Northern Ireland Assembly, 17 November 2025

374 contributions from 58 members. The official report.

Members' Statements

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I want to challenge some of the narrative and, frankly, the mistruths that were spoken here regarding the Irish Athletic Boxing Association (IABA) and the Ulster Boxing Council. The IABA is reaffirming its alignment with the work of the Equality Commission and the importance placed by the association on the publication of the commission's review of the Ulster Boxing Council in light of comments made by the Communities Minister and others last week. The IABA acknowledges that the Minister, in a statement to the Assembly, shared his personal view. That view is not supported by the findings in the Equality Commission report or its recommendations. The Equality Commission's report does not make any findings of discrimination. On that basis, the IABA strongly and unequivocally refutes any suggestion that discrimination on religious or community grounds has taken place within the IABA or, for that matter, the Ulster Boxing Council.

The IABA and the Ulster Boxing Council have engaged, and will continue to engage, fully and constructively with the Equality Commission. The report makes a number of recommendations to strengthen governance, clarify selection processes and further embed good relations practices within boxing structures. In addition, it highlights areas for continuous improvement in governance and communication. In my experience, the IABA is well advanced in implementing those recommendations. The IABA and, indeed, the Ulster Boxing Council emphasise their work on equality, diversity and inclusion in boxing. That is a proud tradition. That commitment to equality and inclusion throughout Ulster and Ireland has long been a proud tradition and has brought people together across community lines. Clubs are inclusive and community-based and welcome everyone, regardless of their background, faith or belief.

I welcome the opportunity to directly challenge some of the narrative from last week, and I appeal to all Members to ensure that there is constructive engagement and cooperation, which should remain central to ensuring public confidence and achieving the shared goal of making boxing a truly inclusive sport for all.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I rise this afternoon to talk about the issue of pay rises for social care workers in the independent sector. First, before we get into the meat of the subject, I want to reflect on something. I dare say that there is not a family represented in the Chamber at this time that is not grateful for the work of those care workers, who go in and care for elderly or disabled loved ones at a time when we cannot do it for them ourselves. We owe them a debt of gratitude, and it is right and proper that we put that on the record this afternoon.

The Minister of Health did the right thing when, earlier this year, he promised to provide those workers with the real living wage. The permanent secretary doubled down on that at the Health Committee and indicated that that would happen, perhaps even by September. However, we now find that, given the issues with the budget, the Minister has moved to a position where he is saying that he is still committed to that but only when it is more affordable — perhaps next year. Providing the real living wage is the right thing to do. In fact, it is the only thing to do.

Let us think for a moment about the position that the Minister has got himself into with his budget. There are already huge pressures on next year's budget. We are talking about the potential of him carrying an overspend into next year. He also promised last week in the House that he would prioritise pay for healthcare workers and, indeed, provide an upfront payment earlier in the year, even ahead of the pay review body settlements, and he has now promised that he will push the issue of the real living wage into next year as well. We are entitled to ask this: what is the Minister's financial plan for healthcare? It seems that we are kind of making it up as we go along, and that is simply not good enough. This year's pressures translated into next year's will create massive pressures on the healthcare budget. Furthermore, we will not relieve the winter pressures and take people out of hospital if we do not have a sustainable social care workforce, and the Minister needs to plan for that much more carefully than he has done heretofore.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

I rise today to speak with grave concern about the recent news regarding the confirmed serious and significant failings in the central safeguarding functions of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland in the period from 2009 to 2022. That announcement arrives following a report on allegations of bullying and harassment that was commissioned by Lord John Alderdice, who was a member of the Presbyterian Church until 2018. Lord Alderdice commissioned that report, and it was submitted to the Charity Commission. It outlined allegations of members being shunned and gaslit by Church leadership and the mental health concerns among ministers across the Church.

Yesterday, a statement was read out to Presbyterian congregations across this island that informed Church members of an investigation and review of previous handling of safeguarding issues at an Assembly Buildings level. The results of that review are highly concerning. It found failures to make referrals to statutory authorities; inadequate responses to concerns expressed about individuals and congregations; and ineffective monitoring of offenders who sought to return to worship at church. The statement also contained an apology for the betrayal of trust and the hurt caused by the failure to take action.

The statement followed the resignation of Presbyterian moderator, Rev Trevor Gribben, last week. He is the first moderator to have stepped down in the Church's history. It has been greatly disappointing to discover the failings. In any organisation, safeguarding concerns must be treated with the utmost seriousness. In considering this specific case, places of religious worship and faith are where so many seek comfort and support, particularly those who are vulnerable. For so many, that trust has now been put into question — for some, it has been broken. It is essential that, in any future process, victims are protected and at the heart of any decisions.

