry from a huge number of the public. In this Chamber, a matter of days before the trip, Paul Givan expressed his thanks to the Israeli Defence Forces, as he calls them. I wonder whether that was before he had his ticket booked to Jerusalem.

In response to incredibly serious questions about his decision-making in office, Minister Givan has refused to acknowledge or apologise for breaking the rules of his office. Instead, he has sought to deflect, obfuscate and sling offensive, inaccurate slurs. Had he not been so offensive and arrogant, this matter might have blown over. The Minister has levelled a charge of antisemitism against me in particular and other Members of this Chamber who asked questions about his recent trip to Israel. I wish to refute that in the strongest possible terms and to condemn the Minister for diminishing the truly horrific and deeply serious reality of antisemitism by flinging it at his critics like a get-out-of-jail-free card. I would also like to remind him of the great replacement-type conspiracy theories that have been repeated by his party colleagues almost every single week, which have their roots in antisemitic hatred. It is his party that peddles far right rhetoric in an attempt to deflect and blame minorities and migrants for society's ills. The Minister should be ashamed and apologetic, but then he is not known for his honesty or his humility.

As I have just set out, the case for the Minister to resign is strong before we even consider that he made an official visit to a state that is carrying out an active genocide against the people of Palestine, while Ministers here have a duty to prevent genocide at all costs. For the record, I believe that the Minister's travelling to Israel during this genocide is reason enough to question his fitness for ministerial office. Israel has openly defied international law time and again, inflicting maximum suffering on civilians. That is not just my view or the view of other parties in the House but the words of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The International Court of Justice has recognised the unlawfulness of Israel's ongoing presence in the occupied Palestinian territories. Paul Givan chose to visit a school in those occupied territories. Bizarrely, he patted himself on the back for visiting a school in illegally occupied territory because it was integrated. The irony of that statement should not be lost, given his party's role in preventing integration at home on every step of the way.

The Minister repeated lies about the education that Palestinians receive. He claimed, last week, that they are told to hate the Jews. That is completely false and inaccurate, is deeply racist towards Arabs and ignores the hatred that is taught in the Israeli education system —.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

In a second, maybe.

In that state, "Death to the Arabs" is regularly chanted in the streets by settlers, with absolutely no repercussions. Days before the Minister smiled for pictures in the Knesset, that same body voted to annex the West Bank — a decision that would further breach international law and that was criticised heavily by US Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, those well-known members of that left-wing cabal.

Millions of us have been forced to watch the death, torture, bloodshed and suffering of Palestinian people at the hands of the Israeli state. I cannot fathom how anyone could see children with missing limbs and lifeless bodies being pulled out of rubble and then accept an invitation from the people who are directly responsible for that mass slaughter. The Minister and his party made a fundamental mistake in writing off the anger of the Palestine Solidarity Movement and people across communities in the North as antisemitic, sectarian or terrorist sympathising. That is not just a cynical deflection tactic; the DUP accuses its critics of being antisemitic or sectarian because it so desperately wants that to be the truth.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Maybe in a second.

The DUP fears the power of the local and global Palestine Solidarity Movement, which is cross-community, diverse and filled with millions of people of all ages, religions and backgrounds.

In response to the motion, some people talked about the need to focus on issues at home, but I say, "Look at home. Look at the state of our schools". A total of 84 schools across the North are suffering from black mould, and six of those are in the Minister's constituency. That is the context in which he chose to travel to Israel for six days to visit one school and to smile alongside the Israeli Government. The Education Authority (EA) told principals recently:

"to take any and all actions possible to reduce expenditure"

to fill a £300 million black hole in the budget. That is austerity on steroids.

The Minister ordered the removal from the EA website of guidance and support for trans pupils, trying to further kick, marginalise and attack a community that is already under huge repression and attacks. His Department published plans to criminalise teachers for not taking part in school inspections while taking legal industrial action. Just last week, the EA announced that it was hiking the price of school meals and cutting overtime payments and school music programmes. A few days ago, I was contacted by an education other than at school (EOTAS) teacher who works with marginalised and vulnerable young people. Disgracefully, the EA had told them that referrals to that provision were being suspended. As you can imagine, the staff are demoralised and furious about the lack of communication and transparency. I could go on and on, but it is a long list that I do not have the time to go through.

Paul Givan's tenure as Education Minister was marred with controversy and failings long before this scandal. He has failed education workers, schools and some of the most vulnerable and marginalised in our communities. He has ducked and weaved in and out of the truth in order to justify a trip to Israel as it actively continues to commit genocide against Palestinians. While in Israel, he failed to uphold his Pledge of Office and to comply with the ministerial code of conduct. He has made deeply offensive and unfounded accusations of antisemitism, because he is in a tailspin. I am sure that many of the same slanderous remarks will be recycled in the debate, as the DUP is not renowned for its creativity. Those accusations should be utterly rejected and condemned by all.

It is an embarrassment to the institutions that big parties here claim that they want to protect at all costs Minister Givan continuing in his role as Minister of Education. I appeal to the Minister to do the right thing, make his apologies, accept that he is not fit to hold the post of Minister of Education, and step aside.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Declan Kearney.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

You have five minutes, Mr Kearney.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The participation of the Education Minister in his Israeli state-sponsored propaganda stunt was an obscene act, one that has caused deep offence. It has also been roundly condemned by teachers, unions, students and all right-thinking people across these islands.

Minister Givan knew exactly what he was doing. His participation was premeditated. He knew that the use of his departmental social media would provoke widespread outrage. That, too, was premeditated. In doing this, he chose to ignore Israel's sadistic depravity and genocide against the Palestinian people. If there was ever the slightest doubt before, there is no doubting now that he is a genocide denier — an amoral, inhuman, incredible and grotesque position for anyone to adopt, but especially someone in public office. The Minister chooses to ignore the slaughter of over 20,000 innocent Palestinian children in Gaza, 1,000 of them under the age of 12 months. One child has been murdered every hour for the past two years, and 21,000 children have been left with permanent life-changing injuries. Limbs have been amputated without anaesthetic; hundreds have been starved to death by Israel's siege of Gaza; and Gaza is a graveyard for children, as described by UNICEF.

The Minister has form in using these institutions to rake up the past of our political conflict and to consciously provoke and demonise. By acting as a prop for that propaganda stunt, you have aligned yourself with a rogue terrorist state — a state whose murderous bloodbath in Gaza has made it a pariah in the global community; whose leader is the subject of an international arrest warrant issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ); whose genocidal war has violated every canon of international law, such as the genocide convention, the Rome statute, the Geneva Convention and the United Nations charter; and whose famine, genocide, torture, siege and carpet bombing of Gaza have been denounced by the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, B'Tselem, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Today, the state of Israel stands charged with and condemned for crimes against humanity.

Your Israeli-sponsored trip and attempt to sanitise your complicity with a social media post on the Department of Education web page is an affront to the Assembly and to our power-sharing institutions. You do not own the Department of Education. It is the property of our peace settlement and the Good Friday Agreement. The arrogance that you have shown in defence of your actions since your return confirms your premeditation. There has been not one ounce of humility, compassion or regret for the people of Gaza or the anger that you have provoked. It is clear that you intended to cause rancour and division. Your actions are inevitably tied up with your personal political ambitions and your party's electoral pressures within political unionism, but, be that as it may, what you did was absolutely wrong. Denying genocide and defying international law are absolutely reprehensible. You have chosen to associate yourself with the perpetrators of a modern holocaust and then to revel in that decision. You should be ashamed. You can no longer command —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I remind the Member —

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

— confidence as a Minister of Education —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Kearney —

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

— and you should go.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Just a moment. I remind you that, when you say "you", you are actually referring to me. If you want to refer to the Minister, you should say "the Minister" or the other person, but, when you say "you", you are referring to the Chair. I remind you and other Members of that.

Are you finished?

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Yes.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

"Victory to the Palestinian Resistance" alongside a raised fist emoji. What a thing to write as Hamas, an internationally proscribed terrorist organisation, not only fired over 4,300 rockets indiscriminately into Israel but murdered more than 1,200 innocent men, women and children, raping and pillaging as they went. What a thing to write from the comfort of your home, thousands of miles away, as young people at a music festival were hunted down and slaughtered, young women were brutalised and hundreds were dragged off to an uncertain future and reduced to commodities. However, the mover of the motion felt that that was the most appropriate thing to post as the murderous brutality of the Hamas attacks unfolded on 7 October 2023. Those were and remain the deeply held sentiments of Gerry Carroll, as he submitted the motion of no confidence in the Education Minister. The motion is nothing more that an extension of his continued support for the brutal actions of Hamas on 7 October 2023. It is not a nuanced position. It is unequivocal support for the terrorist slaughter of men, women and children: an explicit anti-Israel position. That is at the root of the motion.

The motion is not about the competence of the Education Minister or about what the Department did or did not do. It is not about any of those things. It is a convenient vehicle to attack Israel. It is a performative motion and, frankly, it is grotesque. Here we have a Minister who visited a school — not just any school but an integrated one where Arabs, Christians and Jews are educated together. In response, People Before Profit, Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party — a pan-nationalist pile-on — decide that that is enough for them and he needs to go. Is it any wonder that this place is ridiculed?

Unsurprisingly, my party will not support the motion. We know that Gerry Carroll is a Hamas fanboy; that was clear from his tweet. We know that Sinn Féin have been long-time admirers of Hamas, having met them multiple times over the years, with Declan Kearney, Gerry Adams and Pat Sheehan all having courted them and tried to give them credibility. Sinn Féin have done the same with terrorist groups around the world. It is what they do.

The SDLP, of course, is struggling for relevance, and being the official Opposition necessitates supporting pointless motions such as this. However, it would have been nice to think that the SDLP was better than that. It will be interesting to note what approach the SDLP takes in response to the outcome of court proceedings involving the Infrastructure Minister. If she is found to have acted unlawfully, what then? Or is it only going to do this when a unionist Minister visits Israel? Where was its criticism of its former party leader, Colum Eastwood, on his visit to Lebanon, funded by the Council for Arab-British Understanding, or is it only when fact-finding trips are organised by the Israeli embassy?

Then we come to the Alliance Party. If ever there was a party that has drifted from its roots, this is one. It is not the party of Oliver Napier, Bob Cooper, John Ferguson and Basil Glass. It was a party that was once not neutral on the union and explicitly supported it, but now the world and his dog can see what its position is as, once again, it falls in behind nationalism and republicanism. Any party with any wit would have steered well clear of the toxicity of such a motion, tabled by Gerry Carroll and supported by Sinn Féin, but the Alliance Party could not help itself as it seeks to boost its credibility in nationalist areas.

The people of Northern Ireland deserve better. Is this where we are as a society, where politicians are condemned for speaking directly to the innocent victims of the 7 October massacre, public representatives are not permitted to ascertain facts for themselves and we must source our news and current affairs only through avenues permitted by nationalism? No, thank you. Once this pantomime is over, perhaps we can get back to what we are paid to do. I support my colleague.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Recent months have not been good for the institutions or for politics more generally. There has been a race to the bottom marked by toxic culture wars, nasty personal insults and a politics that is rooted in fear, division and distraction, with the Chamber at times descending into farce.

The propaganda mission by the Education Minister is but the latest distraction. The images of the Minister smiling for photographs in illegally occupied east Jerusalem that were posted on the Department's website were no accident. They were designed to provoke and stir controversy in order to deflect from a mismanaged budget, hikes in the cost of school meals and cuts to education support for some of our most vulnerable children. The hurt felt by pupils, parents and teachers as a result of that cynical stunt is real. They are appalled that a Minister who is responsible for the welfare of our children would not only accept hospitality from a Government who have killed a classroom of children every day but use public resources to whitewash that situation.

In a power-sharing Executive, of course we will have different views. We will not always see eye to eye, and there will be times when we do not have confidence in Ministers' political positions or policy priorities. However, the motion is not about a simple policy disagreement or difference in political opinion; it goes to the heart of a flagrant disregard for international law and the ministerial code. Despite the bluff and bluster in many of the statements that we have heard from the DUP over the past two weeks and, indeed, often because of those statements, key questions remain.

On 24 October, the Minister told the BBC that he was, in fact, there not in a ministerial capacity but in a party political one. That story has since changed, and it goes to the nub of the issue: if the Minister was there in a DUP capacity, he has misused departmental resources by promoting a political visit; if he was there as a Minister, he was potentially in breach of the Functioning of Government Act by not having officials present. Much more seriously, by entering illegally occupied territory in that official capacity, he has brought the Executive into disrepute by egregiously breaching UK foreign policy and ignoring international law. There is also a question about why the Minister had not declared that he was about to receive thousands of pounds in hospitality from the Israeli Government before rising in the Chamber to praise the actions of the IDF. A Minister in any other part of these islands who engaged in that conduct would already be gone.

Of course, the Minister will be keen to claim that his permanent secretary has given him a clean bill of health in a report that, coincidentally, has not seen the light of day. However, I am aware that the head of the Civil Service is undertaking further enquiries that have not yet concluded.