I hope that all organisations across our society, whether religious, community, sporting or other, reflect on their own policies and safeguards. My thoughts are, of course, with the victims. I encourage anybody who wishes to make a disclosure to come forward and contact the police or Victim Support NI.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Ten years ago, we were coming to terms with the aftermath of the Paris terrorist attacks. Those attacks, on 13 November 2015, left 130 people dead and nearly 400 injured. France was left in a state of emergency for nearly two years such were the attacks. Who can forget the scenes of the aftermath of the Bataclan massacre? Ninety people were killed in that venue alone. It was truly devastating. The attacks started with a series of suicide bombs. As somebody who has been directly involved in three suicide bomb attacks, I know just how devastating suicide bombings are and the injuries that they cause. Paris has come through a lot, because that particularly fateful day cost Paris a lot.

Absolutely nobody in this Chamber would refer to those ISIS perpetrators as "combatants". Nobody would do anything other than refer to those who were killed and injured as "victims". The perpetrators were not victims. Why on earth do we, in this place and throughout Northern Ireland, bend ourselves out of shape so as not to point the finger at the people who perpetrated atrocities and say, "You are the terrorist, and you terrorised", and point at the victims and say, "You are the victims. We will make sure that we look after you and refer to you as 'victims'. We will not group you with the very people who made you victims"?

The Ulster Unionist Party is a party of the rule of law. It does not matter who you are — soldier, policeman, civilian or politician — if you break the law, you should face the law. We will stand up for that. The British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference will meet on legacy very shortly. Our party is clear on two things for now. First, we will argue that the term "victim" refers only to those who were killed or injured through no fault of their own. We will also make sure that sexual crimes are added to the list of serious harm, because rape was used as a weapon of war during our Troubles.

Paris is healing and, in some cases, has healed, because it confronted the truth. The French did not hide away from direct language; they used direct language. Terrorists are terrorists: they terrorise. Victims are the innocent people who were made victims by terrorists. Let us get back to clear speaking, and maybe we will sort this mess out.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

On behalf of Sinn Féin, I send our deepest condolences to the families and friends of the five young people who lost their lives on Saturday evening in a road tragedy in County Louth. The tragic deaths of Chloe Hipson, Alan McCluskey, Shay Duffy, Chloe McGee and Dylan Commins are dreadful and have stunned County Louth, County Monaghan and the wider area. The tributes that are being paid online and in the media show that all five young people were popular and had bright futures ahead of them. Their loss has cast a dark shadow over the community. I also think of the emergency services personnel who attended the scene on Saturday evening. Having to take the injured to hospital and call to the homes of the five families of those who lost their lives is devastating. I hope that those people will receive the support that they need. There are difficult and dark days ahead for the families in Monaghan and Louth, and we will continue to think of them as they face up to what is an unimaginable tragedy.

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

A sense of shock and sadness is consuming communities in Louth, Monaghan and Meath. On Saturday night, five young friends were heading for a night out. We can all identify with the sense of joy, excitement and fun that they were experiencing. That was turned on its head in an instant. My heart goes out to the families of Chloe McGee from Carrickmacross, Alan McCluskey from Drumconrath, Dylan Commins from Ardee, Shay Duffy from Carrickmacross and Chloe Hipson from Lanarkshire. We offer them our sincerest condolences and pay tribute to the emergency services personnel who attended the scene. Our thoughts are with the families of the deceased, their communities and their colleagues. I measc na naomh go raibh siad.

[Translation: May they be numbered among the saints.]

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

At the outset, on behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party, I convey our deepest sympathies to the families who lost loved ones just outside Dundalk on Saturday. The pain and grief that those families and school communities are facing at the moment must be unbearable.

"Illegal immigration is tearing the UK apart"

and:

"Illegal migrants and foreign criminals are exploiting our human rights laws."

Those are not my words but those of the Home Secretary of the United Kingdom as she announced the most significant changes to our asylum system in over a decade. That very point should be one of eternal shame to the Conservative Government who previously held power for 14 years and presided over such significant issues in our asylum system. Our communities know only too well the difficulties caused by illegal immigration. They have been talking about them for years. A year ago, a Labour politician would have attempted to lock people up for making a statement such as the one that the Home Secretary made. The fact remains that the political classes seem to be going through the stages of political grief. First, they ignore you, then they laugh at, sneer at and ridicule you, then they fight you, and then they claim your viewpoint as their own. That is what has been happening in the United Kingdom.

The measures that the Home Secretary has outlined are, I believe, common sense. They will not solve illegal immigration in its totality, but they will help. There are to be visa bans for countries that do not take back their citizens who have arrived on the UK's shores illegally: that is common sense. There are to be restrictions on the ability of those who arrive here illegally to claim benefits: that is common sense. There are to be restrictions on endless appeals by illegal immigrants against their removal: that is common sense. We have only to look at the legal aid bill to see that it is costing the country a fortune to deport those who should not be here in the first place.