Ultimately, confidence is at the heart of the issue, and the manner in which the Minister has responded to the fiasco has not helped in that respect. It is clear that the confidence of teaching unions, the wider public and a majority of parties in the Chamber has been shattered by the Minister's behaviour. He could, at any point, have recognised and apologised for the hurt caused, committed to an independent review of his and his Department's actions or referred himself to the standards process, but, instead, he lashed out and doubled down.

Successive attempts have been made in recent weeks, disgracefully, to overlay this debate with sectarianism and prejudice. They are not orange or green issues. People from across our community are horrified at the disregard for the ministerial code, international law and human rights. It is entirely possible to condemn the terrorism of Hamas on 7 October and the genocide that has followed. The previous Member to speak made reference to Oliver Napier and Bob Cooper: I mean, she is not fit to utter their names

[Interruption.]

The DUP, throughout the history

[Interruption.]

Throughout the history —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Throughout the history of the Alliance Party, the DUP has attacked us and impugned our integrity and our motives, so that certainly has not changed. We have been consistent, unlike her party, in standing up to paramilitarism, wherever it comes from, and standing up for the rule of law.

Let it be beyond doubt: the comments of the proposer of the motion, Gerry Carroll, on 7 October were abhorrent and repulsive, and Alliance condemned those comments clearly at the time. Indeed, if Gerry Carroll held ministerial office, we would be in the Chamber supporting a motion of no confidence in him as a result of his conduct.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

We are told that the motion was tabled because the Minister of Education failed

"to uphold and support the rule of law"

and breached the ministerial code of conduct. In truth, the motion tells us far more about the state of politics in Northern Ireland than it ever will about Paul Givan or the visit to Israel. It is performative and partisan. Worse than that, it misleads the public. Let us call it what it is: political theatre dressed up as moral outrage.

We in the Ulster Unionist Party, like the people of Northern Ireland, are horrified by the horrors, the death and the destruction in Israel and Gaza. We recognise that, across Northern Ireland, people hold a range of views on Israel and Palestine, and we note that some have taken issue with the Education Minister's actions. Those who tabled the motion of no confidence, however, should be honest with the people of Northern Ireland. It is politicking, pure and simple, and it will achieve little but the further entrenchment of views and attitudes across our society.

I have said it before, and I will say it again: a Palestinian child and an Israeli child are of equal value. Their lives, education and future are all of equal worth. That simple truth should shape how we speak and act, especially when the world is torn by war and grief, particularly in the Middle East, but those driving the motion have chosen something different. They have chosen spectacle over substance and condemnation over consistency. I know that some who have signed the motion have done so from a place of genuine conviction. Their moral compass is far clearer than that of others who have attached themselves to it. Perhaps inadvertently, however, they have allowed themselves to be drawn into an alliance with those who would spin sincerity into spectacle and turn even principle into a prop for politics.

The author of the motion, Gerry Carroll of People Before Profit, in an attempt to outdo Sinn Féin, accuses the Minister of failing to uphold the rule of law, yet, on 7 October 2023, as Hamas murdered, raped and butchered hundreds of innocent men, women and children, Mr Carroll posted on X, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance". That post is still there today. That is hypocrisy at full throttle. It tells us all that we need to know about the double standards at play.

We then have Sinn Féin, eager to reclaim the territory staked out by Mr Carroll. Some of its members have met Hamas representatives. Those individuals openly boast of their involvement in acts of terror, yet Sinn Féin now presumes to lecture others on moral responsibility and the rule of law. Once again, it is a case of the mote and the beam. Sinn Féin is quick to spot the fault in someone else but blind to the failings in its own ranks. When Sinn Féin Ministers attended the Bobby Storey funeral during a time of strict COVID restrictions, the rules were ignored. Public faith in government was shattered, yet there was no motion of exclusion, no 12-month sanction and no humility. There was only deflection. The people who justified that now claim to be guardians of the ministerial code. This is not about the rule of law but about the rule of convenience. The rules apply to others when it suits but never to Sinn Féin.

The Minister of Education has informed the House that his visit to Israel has already been reviewed by his Department's permanent secretary and found to have followed proper procedure. I am sure that, for full transparency, the Minister will ensure that that review is published. I also understand that the head of the Civil Service is examining the wider handling of the visit. That is the correct and proportionate process for addressing such matters, not the kind of political show trial that we see here today. Until those reviews conclude, the Assembly should resist the temptation to play judge and jury for the sake of a headline.

The motion drags the Assembly into performative outrage while our schools cry out for resources, our children wait months for special needs assessments and our teachers struggle to find basic classroom materials. If those who tabled the motion cared as much about our own children as they claim to care about the conflict in the Middle East, they would channel their energy into education reform and mental health support instead of political grandstanding. Northern Ireland faces deep and seemingly intractable problems, but I can think of few moments that illustrate our dysfunction more clearly than the motion. When hypocrisy outweighs humanity, theatre replaces truth and the beam closes our eyes to our own failings, we all lose sense of what really matters.

The Ulster Unionist Party will not support the motion. We see it as performative, divisive and deeply hypocritical. It does no justice to the innocent victims who have lost their lives in Israel and Gaza. Until we learn to remove the beam from our own eye, we will remain blind to a better future for all our children — Palestinian, Israeli and Northern Irish alike — and —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

— they richly deserve it.

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

My time is brief, so I will be clear about why we are here today. I will be clear about why the SDLP supports the motion of no confidence and why I am a signatory to it.

We are not here solely because of Paul Givan MLA's views on Israel, which I and others in the Chamber find reprehensible and abhorrent. Nor are we are here solely to debate Israel's genocide in Gaza, which has scarred the moral conscience of the entire planet. We are here because of Paul Givan's misuse of office, his shameless compromise of Civil Service impartiality and his flagrant breach of a law that was passed in the Assembly four years ago. Yes, and all of it in territory that has been deemed by the international community, including successive British Governments of all stripes, to be illegally occupied.

Israel's bombardment of Gaza, following the appalling and evil atrocities of 7 October, unleashed, as I said, a wave of revulsion across the world, and it has tested the ability of language to capture horror and misery. Today's debate is not simply about that. I do not think that there is any debate left to have on the justification of that, but had Mr Givan simply embarked upon a tour as a private MLA and a DUP representative, as he first claimed that he had done, we would probably not be here today. He would have angered and appalled people — perhaps, much to his delight, because that was the entire point — but that would not necessarily have been anything new. However, on 27 October, with the Minister having already been in Israel for several days, the Department of Education, at the Minister's instruction, posted a news story online and on social media about his visit to the Ofek School in occupied East Jerusalem, commending:

"Israel’s innovative approaches to gifted education and inclusive learning."

That communication is at the core of why we are here today. The Minister also posted a picture on his own account, which included a nameplate that described him as the "Minister of Education".

I want to be precise and clear about why we are here today because Mr Givan has been imprecise and inconsistent and spoken with a forked tongued. He confirmed last week that, in addition to the extraordinary social media posts, officials had been involved in setting up that meeting, so it was an official ministerial meeting. He shakes his head, but his nameplate was in front of him, and he said last week that his officials helped him to set up the meeting. Under section 7 of the Functioning of Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021, he and all Ministers are obliged to ensure that official meetings are attended by at least one civil servant. The meeting has all the appearance of an official meeting: it was an official meeting. In my view, and that of the Opposition, he has clearly breached the Functioning of Government Act. Ironically, in the DUP's haste to outdo the TUV in offending people, it has broken a law that was introduced by the TUV.

We then come to the matter of Civil Service impartiality in the NICS code. He said that the permanent secretary has given him a clean bill of health. We have not seen that, but I am afraid it has all the credibility of one of Donald Trump's medical exams. The content may not have mentioned the DUP by name, but it should have been obvious to the Minister, the special adviser, and, indeed, senior civil servants, including the permanent secretary, that a visit to occupied East Jerusalem was highly and profoundly controversial.

Add to all of that the extraordinary situation in which a unionist Minister conducted an official visit to a place that has been deemed by the UK Government to have been illegally occupied for the past six decades. That is the precise diplomatic equivalent of visiting a school in Russian-occupied Ukraine, in Luhansk or Crimea, with one of Vladimir Putin's officials. Minister, you are not a stupid man — you certainly believe yourself to be very smart — but, even if you do not care about Palestinian suffering, that was a moronic, stupid thing to do.

The Minister is not a stupid man, but he cannot resist provoking and outraging people. Even before the trip, he had pushed the envelope when it comes to politicising his Department. In the EA, he forced in a chief executive against the wishes of the EA board and forced in a serving DUP politician as chair of the Education Authority. He also had a permanent secretary leave in murky and unexplained circumstances. Minister, you and your colleagues have already begun deflecting and distracting from your appalling actions. Worse, Minister, you have tossed around the profound libel of antisemitism.

People from all backgrounds have got in touch with me to say that they are angry at your actions. Today, your party will protect you from your deserved fate, even though the majority in the Chamber have lost confidence in you. You will no doubt feel vindicated. You are already crowing with the smile of a panto villain, but you know, deep down, that, as is so often the case in your party, the victory will be pyrrhic, because more and more people will turn off politics in this place and look to an entirely different future. Mr Givan, if you had shame or sense, you would be gone by now.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

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

Sadly, you have neither. We support the motion.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The Israeli regime is full of unvarnished liars, and they have been caught out on numerous occasions, of which I will mention just two. On 17 October 2023, a rocket landed in the courtyard of Al-Ahli Hospital, and almost 300 Palestinian men, women and children were killed. They were blown to pieces. The Israeli regime said that it was a misfired Islamic Jihad rocket. When ballistic experts and sound pattern and sound wave experts were brought in to look at the evidence, it became clear that it had been the Israelis who bombed the hospital. On 23 March this year, in southern Rafah, the Israel military attacked a convoy of ambulances, a fire truck and a UN vehicle, and 15 paramedics were killed. The Israelis said that the convoy had advanced without any lights. The Israelis also buried the ambulances and the dead. It was only when the bodies were recovered and a mobile phone was recovered from one of them that what the Israelis had said was shown to have been absolutely untrue. The ambulances and the fire truck had approached with all their lights on.

The Minister and the DUP do not want to listen to the likes of the UN, Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch when they say that Israel is committing genocide, but plenty of other reputable organisations have said that Israel is committing genocide: in Israel, B'Tselem, the Israeli human rights organisation, and Physicians for Human Rights; in the States, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, Jews Against Genocide, Jewish Voice for Peace and Genocide Watch; Médecins Sans Frontières; and Doctors Against Genocide, which is a global coalition of healthcare professionals, all say the same thing. The Minister would, of course, much prefer to accept the word of those who are wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Not once has anyone from the DUP, let alone the Minister, said that the killing of over 20,000 children, the maiming of tens of thousands of others and the destruction of the entire education system is wrong. Not one of you can say that.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Killing children is wrong, whether it happened here or is happening in Gaza. We have heard weasel words about the killings being appalling, regrettable and so on, but the DUP cannot even bring itself to say that the slaughter of children in Gaza is wrong. Where is the empathy? Where is the compassion?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Where is the humanity —

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

— from those who constantly bombard us —

[Interruption.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. It is quite obvious that the Member does not want to give way. Let him carry on.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Where is the humanity from those who constantly bombard us with their Christian beliefs? That is a different sort of Christianity from the one that most Christians, I think, believe in. I ask the Minister to give a commitment that he will not go back to Israel while he holds the post of Education Minister, and I ask him to give that commitment today.

There are many reasons why the Minister should resign. After the debate, we will see that he does not have the support of the majority of MLAs. Over the past year or so, we have seen that he is financially and economically illiterate. Now we hear about his inability to manage his staff. If he were the manager of a football team, it would be reported that he had lost the changing room. Rather than stand aside, however, he will continue to parrot the propaganda of those responsible for genocide, and he will hurl personal insults at those who support the no-confidence motion. All of that is deflection. The truth is that his actions are indefensible, and his position is untenable. Do the right thing, Minister: go now. You are an embarrassment.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Today's pantomime confidence vote is nearing its final act, but, in case anybody has not been listening, let me issue a spoiler alert: the only resignation that there will be today is at the BBC for apparent breaches of impartiality.

I have stated continually in the House that everybody is entitled to a different perspective and position on the Middle East and the conflict there.

For the benefit of Mr Sheehan, every child and baby is innocent, no matter where they are in the world, and their killing is abhorrent and wrong. Is that clear enough, sir?

The motion is nothing short of the imposition of a view that is held by some people.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I will.

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Does the Member agree that a number of current and former Ministers have certainly lost the confidence of the House?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has an extra minute.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Absolutely. When we come to a time when it is deemed that a Minister has breached the ministerial code — say, via a court ruling, rather than by a pan-nationalist kangaroo court — what will be the position of those parties? If we want to talk purely about confidence in Ministers, the Executive and indeed previous Executives, we had better do just that. What about confidence in our supposed "First Minister for all", a lady who said that there was no alternative to IRA violence? We are being subjected to lectures from none other than Declan Kearney and Pat Sheehan about the murder of defenceless, innocent children and babies when their own military wing took the life of many innocent babies and children in this country. Sorry, but there is a brave degree of self-denial from the Members opposite.

What about confidence in another Minister who signed the motion, namely the leader of the Alliance Party, Naomi Long?