Then there are reforms to prevent immigration judges from putting European Convention on Human Rights laws above the rights of the citizens of the United Kingdom to control our borders and keep our people safe. Those are all common-sense measures, and it is high time that the Government —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— got on with dealing with the issue.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

I acknowledge and, in many ways, lament the closure of the 'Down Recorder', the local newspaper that has served Downpatrick, Ardglass, Killough and many other areas of South Down. At over 189 years of age, it was one of the oldest papers on the island of Ireland. My thoughts are, first and foremost, with the staff at the paper — the journalists, editors, production staff and other workers — as they face into this uncertain period. Those staff were always proud to work for what was known as "the campaigning paper", highlighting local issues and championing the communities that they served. In an era of social media and fake news, it is sobering to see local papers such as the 'Down Recorder', which are so diligent in their journalism and hold to the values of the profession, ceasing production.

On the community aspect, I am sure that there are parents, and perhaps even grandparents, here who have seen the confidence that is inspired in our young people, from P1 and up, when they see themselves in the local newspaper at sports days and all sorts. That inspiration goes right the way through to helping journalists and other people who are involved in the media with their first tentative footsteps into the industry.

My final point is on the local economy. The 'Down Recorder' created jobs, supported local businesses and promoted community and cultural events. Its closure will be well felt, and I hope that some solution can be found.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Israel is a rogue state. It is a terrorist state and a genocidal state. Its leaders are wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity. In the Gaza Strip, 65,000 people have been confirmed as having been killed by the Israeli military, and it is reckoned that tens of thousands more bodies are still buried under the rubble. Of those who are dead, 20,000 are children and 500 are teachers. Of the schools in Gaza, 95% have been destroyed, and every university has been destroyed. There has been systematic destruction and obliteration of the education system in Gaza, which the UN describes as "scholasticide".

Recently, the Minister of Education thought that it was a good idea to visit Israel and engage in a propaganda exercise for the genocidal Israeli regime. While he was there, he visited a school in illegally occupied territory. When the permanent secretary appeared before the Education Committee last week, he said that, at the time, he did not know that that school was in illegally occupied territory. At that meeting, Committee members drew from the permanent secretary that another invitation for a trip to Israel in the near future has already landed on the Minister's desk. His recent trip caused palpable anger among teachers' unions, parents and students; led to the majority of Members in the Assembly voting for a no-confidence motion in him; and, similarly, the Education Committee holding a vote of no confidence in him.

It would be a huge mistake for the Education Minister to go back to Israel, particularly in his capacity as Education Minister. I call on the Minister to state publicly that he has no intention of going back to Israel.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

The 40th anniversary of the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement by Margaret Thatcher and Garret FitzGerald was marked on 15 November. That agreement was the beginning of my personal journey into politics as a teenager. It sparked something in me that led me to where I am today. The agreement remains a historic reminder of what happens when political change is imposed upon the people of Northern Ireland without their consent. Delivered over our heads and devoid of democratic legitimacy, it sowed deep mistrust that continues to have ramifications to this day. In recent years, the same disregard for democracy was repeated when the Northern Ireland protocol was imposed by the United Kingdom Government. Again, it was rejected by unionists and forced through without our consent.

The Anglo-Irish Agreement struck at the heart of what it meant to be a unionist. It was not just a constitutional issue; it was personal. It was a document on how the future of Northern Ireland could be shaped about us, but not with us; a document that allowed a state that housed training camps, safe houses, supply routes and bomb factories for the IRA to have a say in our affairs — a state that was perceived as not doing its part to combat the evils of terrorism that resulted in the deaths of thousands of men, women and children in Northern Ireland, who were betrayed by a Prime Minister who had famously said "Out ... out ... out" to the proposals of the New Ireland Forum and had now let Dublin in.

Mrs Thatcher, once considered a steadfast defender of the Union, had signed an agreement where the will of the people was not just ignored but was not even sought. It was done without our consultation or consent. In later years, she would express regret and admit to underestimating the depth of unionist anger across the UK and the damage that the agreement would do to trust in the Government. Such regrets do not, however, change the past. While the agreement would be superseded, it marked a dark day in Northern Ireland's history when terrorist violence was rewarded.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

In a similar vein, I want to mark the 40th anniversary of the Anglo-Irish Agreement that, on Saturday, was gushingly referred to by the Northern Ireland Office in a press release as having paved the way for the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. As members of a party that, before I was in it, was one of the architects of that agreement, we cannot recognise or agree with that tone-deaf statement.