Some Members

She did not sign it.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Sorry, I will correct that: she is the leader of a party that will support the motion, a lady whose party believes that those who planted bombs and pulled triggers must be elevated to the same status as innocent victims. What utter shame. She is a Minister of Justice who believes that men should be housed in women's prisons. I mean, is that not a point of confidence?

Then, we have the Minister of Agriculture, Andrew Muir. Well, where do I start with this one? My goodness, his approach to agriculture is reminiscent of the man who thought that you could milk a cow by pulling its tail. This man —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Will the Member get back to the motion, please?

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

The Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU) has demonstrated that it has absolutely no confidence in that man as Minister.

Then, there is the SDLP. Well, this will be brief. It will be brief, because voters issued their vote of no confidence in the SDLP at the last election.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The item in the Order Paper is a motion of no confidence in the Minister of Education. I ask for your ruling on whether anything that we have heard from Mr Buckley deals with that issue.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I see where the Member is going, in that he is questioning whether other Ministers should be here. However, I encourage him to get back to the issue of the motion, which is about confidence in the Education Minister.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Alliance Members are interested in talking about other Ministers’ records, but, when their own Ministers’ records are put up in lights, they run for the hills. They are records of dismissal and of hiding behind the desk while their Departments are in absolute chaos.

The voters had their vote of no confidence in the SDLP. They are in opposition not out of choice but because the voters put them there. That is the truth.

Then, we have — come on now, Members — Comrade Carroll, the conductor in chief. He has the SDLP, Alliance and Sinn Féin all doing the 'Cha-Cha Slide' to a leftist agenda. I mean, I would expect it from Sinn Féin, but what a slide to the hard left by the Alliance Party. It is a shameful approach.

On 7 October 2023, Mr Carroll tweeted: "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance", when babies were being burnt in ovens, children were being killed and women were being raped. I will give him the chance, if he wants it, to withdraw it right now. Will he withdraw it? There is silence. That, my friends, is the man who is being propped up by the parties opposite. They have no shame.

Mr Carroll, because you will not withdraw that comment, I cannot conclude anything other than that you are a rampant antisemite and that you hate Jews.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it right and fitting for the Member to repeat things that are categorically untrue — Mr Buckley has done it once again — such as that I am antisemitic. That is a slur and a lie, and he should withdraw that remark right now.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Withdraw your tweet.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. I remind Members that, if they were to refrain from using words such as "antisemite", "racist" and various other things, that would help us to conduct our business. I talked at the outset about moderating our language, and I encourage Members to do so.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

The most interesting part of Mr Carroll's point of order is that he did not utter one word of regret about the tweet that he issued and had not one word of sympathy for those who were killed. That is hypocrisy, Members.

The Minister of Education will still be the Minister of Education at the end of today's debate. He will get on with doing his job. He was put into office by members of this party, courtesy of those who voted for us at the election. He will serve all communities without fear or favour and ensure —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Paul Givan is entitled to his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but, in his role as Education Minister, he represents every child, school and parent, and that has weight. What message does promoting a state that is accused of war crimes and genocide send out to those whom he represents? We are obliged to ask the following questions: to what end? Whose story is he telling? Whose pain is he willing to see? Those are the voices that are missing from the Chamber today, and I will bring them in.

The Palestinian community has asked me to read the following:

"We in the Palestinian community are shocked and dismayed by Education Minister Paul Givan's visit to Israel and Jerusalem, the capital of Palestine under illegal Israeli occupation. During and after his visit, the Minister made statements praising the genocide in Gaza in which, so far, around a quarter of a million Palestinians — over 10% of the Gaza population — have been killed, wounded or remain missing. It is important to remind the Minister that Israel also destroyed Gaza universities and 95 of its schools, depriving 660,000 students of their right to education. Despite the announced ceasefire, Israel continues to bomb Gaza, killing and injuring hundreds of Palestinians. In the West Bank, Israeli settlers and soldiers attack Palestinians on a daily basis. Over the past two years, over 1,000 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank, while thousands have been displaced through home demolitions, land confiscation and settlement expansion. The apartheid wall, the theft of land and over 1,000 military checkpoints and metal gates have devastated Palestinian life and undermined hope for a two-state solution. The Education Minister's abuse of his position and departmental resources to frame the suffering of the Palestinian people as a green and orange issue is inappropriate. This is not political or a partisan matter; it is a humanitarian tragedy that resonates across communities in Northern Ireland. Christian members of the Palestinian community in Northern Ireland would like to invite Minister Givan to hear more about their fellow Christians who are living under Israeli occupation in east Jerusalem, including chronic underfunding of their schools and hospitals, the confiscation of Christian-owned land for settlement expansion, and severe planning restrictions that have crippled their housing prospects. Such discrimination has decimated the Jerusalem Christian population and forced many to leave their ancestral city. Numerous reports and footage show Israeli settlers harassing and assaulting Christian priests and nuns and desecrating churches while Israel failed to take action. Also, 3% of Gaza's Christian community were killed during the genocide, and three historic churches were destroyed. These are not the actions of a democratic state. Finally, we the Palestinian community invite the Education Minister to meet us, including those who have lost family members in the ongoing genocide, to hear our concerns and to understand the plight of our loved ones in Gaza, who will face the harsh winter months without food, healthcare or shelter."

It is our job as elected representatives to listen, feel and unite. What do we want for our children? Do we want more entrenchment and indifference, or do we want compassion and understanding? Many people have suffered in the conflict.

I say this sincerely to the Minister: if you truly believe in education, fact-finding and understanding, please listen to the people in the Palestinian community in Northern Ireland. Listen to their plea and meet them. I have been working with the people in that community for 18 months now, and they have been telling me of their families, who are moving to safe places — places where they are told that they will be safe, but they are then bombed. They have been denied food, and babies have been denied breast milk and formula. All that was done by a state that paid for your visit. Please listen to their stories; listen to their pain.

The values of the Assembly were founded on peace, justice and our shared humanity. Those values seem to be more important right now than ever before in the whole world. The Minister has an opportunity to show leadership here and to introduce hope where there has been despair. There is an opportunity for us to move forward. Please, meet the Palestinian community and offer some hope in this very sorry situation. I urge you to take that opportunity.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

We have heard a lot of lofty words in the Chamber this afternoon about integrity, accountability and leadership, but let us be honest: that is not what the motion is about. It is about political opportunism but, more importantly, rank hypocrisy from parties who want to hold everyone else to a standard that they will not follow themselves.

Let us start with the party opposite. The Assembly unanimously passed a motion of censure against Ministers who, during the COVID pandemic, put a Provo show of strength ahead of a public health message. That party's Members then sign a motion of no confidence in our Minister and think that we will take lectures from them. The only Minister in the history of this state to be found guilty of religious discrimination against a Protestant was a former Sinn Féin Minister. Where was your motion of no confidence then? It was nowhere to be seen.

Two Sinn Féin Ministers and an SDLP Minister were in court for breaching the ministerial code when they attempted to remove a bonfire in north Belfast and heighten tensions. Where were your motions of no confidence then? They were nowhere to be seen. The very Minister who was found to have breached the ministerial code has, again, signed a motion of no confidence in our Minister. No lectures will be taken from those Benches.

Then we have the Alliance Party, whose Members today said that they would support the motion. It is always claiming to be the party of the moral centre and preaching and lecturing to others. The Police Federation has a different view of the Alliance Party's ability, as it has publicly condemned an Alliance Minister for its failings. Let us not forget the Ulster Farmers' Union. The very people whom another Alliance Party Minister is meant to represent passed a unanimous vote of no confidence in that Minister.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I will happily give way.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Does the Member agree that the Alliance approach is, "One rule for thee, a different for me"?

Gary Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Yes, yes.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member has an extra minute.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

How can a party that has lost the confidence of our Police Service, our justice system and our farmers come to the Chamber with a straight face and try to lecture us and then get into personal attacks on our deputy leader? Let me be very clear: my deputy leader will be returned without hesitation by the electorate of Northern Ireland at the next election. I am not quite sure that the same will be said for the deputy leader of the Alliance Party.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

The SDLP, in its continued search for relevance, falls into line in behind Mr Carroll. We take our confidence from the people of Northern Ireland, who voted us into office to be joint head of government, unlike the SDLP, which was voted out of office, out of seats and into opposition because the people of Northern Ireland have no confidence in it whatsoever.

I will not waste a huge amount of time on the proposer of the motion today, but it will not be lost on the people whom I represent that, when he had the opportunity to withdraw his antisemitic, disgraceful tweet, he did not take it. Thankfully, I know that, in 18 months' time, the electorate of West Belfast will pass verdict on Mr Carroll, and I look forward to welcoming an additional DUP Member to these Benches who will properly represent the people of West Belfast.

Mr Givan's record speaks for itself. Record pay settlement for teachers. Record pay for new teachers. The first time we have had a proper childcare support scheme. Bursaries for new teachers to ensure that the subjects that we want to see promoted are produced. A record number of SEN places. Also, he has been proven by the High Court to properly interpret legislation, unlike the Alliance Party, because its Bill and Act was found to be a nonsense. This party has confidence in Mr Givan. Our party leader has confidence in Mr Givan. The people of Northern Ireland have confidence in Mr Givan. He is not going anywhere. Get used to it.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I rise with a deep sense of regret and dismay: regret that so many Members of this House are being led by a man whose conduct in the hours after that awful attack on the people of Israel was nothing short of outrageous and regret that the passion and intensity that they whip up at times like this are not replicated when we are dealing with domestic public services issues. If they were, perhaps services might not be in the mess that they are.

Let me say at the outset that there has been terrible loss on both sides, but let us look at where this first began. The attack on the people of Israel was an evil one. Twelve hundred people were killed, 250 people were taken hostage, babies were butchered and women and girls were raped. That is the Palestinian resistance that this man fist-pumped, shamefully, on social media. That is the man whom you follow today. There has been devastating loss on both sides, and I have as much empathy for the bereavement of Palestinians as I do for Israelis. They are both made in God's image. Israel has a responsibility to prosecute its war with as much precision and proportionality as possible, but that is made nigh on impossible by the fact that Hamas weaved itself into the community in Palestine. It embeds itself into schools and hospitals. In fact, the fact that it weaves itself into every nook and cranny of Palestinian society is something that the next president of Ireland has hailed as a good thing. Israel can be judged, as every state should be, on its prosecution of war. Not by this Chamber, but by those with the expertise and the evidence to do so.

Let me tell you why I will oppose the motion.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

No, I will not give way. I have heard enough from you, Mr Carroll.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I will tell you why I and the Ulster Unionist Party oppose the motion. First, we will not be led by the man who celebrated the attack on the people of Israel. To the people who are being led, it is not too late to think again. The SDLP — the party of Hume, Mallon and McGrady — is following a man who tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance". The Alliance Party, which was on the middle ground —.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

No, I will not give way.

The Alliance Party, which is trying to untangle itself from its dalliance with republican language about the past, is doubling down on that. I see the Member pull his face, but yesterday, when Ms Bradshaw was talking about memorials to terrorists, she said that they were for ex-combatants. That is the language of Sinn Féin. The people who blew up Enniskillen in the Poppy Day massacre are not ex-combatants; they were terrorists. That is why I will not support the motion.

Secondly, the motion is destabilising. We did not support Mr Gaston's motion, which, actually, I thought was fairly presented in the sense that Minister Long had lost a lot of confidence. I think that her leadership is disastrous and that her language about victims was atrocious, but, if we all started backing motions that were brought about fellow Ministers in our Executive, there would be no government. Where would it end? It is proper scrutiny, not stunt politics and Punch and Judy politics, that brings real accountability.

Thirdly, we must deliver for our people here in Northern Ireland. There are places in my constituency where planning permission cannot be passed to build homes and schools because the sewerage is at capacity, so people are moving out and the school population declines and the villages are dying. We should be here until midnight discussing those things. Basic infrastructure has failed because many in politics have failed. The challenges to special educational needs are huge. School buildings are crumbling. There are children who travel for three hours to get to school every day, but, no, we want to talk about matters of international affairs. I tuned in, slightly late, to the Education Committee last week. For a moment, I thought that I had tuned into the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs at the Houses of Parliament, but then I saw two Sinn Féin members, and, clearly, they would not go to Parliament.

A Member

Will the Member give way?

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I will not give way.

What are we doing debating these issues with such passion and intensity while we crumble here at home? I did not appeal to Sinn Féin's moral compass, because it has none. It is the party of the PIRA, of Hamas, of FARC, of ETA. You judge people

[Interruption]

by the company that they keep.

[Interruption.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. The Member will be heard.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

For those reasons, we extend sympathy to and empathy for everyone affected by the crisis in the Middle East and every other humanitarian crisis. The biggest in the world at the minute is in Sudan, which the Member does not mention —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

— because it does not suit his antisemitic narrative.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up. Mr Burrows.

[Interruption.]

Order. Three Members wish to speak after Mr Frew, whom I will call now, so I will apply the grace period to allow those Members to speak. However, I warn you that, if you give way, you will not get an extra minute.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Mr Speaker, what a farce; what an absolute farce. When we in the Chamber could be debating housing — we have a Minister here — or education in our own country — the Education Minister is here — what a farce it is that we are debating something that will make no material difference or have no outcome after the debate. It is an absolute farce. Members are bringing the Chamber into disrepute by bringing the motion to the House. It is incredible that we are spending and wasting time on a debate on a motion that will make no material difference. Why do they do it? Mr Speaker, I suggest that the parties have brought the motion as a sham fight — a pantomime. However, it is even more serious than that, because they have all been led by the nose by a Member who, to his shame, tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance", followed by clenched fists. On the day that babies were being burnt in ovens, when children were being executed by a bullet in their head and when young girls and women were being raped and gang-raped in their homes, the Member tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance", followed by clenched fists.

It is not the first time that Sinn Féin has been spooked by Gerry Carroll and People Before Profit. I remember when it voted, last term, to reduce everybody's rent by 10% and had to claw that back through legislation. It has been in embarrassing situations before. Of course, I have no confidence whatsoever in Sinn Féin, any of its Members or any of its Ministers. However, I expect a different level from the SDLP, which has, in the past, deemed itself to be non-violent, and, of course, the Alliance Party, which models itself as being middle-of-the-road. How middle-of-the-road is this? There is no middle-of-the-road here. Instead of spending time debating the important issues that will affect our people — every one of our voters in Northern Ireland — we have this sham fight that will make no material difference. Shame on you all, because you have brought the debating Chamber into disrepute. It should not be the case, but you have, and it is shameful.

Why should I have confidence in the other Ministers in the Executive? At times, in my time, especially over the past five years, the Executive have been poor. They have brought in measures that have hurt our people dramatically and drastically. Anxiety levels and mental health issues are through the roof. It was the Executive — it was the parties in the House — who did that to our people. The DUP fought against it, resisted it and opened up sooner. Lockdown philosophy is your fault, and you need to be held to account for it. Even during that time, Sinn Féin had a sham funeral oration in a graveyard for somebody who was not even buried there.

It brought thousands out on to the streets at a time of public health dangers and risks. Did Sinn Féin care? No, it did not. Sinn Féin is just as bad as Boris Johnson, yet it will criticise him.

Sinn Féin has the only Minister who has been taken to court and proven guilty on the grounds of religious discrimination against a protestant. Where was Alliance then? Where was the SDLP then? Why was there no motion then? This is drama, and you have all been spooked by the person in the corner: by the Member who tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance", followed by clenched fists, when babies were being burned in ovens and young girls gang-raped in their homes. Shame on you all. When we should be debating issues important and significant for the children of Northern Ireland, the mask has slipped, and you have brought the House into disrepute. Shame on you all.

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

Minister, you have been hailed by political commentators as a doer: a man who is getting things done. I begin by complimenting you, because I do think that you are a doer, but the problem is that you are not bringing anyone along with you. In the past number of weeks, you have been extremely and deliberately divisive, and, both last week and this week, when we were discussing humanitarian tragedies, you smiled like a Cheshire cat. It is not me who is saying that, Minister. Rather, it has been pointed out in the many messages that I have received from people from across our communities who feel outraged.

Today's debate goes beyond the trip that the Israeli Government paid for, which was inherently political and divisive. In your role, Minister, you have not allowed girls to wear trousers to school, and you did not include in legislation a number of amendments that we had worked hard on in Committee to assist children with sensory needs and to provide period dignity for our young people. Today, we are asked to scrutinise the conduct and judgement of the Minister, who accepted a state-funded visit to Israel: a state that has engaged in the relentless and wholesale destruction of Gaza and that has killed innocent women and children. Those are the facts.

What Mr Givan wishes to do as a private citizen is a matter for him.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Given that the Minister did not make any decisions about amendments to the Bill in question, is it in order for the Member to challenge the Speaker's judgement on that issue?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member can keep going. I do not want to be drawn into a further issue.

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker. What Mr Givan does in his own time, as a private citizen, is a matter for him. What he wishes to do and where he wishes to visit as a DUP MLA, outside of his ministerial role, is a matter for him, but today's motion is simple. In his role as Minister, can we have confidence in him when he chose to lend the prestige of his office to his trip with the Israeli Government, who are carrying out what is arguably the greatest atrocity of this century?

Minister, you pride yourself on being a believer in Jesus Christ. You pride yourself on being a Christian. You are proud to be someone who uplifts, educates and empowers children. You and your colleagues have rightly spoken out passionately about Christians being persecuted across the globe, yet Israel has bombed Christians in Gaza. Israel has killed Christians and their families in Gaza. You have stood, smiled and waved with the Israeli Government despite the fact that they have murdered innocent Christians, Muslims and others. It is important to mention that, because it has been painfully overlooked throughout the debate. I am not virtue-signalling or acting morally superior. I just genuinely do not understand why that is continually overlooked.

The Minister of Education undertook a paid trip to a place with a Government who have bombed schools, universities and hospitals. That is beyond understanding. The Minister's decision has been criticised by the Northern Ireland Teachers' Council (NITC) as an:

"overtly political and divisive act that serves to diminish confidence in his judgement".

The Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO) stated that accepting the invitation is:

"hard to comprehend, let alone justify".

Those are not the words of the SDLP but the words of members of the public.

There is an old proverb that states:

"A fish rots from the head down."

It is generally used to mean that, when an organisation or state fails, the leadership is to blame, because dysfunction starts at the top. The Minister has clearly failed to act correctly. He has failed morally; he has failed professionally; and he has failed the children, parents and teachers of Northern Ireland.

Today's motion is not sectarian; it is certainly not antisemitic; it is not about orange and green; and it is not selective outrage. The violence of 7 October was wrong, and the continued slaughter of innocent Palestinian people to this day is wrong. Today's motion gives voice to so many across Northern Ireland about how they feel. It is led by the people of Northern Ireland: the pupils, parents, unions and teachers who have sent us all, I imagine, countless messages about their outrage. I speak for them when I say this: no more. It is time for the Minister to resign.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

It is understood that some Members and parties in the Assembly disapprove of other Members taking part in the official visit to Israel last month. They are entitled to that view, and we are entitled to support the Members who took part in the visit, which, clearly, made a strong impression on them. However, the fact that Sinn Féin, the Alliance Party and the SDLP are being led on the matter by Gerry Carroll MLA, who has the most extreme anti-Israeli views, is utterly appalling. As we have repeatedly stated, Gerry Carroll posted on social media on the very day of the diabolical slaughter, rape and kidnapping of Israeli and international citizens by Hamas on 7 October 2023, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance", along with the image of a clenched fist. That was and remains a shameful message. Shame on the parties that align themselves with his position on Israel in the motion. Those parties are supporting a stunt motion that will, of course, come to nothing.

The named supporters of the motion are all members of the Finance Committee. At the Committee last week, the SDLP Chair pushed forward a proposal, which split the Committee, resulting in Ayes 5, Noes 4, nationalist and Alliance against unionist, to investigate the actions of the Education Minister, Paul Givan, in taking part in the trip to Israel and, in particular, a post on social media that he visited a school, which is not surprising.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

No, I will not have time.

The DUP and UUP members said that, if the Committee had any sense of consistency, it would also then investigate the Sinn Féin Economy Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, who recently announced that she had issued an instruction to stop her officials taking part in UK trade discussions with Israel and to prevent Invest NI support from going to any companies from the Northern Ireland defence industry — an area of excellence — whose products or components might be supplied to Israel. That is the imposition of her political views on officials, and we in the DUP seek to bring that matter before the full Executive.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

And the UUP.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

And the UUP, which supports that.

However, the double standards of the Finance Committee were in full view when the members who voted to investigate the DUP Minister divided the Committee — Ayes 4, Noes 5 — in voting not to investigate Sinn Féin Minister Caoimhe Archibald: nationalist and Alliance against unionist. Everyone can see the clear double standard in play. Likewise, the motion before us is entirely about politics; it is not about principle. We in the DUP stand 100% behind and beside our Minister, and we will have no part in this charade.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I want to make it clear from the start of my comments that the motion is not about justice, it is not about principle, and it is certainly not about integrity. The motion is Punch and Judy politics, and, my goodness, it is a poor attempt at that.

What we are witnessing today —

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— is the art of left-wing political theatre —

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— with Gerry Carroll writing the script.

Do not worry, Pat, once I get to you, I will certainly give way. I will give way to you, Pat, and I hope that you will do the same for me the next time. You are nothing but a hypocrite. When I get to you, I will certainly give way.

My goodness, we have Gerry Carroll writing the script and Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance falling into place right on cue.

Getting to serious matters here, if there were any substance to the motion, section 30 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 exists for exceptional circumstances where a Minister has demonstrably breached the law or, indeed, the solemn Pledge of Office. That determination must rest in evidence and depend on due process. The Functioning of Government Act 2021, passed by the Assembly, provides precisely that process. When an allegation arises, it should be referred to the Assembly Commissioner for Standards, the independent office created to investigate and report. That route was designed to remove partisanship from judgement, yet the proposers of the motion bypassed it entirely. There was no investigation, no report and no findings before they came to the Assembly today for this political theatre; just accusation to suit the political narrative. If the rule of law truly mattered to those who tabled the motion, they would have allowed the commissioner to examine the facts before seeking to exclude a Minister from office for their own social media likes.

It is especially rich for those who have never accepted the rule of law to give lectures. We are asked to believe that Sinn Féin now stands as the defender of probity while it continues to glorify terrorists who murdered our police officers, soldiers and civilians. Eighteen years ago last month, Paul Quinn, a 21-year-old, was stripped to his underwear and beaten for half an hour with iron bars and nail-studded cudgels. Every bone in his body was broken by the IRA. At the time, a Sinn Féin Minister, Conor Murphy, blackened that young man's name. Sadly, there was no vote of no confidence to remove him from office. Do not come to the House and tell us that you care and have compassion for young people in Gaza, when the same parties turned a blind eye to a 21-year-old being beaten to death on his own doorstep.

This week, as our nation gathers to remember the fallen men and women who gave their lives to uphold the rule of law, we still have a Sinn Féin First Minister who, only weeks ago, refused to describe the Enniskillen Poppy Day massacre as murder. Sinn Féin spokesman, Mr Pat Sheehan: my goodness, he is well equipped. He is the cash-and-carry bomber from West Belfast, who does not like to take an intervention to give me the opportunity to call out his hypocrisy. His party stood shoulder to shoulder with Hamas, and he does not even have the guts to let Members come in and challenge him on that.

I will go back to the newly crowned leader of the nationalist and republican alliance: Mr Carroll. As Israeli women were raped, children kidnapped and grandmothers murdered, he tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance". Mr Buckley gave him the opportunity to retract that, but he did not take it. Shame on him. Members will troop through the Lobbies today behind Mr Carroll —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— who now leads your circus.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Your time is up, Mr Gaston.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Members must know what that man stands over to this day.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up, Mr Gaston.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Shame on any of you who follow Mr Carroll into the voting Lobbies.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call the Minister of Education. You have 15 minutes.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Mr Speaker, I will not be taking any interventions.

I welcome the opportunity to respond to the debate and to take the opportunity to expose the toxic mix of antisemitism, anti-unionism and hypocrisy that is at the heart of the motion. The motion was proposed by a man who has never condemned the murder of over 1,200 Israelis and is now backed by a coalition of those who will jump on to every bandwagon going. The debate has exposed the ugly face of pan-nationalism and its fellow travellers.

I am confident that, when the votes are cast, the attempt to drive me from office will have failed, but, in the process, some deeper truths will have been revealed. Those truths will not be lost on the unionist community. We have seen the informal creation of a new coalition of Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party under the leadership and direction of Gerry Carroll. We have witnessed a calculated attempt to drive a unionist Minister from office, not for misconduct but simply for daring to dissent from the prevailing anti-Israel orthodoxy of Irish nationalism. That is not principled politics; it is an attempt at ideological purging. We have had a glimpse into a new Ireland. It is not a land flowing with milk and honey but a land where unionists serve only at the pleasure of and on terms dictated by nationalists and republicans, aided and abetted by the Alliance Party. It is a vision not of equality but of subjugation.

The motion has not just targeted me; it has sent a chilling message to the unionist community that our convictions, our values and our right to engage with the wider world are to be policed and punished. It is a warning to every unionist voice that dares to speak outside the lines that have been drawn by nationalism. It tells our community, "You may participate", but only on their terms. You may speak but only if you say what they want to hear. It is because those truths have revealed themselves that I welcome the motion and the opportunity to reply today.

Let me begin with the trumped-up charges drafted by Mr Carroll but signed and endorsed by others. The motion suggests that I do not support the rule of law and have breached the ministerial code in some undefined way. It is signed by those who, for generations, refused to recognise the police, the courts and the rule of law in Northern Ireland and still claim that there was no alternative to murder, including the murder of over 70 children by the Provisional IRA. We truly are in Alice in Wonderland territory.

What is it that the MLAs who speak and seek a political lynching want? Is it to rebuke me for my conduct in visiting a school where Jews, Arabs and Christians are educated together? No. It is to exclude me from office altogether. It is a form of political internment — exclusion without a proper trial — not for the minimum period of three months but for the statutory maximum of 12 months, indicating that there can be no greater punishment for any Minister, no matter their conduct.