The Anglo-Irish Agreement is an example of how not to do peace-building or agreements in Northern Ireland. It was imposed on the people of Northern Ireland without consent or consultation. It was negotiated in secret, certainly from unionism. As ever, it was negotiated with the aim of securing from the Irish Republic something that should be the basic duty of a normal democracy: cooperation in the fight against terrorism. It was George Santayana who said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. It is worth reminding ourselves of those fundamental failures, because we have seen them time and time again. Negotiating things in secret, like the on-the-run letters, has massively damaged relationships in Northern Ireland. Some people would still try to impose things without consent in Northern Ireland. We are seeing our own Government, again, with regard to legacy, making the mistake of trying to secure the cooperation of the Irish Republic by passing new legacy laws and creating new bodies. As ever, the British Government jump and expect the Irish Government to follow. That is why my party believes that there should have been parallel legislation that meant that the Irish Government were committed to doing the things that the British Government were doing.

It is worth reflecting that the NIO and the British Government can sometimes bend the knee to those who would use or threaten violence. That is why we must be eternally vigilant to their manoeuvres. It is also why devolution is so important, and why my party will never stand for collapsing Stormont: never has and never will.

It places power in the hands of the people of Northern Ireland, which is where it belongs. The Assembly exercises the democratic wishes of the people here.

Northern Ireland had a great year in 1985: Barry McGuigan was the champion of the world in boxing; Dennis Taylor was the world snooker champion; and Northern Ireland qualified for the World Cup the following year. However, it was not a good year due to the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which is a stain on the otherwise proud history of Margaret Thatcher.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I, too, wish to raise serious concerns about the decision to exclude independent-sector care workers from the latest pay uplift and, equally, about the way in which the entire package has been managed. The Minister has confirmed that £209 million has been allocated to pay uplifts following the recommendations of the review bodies, but, to deliver that package, he has already committed £100 million from next year's budget. That is a significant decision to plug an immediate gap. Despite that extraordinary step, the award excludes the independent-sector workforce, which provides essential home care and social care services on behalf of the system. We are now in a position in which next year's Health budget has been compromised in advance, but care workers, who provide daily front-line support to many vulnerable people in our communities, have been left out. That raises clear questions: how can we justify spending next year's money on this year's pay deal while telling an essential part of the workforce that there is nothing for it, and why were pay uplifts not a priority for the Minister from the very beginning?

The Department has said that funding to support the real living wage this year is not being made available. That contradicts commitments to stabilise the sector and to shift left, and it flies in the face of the repeated warnings from unions and providers about low pay driving chronic staffing shortages. By refusing to fund proper pay for those workers, the Minister is, effectively, undermining the very reforms that he keeps talking about. The whole idea of "shift left" is to invest in community support so that fewer people end up in hospital. However, if care workers continue to leave the sector because the pay does not match the responsibility, capacity in the community will fall even further. That means more delayed discharges, more pressure on acute beds and more avoidable admissions.

We are witnessing a fragmented approach to pay, poor planning and a refusal to address part of the workforce, which will have huge impacts elsewhere on the system. Calling that "unprepared" would be generous; it is a repeated cycle of stopping one crisis while creating another. It is not credible to ask our hard-working care workers to accept that outcome while expecting to reduce waiting times and relieve winter pressures. Those workers are vital to keeping people independent, preventing hospital admissions and easing pressure on acute care. Excluding them is not just unfair; it is strategically unsound.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members will be aware that a valid petition was tabled under section 28B of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 on 21 October 2025. The petition, which was signed by 31 Members, expressed concern that a decision taken by the Minister for the Economy may have been taken in contravention of section 28A(1) of the 1998 Act, and that it related to a matter of public importance. The petition related to a decision taken by the Minister to instruct officials to prepare additional measures to eliminate any risk of public funds being used to support the manufacture of components that are used for genocide. The decision was communicated to the Assembly by means of a written ministerial statement on 16 October 2025.

In line with the requirements of Standing Order 29 and the 1998 Act, I have now undertaken the duties placed on me to reach a decision on the matter. The procedure is rarely used, and this is the first such valid petition to be received in more than 10 years. Therefore, it is worth briefly recording some key points for the benefit of the House.

The fact that the petition was supported by more than 30 Members did not, in itself, refer the matter to the Executive; rather, the receipt of 30 signatures required me to do two things. The first was to consult the political parties in the Assembly. Secondly, it was then for me to decide only whether the decision referenced in the petition was of public importance, in which case it is required to be referred to the Executive. I confirm to the House that I wrote to all of the parties and independent Members in the Assembly, seeking their views on whether the subject of the petition was one of public importance. I am placing those responses in the Library. Two parties did not provide a response, but among the contributions that were received there was a range of opinions. However, I need to record that many of those contributions focused on the views of the parties on whether the Minister had power to make the decision herself rather than on whether the decision related to a matter of public importance. I state to the House again that the Act is clear: the only matter for me to consider is whether the Minister's decision relates to a matter of public importance. Whether that was something that should have been decided by the Executive is not a matter for me to take into account.

Over the past few weeks, I have given the matter detailed consideration, and I thank Assembly officials for the work that they have done to provide me with advice. In considering the matter, I reviewed the background to the matter and the responses from the parties. I have also considered the frequency with which Members have raised in the Assembly matters regarding relations with Israel. Finally, I have also taken legal advice. Having taken account of all of those different elements, I have concluded that the only credible position for me to take is that the Minister's decision did relate to a matter of public importance. I have therefore written to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister today to refer the matter to the Executive. The next steps are therefore now for the Executive and not for me.

At the beginning of my remarks, I reminded the House that this is a procedure that is rarely used. However, it is clear that there are some aspects of the procedure that would benefit from greater clarification, particularly in relation to timelines. Therefore, I intend to make a ruling on the operation of the procedure in the next few weeks.

I do not intend to take any points of order on the matter, as I have set out my decision and it is now for the Executive to consider and to inform the Assembly of the outcome within seven sitting days.

Let us move on.

Ministerial Statement

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In compliance with section 52C(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I make the following statement on the fourteenth institutional meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) and the thirtieth plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, both of which were held at Farmleigh House in Dublin on 17 October 2025. The deputy First Minister and I agreed that I would provide the report.

I begin with the institutional meeting. The deputy First Minister and I represented the Executive and chaired the institutional meeting. Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Simon Harris TD represented the Irish Government.

The first item of business was an update from the joint secretaries on actions since the last meeting, and the Council welcomed the engagement that continues across all NSMC sectors on areas of importance to both Administrations. Ministers noted that work is under way across the North/South bodies and their sponsor Departments to develop three-year corporate plans that will set the strategic direction of the bodies over the years ahead. The NSMC welcomed the fact that the next all-island disaster risk reduction conference will take place in early 2026 and practitioners from both jurisdictions will attend and participate. Ministers welcomed the continuing opportunities for developing mutually beneficial cooperation, including through the PEACE PLUS programme and work to develop a successor programme and through the Shared Island initiative.

The Council then considered matters relating to the North/South implementation bodies and noted that the freedom of information code of practice is in the process of being reviewed to ensure that it remains aligned with principles regarding access to information across both jurisdictions. Ministers also agreed that an exercise be undertaken to collectively review the grading of the CEO posts of the North/South bodies.

The Council then discussed developments in the wider policy environment. The NSMC noted the progress on the strategic partnership between the British Government and the European Union that sets out a joint commitment to deepen cooperation. Ministers noted that cooperation between the jurisdictions will continue in the context of the evolving nature of relations and will be monitored to keep the NSMC apprised of relevant developments. The Council recognised the importance of continued investment in the PEACE PLUS programme and welcomed the PEACE PLUS project, Developing Irish Sea Cooperation, known as "DISC", being delivered with partners in both jurisdictions.

The next item was a technical matter relating to the pensions for those employed in the North/South bodies. The NSMC approved amendments to the pension schemes that will apply to the North/South implementation bodies and Tourism Ireland. The Council then approved the appointment of four directors to the board of Tourism Ireland.

The meeting closed with the NSMC agreeing to meet again in institutional format in spring 2026.

Following the institutional meeting, the thirtieth plenary meeting of the NSMC took place. The deputy First Minister and I again led the Executive delegation, and Taoiseach Micheál Martin led the Irish Government delegation and chaired the meeting.

The first item on the agenda related to business and trade matters. The Council had an exchange of views on international and domestic business and trade developments since the previous plenary meeting, including on the UK-US and EU-US trade deals. Ministers recalled that, in what remains an evolving international trading environment, the two Administrations will remain engaged with one another on business and trade matters. The Council also recalled that, where appropriate, the NSMC sectors should continue to consider how agreed collaborative approaches can contribute to the promotion of economic growth. Ministers noted that the most recent combined figures for trade in goods and services between the two jurisdictions showed a total value of £12·4 billion or €14·3 billion. The Council welcomed the hosting of the twenty-eighth TCI global conference on 14 to 16 October by InterTradeIreland in partnership with Invest NI and Enterprise Ireland.

The next topic of discussion was emergency planning and preparedness. The NSMC welcomed the regular and ongoing collaboration between officials in both jurisdictions on civil contingencies, resilience and emergency preparedness. The Council agreed to enhance strategic cooperation between the office of emergency planning in the Department of Defence and the civil contingencies division in the Executive Office.