What is the case against me? Going to Israel on a fact-finding mission to hear from the victims of terrorism? Going to a country with which the United Kingdom retains full diplomatic relations and an embassy in Tel Aviv? Going to visit a school during that trip? Are Members seeking to tell me what to think or where to go? Is it, as some would suggest, merely asking the Department to publicise my visit to a school — yes, a school — on the departmental website and on social media, a request that was properly approved at the highest level in the Department before it was issued? As I said last week, my permanent secretary assessed the Department's role with regard to the trip and concluded that its involvement was limited and administrative in nature. That was deemed appropriate, given the need to manage the Israel trip within my broader ministerial diary and the need to cancel other engagements.

Where do those alleged offences fit into the annals of the Assembly? Has it been forgotten that, far from simply visiting a school, there are Members in the House, some of whom have served as Ministers, including as Education Minister, who were personally guilty of the most heinous crimes without one word of regret or remorse? The Assembly has considered exclusion motions on a handful of occasions, so let us compare the gravity of those allegations with those that I face today.

Are today's trumped-up charges truly more serious than the refusal of the IRA to decommission its weapons and to continue to murder people when Sinn Féin remained in government in the early years of devolution?

Are they more serious than when the police raided Sinn Féin's offices in this very Building, investigating a suspected spy ring on the back of the IRA's break-in at Castlereagh police station and its training of FARC terrorists in Colombia? Remember this: I went to visit children in a school, whereas Sinn Féin's partners in the IRA went to Colombia to teach terrorists how to use car bombs. That is the contrast; that is the truth.

What of the countless occasions when no exclusion motion was brought? Is it more serious than when an industrial tribunal found Conor Murphy to have discriminated against a Protestant on religious grounds and that his evidence was "implausible and lacking credibility"? There was no exclusion motion then. Is it more serious than when Margaret Ritchie, Mark Durkan and Michelle O'Neill were separately found, by the High Court, to have acted unlawfully and in breach of the ministerial code? There were no exclusion motions then. Is it more serious than when the IRA murdered Kevin McGuigan on the streets of Belfast, and the police and security services confirmed that Sinn Féin continued to operate subject to the direction of the Provisional IRA army council? There were no exclusion motions then. Is it more serious than when the then deputy First Minister brazenly and unapologetically violated the Executive's own COVID regulation at the peak of a global health crisis, undermining public trust and setting a dangerous precedent at a time when leadership was needed most? There were no exclusion motions then. There was no outrage and no accountability.

What of my accusers? Do they come with clean hands? Gerry Carroll, the author of the motion, is the same man who tweeted "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance" as Israelis were being murdered — a tweet that remains on his timeline to this day and for which he has never apologised. That is the man who would stand in judgement of me, but Gerry Carroll does not stand alone. No longer at the margins of political acceptability, others row in behind him to create Gerry Carroll's coalition of hate. What of Sinn Féin's Deputy Chair of the Education Committee, Mr Pat Sheehan? He is a man with a chequered past to say the least. Having once been sentenced to 15 years for bombing a cash and carry, following his release he attempted to bomb a security checkpoint in Belfast. On that occasion, he was convicted and sentenced to serve 24 years and was released only under the terms of the Belfast Agreement. Now, he is not just an MLA but a friend of Hamas. No wonder it took his party leader five days, following the horrendous events of 7 October 2023, to condemn the attacks on Israel. Sinn Féin alleges that the Israelis are guilty of genocide, but allegations of genocide are no impediment to Sinn Féin's approach to China. We can look at the genocide of the Uyghur community that is taking place in China, but Sinn Fein's hypocrisy is such that it is prepared to turn a blind eye whenever it suits. What of the Alliance Party, which is now a bedfellow of Gerry Carroll as well as a regular bedfellow of Sinn Féin? Mr Mathison accused me of being on a propaganda visit. That is grossly offensive. If he had seen and heard what I saw and heard, he would not have said such a thing.

The motion is not about justice but ideology. It is not about conduct; it is about control. I will continue to speak up for those who need to have their voices heard. I was in Yad Vashem, the national Holocaust memorial centre, and will remember the six million Jews — men, women and children — who were murdered in the Holocaust.

While the debate has helped to expose and reveal the true face of Gerry Carroll's coalition and the hypocrisy that is at the heart of the opposition that has been levelled at me, it is a distraction from the work that I have been doing — we have been doing a lot. While the Alliance-led Education Committee has been pondering whether a three-year-old can be trans, I have been focusing on what happens in the classroom. In my first 18 months, I ensured that the starting pay for teachers increased by over £7,500 to £31,650. More generally, teachers' pay has increased by between 16% and 18%. Later this month, the independent review of teacher workload will report, and we will take forward a package of measures to ensure that teachers can focus on the place in which they matter the most: the classroom. On behalf of the Executive, I have delivered the most meaningful package of childcare measures in the history of Northern Ireland. Later this week, I will submit the early learning and childcare strategy to the Executive for consideration.

I am undertaking a far-reaching programme of reform to support special educational needs. I have introduced new guidance to discourage the use of mobile phones in schools. I have introduced legislation to ensure that school uniforms are affordable. I have brought common sense back to our education system by making it clear that biological boys should not be playing in girls' sports, using girls' toilets or changing in girls' changing rooms. In the face of opposition in the House, I have been vindicated by the courts for correctly applying the law that the Assembly passed on integrated education. I have assembled a team of international educational experts to ensure that Northern Ireland will have a world-leading education system.

In TransformED, I have launched the most far-reaching and comprehensive reform of education in generations, focusing on curriculum, assessment, school improvement and qualifications, all of which is underpinned by a focus on and investment in teacher professional learning. When implemented, that will help to close the attainment gap for disadvantaged children and raise standards for every child. I have invested £31 million in teacher professional learning in the largest-ever intervention of that kind. In short, by learning from others and building on our own successes, we are creating an education system that can compete with the very best across the world. That is the ambition that I have for every child.

To conclude, the motion is not a stand for principle; rather, it is a stand for political convenience. It is not about upholding standards; it is about silencing dissent. The message is clear: if you dare to think differently, if you dare to stand with Israel and if you dare to speak up for victims of terrorism, you will be hunted, hounded and hauled before the Assembly. I will not be silenced. I will not be intimidated. I will not be removed by those who preach tolerance but practise exclusion. I will not apologise for standing with victims of terrorism. I will not apologise for visiting a school where Jews, Arabs and Christians learn together. While others indulge in performative outrage, I will continue to deliver for our children, our schools and our future. Whether those people like it or not, so long as my party entrusts me with this office, I will be here.

I will quote Tennyson's 'Ulysses':

"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

Despite the best efforts of Mr Carroll's coalition of hate, we on this side of the House will not yield. The unionist people of Northern Ireland will not yield, and we will not be silenced by those who once brought terror to these shores to drive us from office. The true nature of their new Ireland is exposed. I oppose the motion and all those who have brought it.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

[Interruption.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Deirdre Hargey to make a winding-up speech.

[Interruption.]

Order.

[Interruption.]

The member of the public will be removed.

[Interruption.]

Some Members

[Applause.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. Order, Members.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I thank the proposer of the motion. We in Sinn Féin are glad to support it.

I am concerned by the opening and ending to the Minister's statement, because I thought that he was here as the Education Minister to serve all our community, not speaking as a unionist politician. I ask you to reflect on that. Minister, you are here as the Education Minister, and that is about representing all the communities here, be they unionist, nationalist, republican, loyalist, minority ethnic or those from the Palestinian community who are here. You are to represent all the communities that make up our society.

The Minister's decision to use his visit to Israel and to use departmental resources to promote a visit in the occupied territories is wrong, and, I believe, political. Last week, the Minister stated in the Chamber that he was formally invited by Israel — a trip that was planned and organised by the Israeli embassy. That was a political visit and an Israeli-paid-for propaganda visit that was planned well before the Minister made his disturbing speech from the Back Benches the week before he went to Israel, thanking and praising the IDF. Remember that over 50,000 Palestinian children have been murdered or injured in Gaza, and almost 500 teachers have been killed at the hands of the IDF. An enforced Israeli-made famine has taken place in Gaza, and the army enforces its Government's policy of starving an entire population.

That is the context in which the Minister visited the Ofek School, situated in East Jerusalem, which is in the occupied Palestinian territories. On 19 July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a landmark opinion that the occupation of Palestinian territories is against international law. It is unlawful, but still this Minister chose to visit and to promote his visit on his departmental website. The ICJ further stated that Israel's:

"policies and practices amount to annexation of large parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory."

Israel's restrictions on Palestinians:

"in the Occupied Palestinian Territory constitutes systemic discrimination".

Where the Minister visited, there is systemic discrimination against the Palestinian people. The court advised states to avoid any action that would maintain the current situation, but you ignored that advice. Indeed, the British Government, along with other Governments, also see this as illegal activity by Israel and have issued advice pertaining to that. Yet this Education Minister thought that he would flout that advice and use the Department of Education's resources in promoting his visit. The Minister stated:

"No departmental resources were used to publicise any political message."

If only that were true. Publicising the message that East Jerusalem is a normal society is political propaganda. It is a message that is consistently given by the Israeli state, a political propaganda message that this Minister chose to parrot and that breaches international law.

I once spoke in the Chamber of one of the political speeches that most inspires me, made by Tony Benn, the late British MP, on the Iraq war. He spoke of his lived experience as a child in Britain during the period of a world war and the impact on his community. He spoke of 24 October 1945, when the United Nations Charter was passed, and how that generation was determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war — an era that enacted human rights law and standards.

Over recent days, we have also heard the well-known phrase, "lest we forget", as part of remembering those wars. We should all understand and never forget those periods of global history and that we need to learn from the past. Oh, how we have forgotten. International law has been torn up by Israel, or set alight, as in the words of Israel's Defence Minister: "Gaza is burning". That Minister, along with the Israeli Prime Minister, has been issued with an international arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court for war crimes against the Palestinian people. The Education Minister visited a regime that has war crimes warrants out for their arrest, for war crimes against the Palestinian people.

Where do these actions leave international law? In recent weeks, a UN rapporteur who oversees the inclusion of women and children has said how the actions of the Israeli Government towards the Palestinian people normalise atrocities globally. What a stark and depressing statement. Indeed, during the Minister's visit to Israel and to the school in the occupied territories, there was another IDF attack on Gaza, which killed six children. I wonder whether the Minister praised the IDF on that visit.

In this context, the teaching unions have rightly condemned the Minister's actions. The wider community has condemned them and, as others have reflected, condemnation has come from across the community. At my constituency office, I have been inundated with messages, not just from nationalists and republicans but from right across the community in South Belfast and, indeed, from East Belfast as well. That anger and those sentiments are backed up by international condemnation of Israel's actions, including by international courts, which have made rulings of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

That is the context in which Paul Givan made his visit. More importantly and sickeningly, he boasted about it on the airwaves in the midst of 50,000 children having been murdered and injured; over 500 teachers having been murdered; international law having been broken and ignored; a forced, man-made famine; forced displacement; and, most grotesque of all, a genocide. Anyone who calls this a pantomime needs to take a serious look at themselves. This is not a pantomime; it is about a breach of international law and the genocide being committed by the Israeli state.

Those of us here today who support the motion stand with international law and international human rights organisations that have called out the actions of the Israeli state. We stand with teachers and teaching unions and the young people who go to school here; indeed, we stand with the wider community, which, I believe, is also repulsed by the Minister's actions. We do so lest we forget Israel's war crimes against the Palestinian people and the Education Minister's attempts to sanitise them. The community sees that, and we support its call for you to go, Minister.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Before I move to the Question, I remind Members that it requires cross-community support.

Question put.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 47; Noes 33

AYES

NATIONALIST:

Dr Archibald, Mr Baker, Mr Boylan, Miss Brogan, Mr Delargy, Mrs Dillon, Miss Dolan, Mr Durkan, Ms Ennis, Ms Ferguson, Ms Finnegan, Ms Flynn, Mr Gildernew, Miss Hargey, Ms Hunter, Mr Kearney, Mr Kelly, Ms Kimmins, Mr McAleer, Mr McCrossan, Mr McGlone, Mr McGrath, Mr McHugh, Ms McLaughlin, Mr McNulty, Mrs Mason, Ms Murphy, Ms Ní Chuilín, Mr O'Dowd, Mrs O'Neill, Mr O'Toole, Ms Reilly, Mr Sheehan

OTHER:

Ms K Armstrong, Mr Blair, Ms Bradshaw, Mr Carroll, Mr Donnelly, Ms Egan, Mrs Guy, Mr Honeyford, Miss McAllister, Mr McMurray, Mr Mathison, Ms Mulholland, Ms Nicholl, Mr Tennyson

Tellers for the Ayes: Mr Carroll, Miss Hargey

NOES

UNIONIST:

Dr Aiken, Mr Allen, Ms D Armstrong, Mr Beattie, Mr Brett, Mr Brooks, Ms Brownlee, Mr K Buchanan, Mr T Buchanan, Mr Buckley, Mr Burrows, Mr Butler, Mrs Cameron, Mr Chambers, Mr Clarke, Mrs Dodds, Mr Dunne, Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe, Mr Frew, Mr Gaston, Mr Givan, Mr Harvey, Mr Irwin, Mr Kingston, Mrs Little-Pengelly, Mr Lyons, Miss McIlveen, Mr Martin, Mr Middleton, Mr Nesbitt, Mr Robinson, Mr Stewart

Tellers for the Noes: Mr Brett, Mr Buckley

Total Votes80Total Ayes47[58.8%]Nationalist Votes33Nationalist Ayes33[100.0%]Unionist Votes33Unionist Ayes0[0.0%]Other Votes14Other Ayes14[100.0%]

Mr Clarke acted as a proxy for Mrs Erskine.