Ministers welcomed the developing collaboration between the National Directorate for Fire and Emergency Management and the Fire and Rescue Service, including on investment, cooperation and collaboration on the training facilities and capacity of both services. The Council welcomed the ongoing engagement between system operators to coordinate mitigations and supports in the event of power-system emergencies in the single electricity market. The NSMC agreed that both Administrations will remain in close contact during the upcoming winter storm season, given the significant impact that both jurisdictions experienced during storm Éowyn and the support that was provided on a cross-jurisdictional basis.

The Council then received a progress report from the joint secretaries. It noted that engagement on a wide range of policy areas continued across all NSMC areas of cooperation and that NSMC meetings continued across all sectors and were in the process of being arranged for the autumn/winter period. The Council further noted that Ministers at the relevant sectoral meetings have discussed climate change and loss of biodiversity.

We then discussed infrastructure and investment cooperation and noted the decision of the Department for Infrastructure to appeal the judgement against the A5 western transport corridor, with the appeal scheduled to be heard in December. Ministers noted that Waterways Ireland continues to progress phase 3 of the Ulster canal restoration project and that the Narrow Water bridge main construction project is proceeding to schedule. The NSMC noted the continued collaboration to progress the all-Ireland strategic rail review's recommendations and welcomed the increase in passenger numbers through the hourly service introduced on the Belfast to Dublin corridor.

Ministers noted the progress that has been made on the Ulster University Magee expansion project and welcomed the submission of the formal planning application for the construction of a new teaching block. The Council welcomed the progress that has been made on the delivery of collaborative research and innovation programmes.

The NSMC welcomed the official opening of the Carlingford lough greenway, noted the progression to phase 3 for the Sligo to Enniskillen greenway and recognised the continued cross-border collaboration on other greenway projects, including the Ulster canal greenway.

Ministers welcomed the significant stakeholder engagement undertaken by the Government of Ireland to aid the advancement of their Programme for Government commitment to establish air connectivity between Dublin Airport and City of Derry Airport, with a view to publishing a market-sounding exercise this year and having ongoing interaction with their Executive counterparts on the approach.

The Council welcomed the progress on the implementation of the PEACE PLUS programme and the discussions with relevant stakeholders on a successor to the current PEACE PLUS programme.

We then moved on to have a very good discussion on ending violence against women and girls, recognising the unacceptably high levels of gender-based violence and violence against women and girls that are prevalent across both jurisdictions. The Council agreed that there is an opportunity for more potential collaboration on initiatives with a protection focus, including child protection in the context of gender-based violence. Ministers also agreed that there is an opportunity for joint working on prevention-focused interventions through all-island awareness-raising initiatives. The Council recognised that human trafficking for sexual exploitation is a significant issue in both jurisdictions and that it also has a cross-border dimension and agreed that there is opportunity for cooperation in that area.

Ministers then approved an indicative schedule for future NSMC sectoral meetings, meetings in institutional format and the next plenary meeting in June 2026.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, First Minister. The statement is littered with instances of the Council simply noting issues rather than actively engaging on them. It is genuinely underwhelming. Strand two of the Good Friday Agreement was a landmark for all of us who wanted to build a new Ireland, yet, under your watch, it has been allowed to drift into near irrelevance. That was never the plan. It does not have to be like this. We need to build something new. Is that not precisely why reform is essential to the institutions, particularly those under strand two — so that they are effective and have real teeth?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In the paper, I set out updates on where we are across a wide range of areas of cooperation. The many varied areas of cooperation continue to go from strength to strength and include issues that we are looking at on a practical basis, be that the strategic railway review; the A5; mother-and-baby institutions; or working on ending violence against women and girls. I set out, clearly, the wide range of areas of cooperation, and I genuinely believe that there is a strong appetite among Ministers to continue to build on that into the future. I have no doubt that they will continue to do so.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you, First Minister, for your statement. I will focus on the new three-year corporate plans for the North/South bodies. I am conscious of the fact, but not yet concerned, that there may be some duplication and overlap of work between the language commissioners. What transparency will there be around those corporate plans so that we can ensure that they all work within their own swimming lanes?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is important that every organisation has its corporate plan, but also that that plan is laid out publicly so that everybody has a chance to scrutinise it, and that the organisation can stand over it. Openness and transparency is key. I have no doubt that all the reports that we discussed at the meeting will be public for everybody to scrutinise, be that on the Loughs Agency website or that of an Foras Teanga or any of the other bodies.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