Question accordingly negatived (cross-community vote).

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

On a point of order, Mr Speaker, may I ask for your guidance? During the debate, Mr Kingston talked about business in the Finance Committee. To be clear — I am sure that you will agree — the business of Statutory Committees includes what is covered by that Department. In this case, the Civil Service code —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I am sorry, Mr O'Toole. I will take the point of order, but I will do so after Question Time, which has to start at 2.00 pm under Standing Orders. I now pass over to the Principal Deputy Speaker.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — The Executive Office

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Question 7 has been withdrawn.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

1. Mr Boylan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the work to progress a permanent memorial to victims and survivors, as recommended by the historical institutional abuse inquiry report. (AQO 2640/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Victims and survivors of historical institutional abuse (HIA) have endured unimaginable pain and suffering over many years. We recognise the importance of fulfilling the final recommendation of the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry report to honour those who suffered, including those who did not live to see justice or acknowledgement. Following extensive engagement with victims and survivors, we are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached to place a memorial plaque in the Great Hall of Parliament Buildings. We have considered the views expressed by victims and survivors and agreed the final wording for the plaque. The Speaker has confirmed that the Assembly Commission is content with the final wording, and officials are working closely with the Speaker's Office to take the final steps. We thank the Speaker for his continued support in helping us to deliver this important inquiry recommendation. The memorial will ensure that the victims and survivors are permanently and respectfully remembered and acknowledged.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her answer. When will the memorial plaque be unveiled?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am pleased to say that, as it is in its final stages, it is just a matter of ensuring that the final plaque is prepared for installation. The First Minister and I hope to be in a position to formally put up the plaque early in the new year.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

The update on the plaque is good news. What work is going on between victims and survivors' groups and the Arts Council on the wider programme of memorialisation that the inquiry report recommended?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for her question. As she is aware, we have included the Arts Council in taking the matter forward. That was a recommendation, as she knows, from the Hart report. It has been outstanding for such a long period because of the need to find as much consensus as possible on a matter that is both sensitive and incredibly important to victims across the piece. We have always been acutely aware that not all victims and survivors have the same view on every matter. We have therefore worked carefully with them, and I am really pleased that we have found a way through on what was a challenging issue over the past number of years.

I have no doubt that there will be the same challenges with local memorialisation, but we want the process of working with people to be victim-centred. It also has to be trauma-informed. That will take time, working with the Arts Council and potentially with councils. Local groups may want to see something a bit different in their area, and we need to have the flexibility to take them into account. Once the plaque is completed, work will continue at pace to ensure that the commitment to local memorialisation is fulfilled as well.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

What more can be done to support those who come under the range of legacy schemes, including the historical institutional abuse (HIA) redress scheme and the victims' pensions process, many of whom face difficulties in having their situation understood and recognised?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for her important question. Those schemes are so meaningful to so many people. They are long overdue. It is recognition of a wrong that was done in the past. That wrong was not done by anyone in this place — indeed, it was done by very few people, if any, in those institutions or organisations today — but it was a wrong that was done, and that needs to be acknowledged and addressed.

We do not just have the HIA redress scheme. We are about to commence our mother-and-baby homes redress scheme. We also have our pension scheme for people who were severely injured. I have talked to people who are going through that process. It can be a re-traumatising and frustrating process. Just over the past week, I spoke to people who have applied on the basis of post-traumatic stress disorder, particularly those who served in our armed forces and the then RUC. It was an incredible thing to step forward in those most difficult of circumstances. People saw their friends, colleagues and family members killed in very difficult circumstances. They have suffered psychological injury. Experts connect that directly to what they experienced. Often, however, they are unable, at the moment, to get help from that scheme. That needs to be addressed. Our understanding of the nature of mental health issues and how they come about has evolved significantly. I do not believe that, at the moment, that scheme takes that into account. However, that does not mean that people should not get that help and support. Of course, I would urge the panel to use maximum flexibility in order to reflect the reality of how mental ill health can happen as a result of those traumatic events.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

2. Ms Brownlee asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for their assessment of the Equality Commission’s recently published review of the Ulster Boxing Council. (AQO 2641/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We recognise that sport plays a vital role in bringing people and communities together, and we welcome the report and its call for a series of reforms to ensure fairness and transparency in the sport. It is encouraging that the Equality Commission has recommended the establishment of an oversight panel to support the effective implementation of the recommendations. We also welcome that the commission will continue to engage with stakeholders on that important matter. We look forward to seeing the outworkings of the report.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she agree that it is long past time that Northern Ireland's sportsmen and sportswomen should be able to compete internationally under their national flag by right?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for her important question because some of the important issues that have been highlighted in that case are common in too many other places as well. Of course, I welcome the fact that the report has now been shared. I welcome the commitment on action. I understand that, tomorrow, there will be a statement in the House from the Minister for Communities on that important issue. However, the Member is absolutely right: the situation in too many sports is that you cannot, and do not have the choice to, compete under your national flag for Northern Ireland. That needs to be addressed. I have worked with many different sports bodies. It is a mixed picture depending on what the sport is. I believe that it should be an enshrined right of this place that you have the ability, should it be in boxing, athletics or fishing, to compete for your country, Northern Ireland, under the flag of your country. I would like to see that addressed not just here and across the UK but, indeed, by international sporting bodies and organisations.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

3. Ms Nicholl asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on an AI strategy. (AQO 2642/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Mr Speaker —. Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 3 and 7 together.

The Office of AI and Digital, under the leadership of Professor Helen McCarthy, is preparing a comprehensive strategy for the ethical adoption of AI in the public sector. That is a collaborative effort, which draws on expertise from across government, industry and academia.

The scoping phase of that work is now complete. It incorporated input from a diverse group of stakeholders, which has been instrumental in shaping the key pillars of the strategy. To support that drafting phase, the office set up two key groups: an external AI advisory panel, made up of industry leaders, including the Artificial Intelligence Collaboration Centre (AICC) and local universities; and a government AI network, which brings together representatives from all nine Departments. Efforts are under way to consolidate feedback from the advisory panel and the government AI network. The government AI network will reconvene in December to review and discuss an early draft of the strategy. Taking an iterative approach will help to ensure that the strategy is robust, inclusive and future-proofed. At the heart of the strategy is a firm commitment to the ethical and responsible use of AI, which is embedded in the governance pillar. The governance pillar is grounded in the principles of transparency, respect and fairness, ensuring that AI is deployed ethically and responsibly across Departments. By embedding those principles, we reinforce our commitment to inclusive governance and to ensure that AI solutions are developed and used in ways that are morally responsible, socially beneficial and aligned with human values.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Question 7 was withdrawn, so it cannot be grouped. Only question 3 can be considered.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her answer and her emphasis on the responsible and ethical use of AI. I agree with that.

Given that Northern Ireland has the potential to be a world leader in this space — all the businesses tell us that — and that we need to act with speed to deliver, is the deputy First Minister able to talk to a more specific timetable for rolling out the AI strategy?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Due to the seamless transition from the previous item of business into Oral Answers to Questions, I do not have the updated file.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It is OK; I have been called worse.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Nor did I realise that question 7 had been withdrawn. That is why I requested permission for the questions to be grouped. Apologies.

The Member is absolutely right. We have a timetable for phase 2 and phase 3. Phase 2 is now complete. As I am sure the Member is aware, a task and finish group has been established by Professor Helen McCarthy, who is in our new post of Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser (CSTA). She has been a real breath of fresh air. That shows the benefit, even though hers is only a part-time posting, of someone's coming in from outside the system with knowledge and experience of, and passion for, the area. She is really trying to drive through what we require from the strategy. That work is well under way. As I said, that group has been convened, and she has been engaging with a wide range of people.

We have established six core pillars for the new AI strategy and action plan, and the aim is that it will cover up to 2030. The six pillars are governance, infrastructure, data, skills, public-sector transformation and citizenship. We are looking at having an AI hub for delivery, which would look at the actions. I commend our CSTA, as it is a significant amount of work. I know that she has also relied on a range of third-sector and private-sector partners for expertise and support. Of course, we are very grateful for the help and support that we have received on that from inside and outside the system.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Minister, you touched on the fact that this is about being inclusive. We know that, with a lot of the technology strategies, it is very difficult to reach people, so will you give an outline of exactly what is being done to reach people in the most hard-to-reach communities so that they can input into the strategy?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

As the Member will be aware, so much of what we do now is about collaborative design and co-production. We hear those buzzwords all the time, but they are important, because this is about including those who will use the strategy during the period and process of putting together the strategies and action plans. That is important, and there are so many different elements. If you speak to anybody about what they think that AI is, you will find that it depends on their personal experience of it. Many people will think that it is about jumping on an app on their phone and asking it to put something together, should that be a picture, a couple of paragraphs or some factual information. Of course, AI has so many other potential uses, not least in our health sector, supporting diagnostics; across our system, populating fields with common information and therefore saving a lot of people a lot of time; and in the drafting of factual background speeches.

There are two key principles: the first is that it has to be ethical; and the second is that it is important that we still have a core human element to check facts and to check for bias and other issues. The end users are really important. We know that a lot of older people use government services. Many of the older people whom I know could buy and sell you in social media and online. We also know that there are challenges with some of those digital skills right across people's ages, so it has to have a role in the entire life cycle. We need to look at all its characteristics and challenges and make sure that it is fit for purpose. You are absolutely right.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

We have heard a lot about the potential benefits and opportunities that will come with AI. Has there been any Executive analysis of the potential impact of AI on job displacement across not just the Civil Service but the North?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is a big concern for many people when they look at their own job and at future-proofing it. Realistically, in all likelihood, AI will be able to do things in five or 10 years' time, and maybe in one year's time, that we cannot even imagine right now. There is an apprehension about that at times. I always think that we need to be careful that we are not being Luddites about it. We do not want to delay by being apprehensive about something that we do not perhaps always understand but should, in fact, look at it while being conscious of the risks and challenges that it poses and acutely aware of the opportunities that it presents.

I would always say that it is not about simply replacing people. It is very much about looking at how AI and technological development can help support better efficiency and better productivity. It is also about upskilling or reskilling people who currently work in jobs that could perhaps be picked up by AI and used in different ways. As we know, the needs of the Civil Service in the future will be very different from its needs of the past.

The head of the Civil Service has undertaken a people strategy review. A lot of work is being done on looking at the numbers that are needed across our public sector to make it fit for purpose, what skills are required for the future and where AI can support those. The important point is that it is not primarily about people losing their jobs; it is about maybe doing things better and differently in the future and reskilling and upskilling for future jobs those who are in existing jobs.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Deputy First Minister, AI has been at the fore in the cutting-edge development in our continually growing defence and space industry in Northern Ireland. How can we ensure that the AI strategy aligns with that growth and that we fully benefit from the UK defence growth deal, which will be worth millions of pounds to the people of Northern Ireland?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is undoubtedly the case that we have a really strong, high-quality defence and aerospace industry in Northern Ireland. Last weekend, we had Remembrance Sunday, which is a time for many to pause and reflect on the role that so many in Northern Ireland played in the world wars and in wars and conflicts since. Importantly and in line with that are the roles that our industries and businesses play in supporting the defence industry. Companies and the things that are made right here in Northern Ireland help to keep the world safe. At the moment, it is unfortunate that, because of global conflict, there are fears. I speak with a number of ambassadors, and we have the opportunity to meet ambassadors and delegations who come to Northern Ireland from across the globe. When you speak to people from Poland, Latvia and a number of countries, you can see that real sense of insecurity and the concerns about security. They are investing in defence, because, fundamentally, they see that as the best way to secure peace for their region, and our companies can absolutely play a role in that.

The Member is right. The initiative by the UK Government to support the defence industry is UK-wide. We absolutely must make sure that Northern Ireland can benefit from that. We have a number of really strong areas in not only aerospace and defence but cybersecurity. That is a big strength that we have. Conflicts of the future will be as much about cyberattacks on our networks and on our electricity systems etc as they will be about that traditional street-by-street type of fighting that, unfortunately, formed part of past wars. That is something for us to be aware of in our defence strategy, and I look forward to working with the ADS group, with you, as Chair of the Committee, and with others to make sure that Northern Ireland can benefit fully on that front.

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

4. Mr McNulty asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on progress to redevelop Casement Park. (AQO 2643/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The redevelopment of Casement Park remains an Executive flagship capital project for sport in Northern Ireland.

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

Deputy First Minister, after years of delay, people are fed up with warm words with no commitments on Casement Park. Has a paper finally been brought to the Executive table; will funding be secured; and will you commit to ensuring that delivery is no longer held hostage to party disagreements at your Executive table?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. The holding up of Casement Park was never a political issue. The funding for Casement Park was secured as part of a multi-sports package. That funding of circa £62 million remains on the table. The Member will be fully aware of the financial pressures facing the Executive in both revenue and capital. That funding remains on the table, and, as indicated, it remains an Executive flagship programme.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Does the deputy First Minister agree that, as she outlined, Casement Park is indeed an Executive commitment and remains a priority commitment?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I can confirm that it remains an Executive flagship capital project. It was part of that investment strategy, and it is referenced in the Programme for Government. The challenge in all of this is because of the cost of that project now, but, as we have said many times before, the commitment to that £60-odd million by the Northern Ireland Executive remains. We know that that is not sufficient against the plans that the GAA has. I understand that the GAA is not willing at this point to put additional money into the project, and that will leave a significant shortfall between the cost of the aspiration and what is on the table. That is a challenge for people to look at, including the GAA, and I look forward to seeing what the GAA's proposals are on that.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Progress on Casement is now critical. Every week of delay risks losing a once-in-a-generation opportunity. We also have the potential to host the Women's World Cup in 2035 and the cricket T20 World Cup in 2030, and the football fund still has a £50 million shortfall. Sport urgently needs strategic direction and investment. Where is the cross-departmental leadership to attract and deliver the long-term funding that we need to finally deliver Casement Park, to fully fund the football fund and to make sure that Northern Ireland does not miss out on international events?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. I know that he has been lobbying and speaking much on the GAA issue, but I reiterate that the project was not delayed by the Northern Ireland Executive. It was not delayed because of political disagreement. It was not delayed because of the DUP. There were lots of local issues in relation to planning, and the costs of the project have increased significantly, leaving what many people would assess to be a shortfall of well in excess of £100 million on that project. I see that the Member is shaking his head. If that is incorrect, that needs to be articulated, but that is my understanding of it.

The Executive do not have £100 million sitting about for this project, as the Member is aware. There are many pressures in the system. We are looking at our investment strategy for Northern Ireland (ISNI), and that is a matter that is coming up later in these questions. To be clear, in all likelihood, the vast majority of any capital funding that will be available in the next 10 to 20 years is already fully committed against a range of projects, and we have been actively looking to see how we can increase the amount of capital available because of, for example, big issues in NI Water that are now holding back housing and economic development. Those are big challenges, and the Executive need to look at those. In the case of this project, there is a significant capital shortfall. That is the reality. It is not political posturing, and it is not about people being difficult about it. It is just a reality, and there is not a solution to that issue at this stage.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Given the huge financial pressures faced by the Executive, including on capital, can the DFM outline the challenging environment for any additional expenditure?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is a timely question, because we are looking into the Chancellor's Budget event at the end of this month. I have to say that there is little space for optimism that we will get any additional money, either revenue or capital. Of course, if we got that, that would be welcome. There are huge challenges. I do not need to say that to anybody around this place when you know what needs to be done in your constituencies, should that be on potholes in our roads, the need for new roads or the promises that have been made to our schools. You can go into a school and see the maintenance that is required and the backlog for that. I go around Lagan Valley and, day in, day out, see that need for capital investment and infrastructure. There are difficult things that we need to look at.

The First Minister and I have tasked the Strategic Investment Board (SIB) with looking at the options around capital funds and what we can do, particularly with regard to NI Water and the requirement for infrastructure, where that is impacting. As we have said, that is not just about the building of houses or holding back economic development; it is contributing to issues such as the situation with Lough Neagh. We cannot avoid that. NI Water is a significant contributor to that situation, and it needs to be addressed by investment.

Those are all things that we are trying to tackle at the moment. However, let us all be incredibly clear: there is not enough capital in the system to do what we need to do and to support our core public services. The idea of finding hundreds of millions of pounds is not realistic, unfortunately, so it is a challenge to which there is no answer at the moment.

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

5. Mr O'Toole asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the investment strategy for Northern Ireland. (AQO 2644/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I knew that a question on the investment strategy was coming up shortly; I did not realise that it was the next question.

The investment strategy remains under consideration. We hope to be able to bring it to the Executive in the near future. The Member may recall that junior Minister Bunting provided a detailed update on the investment strategy in the Chamber on 14 October in response to an Opposition motion. Although an immense amount of work has already gone into shaping the strategy, there are still some key considerations to be worked through. However, we are confident that the substantial work that has already been completed, together with progress on the enabling action plan, sets a clear direction. We know what needs to be done, and we are committed to doing it. We are determined to get this right. Once finalised, the timeline for approval and publication will be a matter for the Executive.

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

Thank you, deputy First Minister. Almost exactly one year ago, you said:

"We are considering the draft investment strategy, after which we hope to be in a position to bring the strategy to the Executive." — [Official Report (Hansard), 25 November 2024, p27, col 2].

That was a year ago. In the meantime, as you have said, road development, including that of the A5, has languished; there has been no investment in NI Water and no plan to invest in it; Casement Park lies unbuilt; and social housing lies unprogressed. Deputy First Minister, are you seriously telling us that, after a year, there has been no progress in delivering the investment strategy? Private meetings do not count. When will it be published?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. He is well aware that none of those things is impacted on by the long-term investment strategy, which sets the overarching framework. The Executive and everyone in this place knows that we need to fix roads and that we need new roads; we know that we need to fix schools and that we need new-build schools; we need more physical SEN provision; and we know what commitments exist with regard to flagship projects and outstanding issues. The A5 will not be impacted on by the ISNI being there or not.

We need to be honest with the public, and we need to be clear with the public. The real challenge that we face is the fact that almost all of the capital that is projected to be available over the next 10 to 15 to 20 years has, as I said, already been committed by previous agreements and commitments on those flagship projects, the roads programme and the schools programme. As the Education Minister has said in this place, if we were to do for schools all the capital work that has been promised, all of the education capital programme for the next 20-plus years would be eaten up. That is the reality of what we face.

We also need to acknowledge that there have been significant changes from this time last year with the A5 judgement and the climate change legislation potentially having a significant impact on big public-sector capital projects. That is something that we need to take into account, and we are actively looking at that. Work is ongoing, but we are considering a number of key issues and trying to bring forward something that will make a meaningful difference, as opposed to having a document simply for a document's sake.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

It is evident that the Long Kesh site has immense social and economic potential that will benefit communities not just in Lisburn but beyond Lisburn. Does the deputy First Minister agree that now is the time to finally move forward with the regeneration of Long Kesh?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for her question. This has been a source of real frustration for me. I am a representative for Lagan Valley, and, speaking personally and in that capacity, I say that I do not agree with the Sinn Féin position that nothing can happen on that site until it gets its way in relation to the listed buildings. The listed buildings issue is a sensitive issue. There is the potential for a huge amount of hurt, depending on what happens there, particularly for victims and survivors. The then deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, made it clear that no or very little economic development could happen on that site unless there was an agreement on those listed buildings.

I appeal to Sinn Féin, and to my colleague in this office, to lift that restriction in order to allow for the economic potential of a site on the main Belfast to Dublin corridor to be fulfilled while discussions continue on dealing with the difficult legacy issues. All kinds of economic development and businesses would be interested in using the site, given that it is key strategically and given its importance to my Lagan Valley constituency. I therefore reiterate my appeal to lift that condition on economic development and allow for it to go ahead in order to unleash the incredible potential of the Maze/Long Kesh site, not just for Lagan Valley but for all of Northern Ireland.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Time is up. That ends the period for listed questions. We will now move to 15 minutes of topical questions. Topical questions 5 and 7 have been withdrawn.

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

T1. Mr O'Toole asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, in indicating that he will lay a wreath here tomorrow on behalf of the SDLP, because he recognises the importance of Remembrance Day, particularly but not only to the unionist community, whether they agree that political leaders have a duty, in word and deed, to embody empathy and reconciliation in this shared society, given that he has taken the deputy First Minister at her word that her priority is to attend Remembrance Day services tomorrow, and further asked why not one of the DUP's more than 150 elected representatives is able to attend the inauguration of a president who is important to many people in this society. (AQT 1741/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. The inauguration event commences at 11.00 am on 11 November, and, as he said, he is acutely aware of the date's importance. It is an unfortunate clash, and my statement outlined why I cannot attend. I will be here with him, and I hope not only to attend that service of sombre reflection and remembrance but to take part in another act of remembrance.

Of course, whom a party decides to send is a matter for that party, and I stand here as deputy First Minister. I advise him, however, that no matter whether people are councillors, MPs or MLAs, tomorrow is a very significant date. I know that some commentators have said that it is a very significant date for unionists, but it should be a significant date for everyone across Northern Ireland, given the immense sacrifice that so many from this part of the UK on this island made, as, of course, did many from the Republic of Ireland as well.

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

Deputy First Minister, you will never find me or my party trivialising the importance of remembrance and of Remembrance Day for so many people in this society and, indeed, on this island, but it is the case that many people feel that your party, which is the leading unionist party, has embarked, perhaps not by design, on a journey of fear, grievance and anger, particularly for unionist people in Northern Ireland. After the debate earlier today, can you genuinely reflect on that and move back to making some vague progress towards reconciliation?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I can advise him that I strive to represent everyone across Northern Ireland in everything that I do, be that by condemning acts of violence or by building a better and brighter future for everyone here. I genuinely believe in doing that and am firmly committed to it. When people reflect on my time as deputy First Minister, they will see that I strongly indicated from my very first speech that I wanted to be a deputy First Minister who worked with and for everyone. I believe that I have demonstrated that not just through the wide range of events that I have attended but through generosity of spirit, which is something that we all need to have.

The Taoiseach, the Irish Government and others understand completely the importance of 11 November. As I indicated, I recognise that it is a huge day personally for the incoming president. I have sought to have a personal call with her in recognition of her very significant personal achievement and what she is about to embark on. I advise the Member that, looking back, there has been a huge amount of engagement not just with the Taoiseach but with Simon Harris and the Irish Government as part of our North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) and British-Irish Council (BIC) engagement. We have had a number of very constructive discussions, and I believe in building constructive relationships. Much of what we are trying to drive forward in order to improve people's lives is based on having those constructive relationships.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

T2. Ms Flynn asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, after noting that she was pleased to hear the deputy First Minister's response to the previous topical question about the spirit of representing everyone, which is extremely important, whether, in the context of her understanding that tomorrow will be hugely significant for many people across the North, across the island and, for the Irish diaspora, across the world, she accepts that she has some responsibility for attendance at tomorrow's event in that spirit and as a symbol of the representation of everyone across our communities. (AQT 1742/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

There is a real appetite among some people to make the matter into a political football and use it to indicate political division or to score political points. That is not what this is about. I got an invitation to the event on Thursday morning. I have commitments on an issue that is very important to me, not least because my grandfather, my great-grandfather and so many people in my family served and were severely injured in the wars. I have committed to attend the service and pay my respects in remembrance here. I also have committed to go to Windsor Castle and pay tribute, in the 80th anniversary year of Victory in Japan, to the veterans of the Asia-Pacific theatre of World War II. That is an opportunity not only to pay our respects to an incredible generation that did incredible things but to recognise the fact that so many people, mainly young men, who came from this small place went right across the globe, risking their lives and giving their lives or getting injured in those frightening and dangerous circumstances, to fight for peace and democracy for all of us. The very least that I can do is go along to pay my respects and tribute to them.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for her response. I hope that she will send someone in her place if she cannot make it. Regrettably, a lot of people from across our communities will hear in her answer a refusal to attend that does not fulfil her cross-community duty, in the spirit of respect and reconciliation, to represent everyone across our society. Sadly, that is what many people will hear in your answer, which is in stark contrast with the leadership that our First Minister for all showed at yesterday's event. It is an extremely stark contrast.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That was quite a lengthy statement. I will not rise to political point-scoring.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Excuse me. Will you take your seat? I am in the Chair here. OK? Do not tell me how to chair. If you do not like a decision, go to the Speaker's Office. Continue.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am sorry. I was interrupted.

As I indicated, that characterisation is unfair. Given that the matter is so serious, I will not get involved in what is an attempt to score political points. I have gone to events throughout Northern Ireland, and I have gone to events on my own, such as when I went to Normandy to pay tribute, despite the fact that 70,000 soldiers from what is now the Republic of Ireland also served there. I paid tribute to those soldiers, too. Likewise, there are events that Michelle, as First Minister, attends on her own, and there are things that we have done together. A generous approach would be to recognise that both of us have been out there talking to people from across Northern Ireland. I will always do my part, but I ask you to respect the fact that 11 November is a hugely important day in my community, which includes so many people who served, and that, in this case, I am unable to attend an event because of an invitation from His Majesty the King and Her Majesty the Queen to pay tribute to veterans. There will be future opportunities to engage with the new president of Ireland and, indeed, to build relationships east-west and North/South.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

T3. Mr Brooks asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, given that the leader of the Opposition has written to the head of the Civil Service on matters relating to the visit of the Education Minister to Israel, to indicate what role the head of the Civil Service has in that regard. (AQT 1743/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for that important question. It is really unfortunate that there have been comments in this place in relation to that matter. We need to be very careful about the limitations of the role of the head of the Civil Service. She has confirmed that she is only engaged in fact-finding and does not have a role in such investigations or inquiries. It is always important to recognise that it is the Minister who takes the decisions in their Department.