When addressing business and trade matters, the First Minister indicated that there were talks around the UK-US and the EU-US trade deals. The First Minister will be aware that President Trump issued significantly higher tariffs on EU exports than on UK exports. As First Minister for Northern Ireland, did you advocate the desire that Northern Ireland exports fall under UK tariff rates, which would mean a lower rate than that of the EU?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We had a good discussion about growing our economy. That included discussing the opportunities that we have but also the challenges, not least those that exist due to the fact that we are caught in the middle of a trade war. Regardless of whether the tariffs are at a UK level or EU level, my interest is in ensuring that we grow our economy. We have huge opportunity to grow our all-island economy. I touched briefly in the statement on the figures from which you can see the economic growth and the value of all-island trade. That will continue to grow, so it is important that we fight our corner. I do so at every turn.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. She will, no doubt, be aware of the figures that have been released by the Department of Foreign Affairs that show that more than 120,000 applications for a new Irish passport were made by people in the North in 2024. Does she agree that the sheer volume of applications speaks to the need for an Irish passport office here in the North? Would she be supportive of that?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I noted those figures, which were released towards the end of last week. They are a strong, positive endorsement and show that there is a huge demand from Irish citizens who live in the North for access to an Irish passport office. The figures further underline the case that I would make personally — a view shared by many — for the need to have an Irish passport office here in the North. I ask the Irish Government to take heed of the fact that so many people want to have an Irish passport and to provide that service. I continue to raise that issue at every turn with the Irish Government.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the First Minister for her remarks so far. When addressing emergency planning preparedness — paragraph 23 of her statement — she talked about the ongoing engagement between the system operators, particularly when it comes to the all-island single electricity market and dealing with emergencies. Obviously, one of the biggest problems is the fact that there is no physical connection between North and South — indeed, unless the North/South interconnector is built, there never will be. Was there any discussion about the impediments to building the North/South interconnector? If there was, what are we going to do about it?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As the Member knows, that is an issue that has been going on for some time, and we want to get a resolution. We need to get the interconnector built. That has always been our view. We know the challenges, including the legal challenges, that have occurred along that journey. We continue to discuss the issue at North/South Ministerial Council level. The Member referred to the paragraph in the statement in which I mention how we discussed emergency planning, not least for storms. There are lots of opportunities for cooperation in that way, and we will continue to pursue them.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I am glad to note that the A5 was discussed at the recent NSMC meeting. Minister, you will be aware that the A5 has been the scene of unbelievable and heartbreaking tragedies that have devastated families. Can you reassure me that the A5 dual carriageway project remains a priority for the Executive and the NSMC?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for his question. I absolutely concur that the A5 remains an Executive priority. We must see the A5 built. We know that we have faced legal challenges and setbacks, but, given the number of lives lost on that road, building it is a safety issue. Think about what happened over the weekend on another stretch of road, where there was the tragedy of five young people losing their lives. We therefore have to get the A5 built. The Minister for Infrastructure is absolutely determined to see it built, and she is going through the appeal process now. I hope that the appeal will be successful. We have to build the A5, however, and we are not going to let up. The situation has been going on for far too long. The A5 is a strategic project for the Executive. It must be built, because of what it will mean for improving safety, regional balance, connectivity and our communities in rural areas.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

First Minister, when it comes to the North/South interconnector, Sinn Féin has a partitionist policy. Here in Northern Ireland, you support overground cables, while, in the Irish Republic, you say that they will have to be underground. When representing the Northern Ireland Executive in discussions about the North/South interconnector, which wing of your partitionist policy did you advocate?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Very good. I can absolutely assure the Member that, unfortunately, the reality, for now, is that we have two jurisdictions on the island. That is something that I hope to change, however. I hope that others, perhaps those on this side of the House, will assist us in doing that. We have been very clear that it is preferable for the cables for the North/South interconnector to be underground. We have gone through all the legal processes in the North, but there are two jurisdictions, and that has led to two different scenarios. The situation is not of our making. Unfortunately, it is the political reality for now, but I hope to change that.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

The First Minister, in her statement, said that four directors have been appointed to the board of Tourism Ireland. Can she outline the criteria and process for making the appointments? Can she also outline how those directors may assist and strengthen North/South cooperation in the tourism sector?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is their very role. I can write to the Member to provide him with the detail on how the process was conducted. I do not have that information here with me. The Irish Government nominated the four directors, because there were vacancies to fill. They are Ruth Andrews, Stephen McNally, Des Annett and Pat O'Leary. Full details about those individuals and their appointment are all on the website.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. As she knows, and it is referenced in the statement, there is an unacceptable level of violence and abuse towards women and girls across this island and beyond, so the issue is relevant to the NSMC. Can the First Minister provide an assurance that ending violence against women and girls will remain a key priority of the NSMC?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I can give the Member that assurance. We introduced the issue on to the agenda of the North/South Ministerial Council some time ago. We are committed to collaboration, and we all recognise that we have a similar problem right across the island. The preventative work is absolutely necessary, however. I genuinely believe that there is a great willingness to cooperate. The relevant Ministers have been tasked with working together to look at potential initiatives, not least by looking at the Shared Island unit for a funding model that will allow us to explore a coordinated approach to dealing with some of the preventative work. Our officials, working alongside officials in Dublin, will explore the issue further and hopefully make even more progress in the time ahead.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chéad-Aire as ucht a ráitis.