As you said, the leader of the Opposition has written to the head of the Civil Service seeking certain information on and an assessment of whether the NICS code of ethics has been breached. I am very clear that, while the head of the Civil Service may wish to provide him with factual information, as she would to anyone who corresponds with her, she is not accountable to the leader of the Opposition, and she is not empowered to sit in judgement of a democratically elected Minister of Education.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

I make a declaration of interest, having been on the trip to Israel. Will the deputy First Minister clarify for the leader of the Opposition that the accountability of Ministers is to the House and not with him trying to politicise civil servants?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

As indicated, I feel that it was inappropriate for the head of the Civil Service to have been brought into the matter by others in this place. Indeed, I have no doubt that the head of the Civil Service would not want to put herself in the middle of what is essentially a political argument. She has a formal, professional role as head of the Civil Service, and that role absolutely does not include any investigation into Ministers or Ministers' decisions.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

T4. Mr Irwin asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether they agree with him that disruption to the supply of veterinary medicines must be addressed before the grace period ends in January 2026, and to outline what engagement they have had with the UK Government on that very important issue. (AQT 1744/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. He has been a champion for our farming industry for so many years in this place. This is an important issue not just for the farming community but for pet owners. Many people are getting notifications indicating that, from January 2026, they will no longer be able to buy their pet medication online from GB suppliers. The UK Government must address the issue urgently.

We have an indication from the UK Government that they are moving in the direction of getting an agreement with the EU, particularly in relation to sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. In my view, that should remove any of the European Union's apprehensions or concerns that prevent a resolution on veterinary medicines from going ahead. As the First Minister will know, I have raised the outstanding issue on veterinary medicines at every single opportunity with the UK Government, whether that is with Nick Thomas–Symonds, the Prime Minister or our Secretary of State. The clock is ticking. The issue needs to be resolved. It will add significantly to the costs that pet owners have to pay for essential medicines for their animals. It will add lots of costs for our farming community and vets. We need to get the issue resolved. I call on the UK Government to act urgently to get the matter resolved immediately and to prevent the grace period from ending and the crisis continuing into 2026.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her response and for her efforts on the matter. The deputy First Minister will be aware that a large number of vaccines are used by the intensive farming sectors. Does she agree that it would be a serious issue if those medicines were not available?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is really important because, first, while we oppose the Windsor framework, it indicated agreement that there would be limited or no diversion of trade, but what we are seeing with veterinary medicines is an entire diversion of trade to other markets and away from the GB market. That needs to be addressed. Secondly, others may say that we have reduced the proportion of medicines affected to 5% or 10%, but, if you are a dog owner or you have a companion animal that is reliant on the drugs that are among that 5% to 10%, that is everything to you, and the cost is very significant.

We know that many people across Northern Ireland, particularly older people, rely on their companion animal for tackling loneliness as a best friend that they love and care about deeply.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Time is up, deputy First Minister.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

They do not have a lot of money to put towards excessive costs. This need to be addressed.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you. Time is up, deputy First Minister.

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

On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

There are no points of order during Question Time. Take your seat.

Oral Answers to Questions — Justice

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Question 5 has been withdrawn.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

1. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister of Justice when she will announce the approval of the pay award for police officers for 2025-26, in line with the recommendations of the Police Remuneration Review Body. (AQO 2655/22-27)

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

2. Mr Clarke asked the Minister of Justice to outline any plans that she has to assist the Police Service of Northern Ireland with its shortfall in funding for the 2025-26 financial year. (AQO 2656/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

With your permission, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I will respond to questions 1 and 2 together.

I am committed to implementing the Police Remuneration Review Body's recommendations in respect of the 2025 police pay award as soon as possible. As Members are aware, public sector pay awards must meet the affordability test before they can be implemented. I have been consistent in advocating for police officer pay to be placed on an equal footing with other public sector workers. As a result of those representations, I was pleased to secure additional provisional allocations from the Executive specifically for police officer pay in October on the same basis as Health. Even with that additional funding, however, the PSNI remains unable to confirm affordability for the pay award at this time.

I am fully aware of the commitment given by the Health Minister that health workers can expect payment of their award in February 2026. The consequence is that funding will be deducted from the Health budget in the next financial year. That will, no doubt, have an impact in future years. While I am keen to ensure that police officers are treated on a par with other public sector workers, such decisions have wide-ranging implications for justice delivery.

I will continue to work with the Chief Constable to explore options to allow the PSNI to demonstrate affordability for the pay review body's recommendations. I can assure the Chamber that the successful implementation of the police officer pay award remains a priority for me as Justice Minister, and I am confident that the award will be realised by the end of this year.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. I wish her well in ensuring that police officers get their well-deserved pay award in the near future.

The Minister went on record in the media last week as saying that the fact that the PSNI is unable to take industrial action did not mean that the police should be at the end of the queue when it comes to funding. I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. Should the 1,600 police support staff decide to strike, what impact that would have on front-line policing functions?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I am sorry; I did not catch all of the question, but I think it was referring to the police support staff potentially going on strike. Of course, the rationale for doing so is not to do with pay, because their pay has already been realised in-year. The issue there is to do with the settlement of the data breach claims. As I have done in the past when there have been disputes with staff or with any other sector, I urge people not to withdraw their services and go on strike but to work with me so that we can find the resources to make those payments.

It is important that the police are properly resourced, and that includes their pay. That is why I set money aside at the beginning of the year, when I was making my allocations, to allow for pay. The pay review body, however, came back with a significantly higher allocation than expected, which left us with something of a gap to fill. The Chief Constable and I have been working hard to look at ways that we can do that. The Department and the PSNI are looking at some of the savings that we are trying to make, and I am pretty confident that we will be able to do that in-year. That is a better place to be than entering next year with an overspend and, essentially, having that trickle on into future years.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I share the Minister's optimism about the pay settlement for the police, and I hope that we are both right to have that optimism. My question goes much wider, however, because it is about police funding as a whole. We all know about the pressures that policing faces at the moment. Is she as optimistic that something can be done to resolve some of the outstanding issues, in particular the big-ticket items that have featured in the media most recently?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Member will be aware that, when it comes to Justice funding in general, I have said on many occasions that we have seen an increase that is well below inflation; in fact, had we matched inflation over the last 10 years, Justice would have around £225 million in addition to what we have at the moment. That would have been a game changer when it comes to things such as injury to feelings, pensions issues, holiday pay and, indeed, the data breach. Those are things that at a better time, perhaps, we could have absorbed, but we are not in a position to do that now.

I continue to engage with the Department of Finance, the Executive more widely, the NIO and Treasury, because, in addition to the issues of which we have been apprised already, there are the issues of legacy, the cost of policing and the pressure on the wider justice system coming down the tracks as a result of new legislation. We need to work out a sustainable model that allows us to have a Police Service that is properly resourced for its primary task but, at the same time, does not eat up the entire Justice budget, which would mean not being able to have courts, prisons and all the other facilities that we need to provide.

If I may, with your indulgence, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I will correct, for the record, something that I said to Mr Clarke last week. He asked about the release of an individual on pre-release testing. I said that that person was time-served on their tariff; in fact, they were not time-served but approaching that point, which is why their pre-release testing had been started. Apologies to the House if anyone was misled by what I said.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Given that pay issues may have a negative effect on police morale and, possibly, on police recruitment, what is the Minister's assessment of whether 7,000 police officers by 2027 be achieved?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Pay will, undoubtedly, have an impact on morale; there is no question about that. As I said, however, there are things other than pay and the speed at which people get their uplift that will impact on morale in the PSNI. The contractual pay arrangements have already been implemented. Since those are unavoidable, I have split them from the PRRB recommendations so that officers now automatically get their contractual uplift each October. That will have been received and will, hopefully, go some way to easing the pressure on officers.

I want to see two things, however. First, I want to see pay realised in-year for officers and in their pockets as quickly as we can make that happen. Secondly, I want to put the wider system, including the PSNI, on a sustainable footing. That means that, as we come up on our three-year Budget, the Executive will need to commit to what has already been indicated to me as a priority: the recovery plan. We need that to be written into the Budget for next year.

Far be it from me to speak on behalf of the Department of Finance and the Finance Minister when it comes to making those allocations, but he has so far indicated to me that that is his intention. Given that it meets the value-for-money criteria, it would make sense for us to do that. When he has made such promises, he has, to date, stood over them, so I can only rely on that.

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

Minister, I am sure that most Members in the House will agree with your broad position, which is shared by other Ministers and, indeed, by the Chief Constable, that the Treasury should meet the reserve claim for the data breach. However, if we are to assume the worst from the Treasury, which is probably a good position to take, what planning is happening between you and the Finance Minister on a plan B?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

We do not know when the matter will crystallise. Our preference is to settle it as soon as possible, but we do not know whether it will crystallise this year or next. It is important that we do not set aside money this year and hold it until the last minute, because we will end up having to return it to the Treasury or to negotiate with the Treasury over a budget exchange scheme, which it is often not willing to do at Executive level.

We are looking at other options. For example, is there an option to convert capital into revenue that would allow us to pay a one-off sum? We are also looking at what options we have to negotiate with the Treasury on how to pay back any call on the reserve. A number of things are there, but, at the end of the day, the Executive will have to look at their overall Budget next year, deduct any projected overspends that are still in place at the end of the year and then look at the other pressures and decide where to allocate money. I will be one of the Ministers at the table and will make the case for this being a priority, but the agreement of all Ministers will be required for that to happen.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

3. Mr Frew asked the Minister of Justice to outline the number of applications made to the child protection disclosure scheme in each of the past four years. (AQO 2657/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Delivery of the child protection disclosure scheme is an operational matter for the Police Service of Northern Ireland. The scheme enables information to be disclosed to members of the public where it is necessary to protect children or a child from serious harm. The information may be requested by any member of the public and will be disclosed by the police, where it is appropriate to do so.

My Department is responsible for the overarching legal framework. I note that the disclosure scheme is in line with the requirements of article 50 of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2008 and with statutory guidance that my Department published in accordance with that legislation.

Such public protection-related matters are kept under review. Notwithstanding that it is for the PSNI to run the disclosure scheme, I want to reiterate the message that I have given before, which is that, if anyone is concerned about potential harm to a child or children, it is incumbent on them that, in the first instance, they contact the police.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

The Minister has failed to answer my question, even though she had time to get the data that I seek. That does nothing to assuage my concerns that the Department of Justice and, indeed, the PSNI are refusing to promote the child protection disclosure scheme, meaning that parents are the last to know if there is a risk to their child. Will the Minister commit to informing the House of her plans to promote the child protection disclosure scheme in the future so that parents will not be the last to know?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The first thing to say when it comes to points of order on this is that the data is not held by my Department, and there is an extant ruling from the Speaker that, when it comes to operational PSNI matters, I am not required to seek that data or to present it here as though it were my own. The second thing to say is that, possibly with the sole exception of the Member who asked the question, I have been one of the few MLAs who, when others have asked for disclosure of the names and addresses of all sex offenders, has repeatedly raised in the Chamber the fact that those disclosure schemes are available, the public can use them, the PSNI has a right to tell and the public have a right to ask. I do not have a budget to be able to promote the scheme. If the PSNI believes that the scheme is being underutilised, it can, of course, choose to prioritise some of its resources, but, given what we discussed during the last question, I think that I have made every effort throughout the past 18 months to make people aware of the scheme and to promote it. I encourage other MLAs to do so as well, because the scheme works well for public protection.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Minister, will you outline what further steps you are taking to strengthen the statutory sex offender notification requirements?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Home Office Ministers provide us with opportunities to further strengthen and streamline the current sex offender notification requirements by extending provisions proposed in the Crime and Policing Bill. As Members will appreciate, providing a consistent UK-wide approach to sex offender risk management is paramount to supporting wider public protection. I have secured the legislative consent of the Assembly for the greater part of the proposed provisions, for which I am grateful, and I intend to bring forward a further legislative consent motion (LCM) early in the new year to enable the introduction of some further provisions in Northern Ireland. Those include, for example, the need to notify a new name no less than seven days in advance of it being used; the requirement to notify at least 12 hours in advance before entering qualifying premises where children are present; and the requirement to seek the approval of the police to apply for certain identity replacement documents, if they are in a new name. Instead of the need to amend this by way of statutory rule, we are now looking at the list of prescribed police stations where an offender must notify and at the ability for notification to be given virtually in certain circumstances but only where particular conditions are met. We are doing all that with a focus on not only trying to streamline how we manage sex offenders but how we ensure that the public are fully protected.

We are also looking at the ability of a police officer to consider whether relevant offenders should remain subject to indefinite notification requirements without the need for an application to be made from the relevant offender and at the ability for an application for a warrant for power of entry and search of an offender's home to be made by a court officer of at least the rank of inspector. Considerable work is ongoing in that space, because we will all agree that we want our children and, indeed, wider society to be properly protected from predators.