[Translation: I thank the First Minister for her statement.]

Minister, you say in your statement:

"the NSMC noted the progress on the Strategic Partnership between the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) which sets out a joint commitment to deepen cooperation."

With the all-Ireland economy thriving and our exports to Europe increasing, do you agree that we need to maximise our potential for dual market access?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I absolutely do. We talk about the many challenges that we have in our economy, but, equally, we have many opportunities. Dual market access is one such opportunity. The fact that it gives us access to more than 500 million customers and a market worth almost £6 trillion shows us that we must reach for and grab it. It will benefit our domestic exporters. It will also be a unique selling point, which is certainly the message that we give when we engage with ambassadors and international visitors and companies. When we meet them, we talk about the fact that we have dual market access, and we continue to highlight that as our unique selling point. More people will be more interested in investing in this place as a direct result of it.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thank you for your statement, First Minister. How will you ensure that Northern Ireland is best positioned to benefit fully from continued investment in the PEACE PLUS programme? How will the Executive contribute to the work that is being undertaken to develop a successor programme?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The potential for a successor programme to PEACE PLUS was discussed at the meeting and at the summit between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister in March. They publicly said that they had agreed in principle to a successor programme, but I agree with the Member that we need to influence how that is shaped. We discussed that at the meeting. It will be a matter for ongoing engagement between the Department of Finance and its counterpart in the Twenty-six Counties. There is a lot of work to be done on translating what is, at the moment, a somewhat high-level agreement into detail. We may have a road to travel in shaping that, but we want to make sure that it delivers maximum benefit for people here and that we see the excellent work that went into the previous programme continue.

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

Minister, I agree with my colleague Sinéad McLaughlin that, sadly, 40 years on from the Anglo-Irish Agreement and 60 years on from Paisley throwing snowballs at Lemass outside this Building, the NSMC has become a bit of a dusty irrelevance. The statement is full of "noting" this and "technical updates" on that. I will ask you specifically about the North/South interconnector, as it has come up today. Sinn Féin's position on that appears to be a bit like that of 'The Wombles' — underground, overground — and who knows whether it will ever be built? You are the First Minister in this jurisdiction, but yours is an all-Ireland party and you guys make great play of that. Do you support the North/South interconnector being built overground if needs be? When will it be constructed?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

You will know a lot about the North/South interconnector, given that your Minister took the decision when she was in post. Let us not play games; let us be serious about growing areas of North/South cooperation. What I highlighted in my report reflects the high-level engagement that we had, but, underneath the layer of the North/South institutional plenary meeting, there are so many levels of work across each sector — health, education and infrastructure — that are all reported on in the Chamber, and everybody has a chance to discuss them. We can see real progress in areas of North/South cooperation. There is an awful lot more on which we can engage, and there is willingness to do so.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Minister, how can the Executive build on the work of the NSMC in order to deepen all-Ireland cooperation in the likes of health, infrastructure and the economy to ensure that that benefits all our people North and South?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you. That is on the point that I am underlining. Underneath the plenary meeting, across the sectoral meetings, such a large volume of work is happening, whether that be on ending violence against women and girls, infrastructure investment or business and trade — all the areas of cooperation — for the benefit of people here. We need to continue to grow that, because we live on a small island, and we have so many synergies across those areas. We have two health services and two education systems back to back: let us do something better for people. We can do that through more cooperation and by joining up our services.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the First Minister for her statement. It was encouraging and reassuring to hear her set out areas of strategic cooperation and collaboration between Departments on emergency planning and preparedness issues. Does the First Minister agree that, where it makes sense for us to cooperate on issues that matter to us all, we should absolutely do that?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, it is just good sense. It is just common sense for us to cooperate where we can. When we look at our public services in the North, which have been starved for so many years because of austerity decisions taken in London and are on their knees, we see that we need to continue to do what we can to improve things.

There are many practical areas as well. During storm Éowyn, we needed to lean into each other to support each other through that. Undoubtedly, those are areas where we can practically work together. It is also about having the vision to do more. I think that that is what all our Ministers are there trying to do. Across all the areas where we have been able to cooperate — health issues, infrastructure issues — it leads to improvements in people's lives. Ultimately, that is what it is all about.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

The First Minister will be aware that, in Derry, the North West Cancer Centre serves over 500,000 people. It is hugely important in our area. Does she recognise that there is an opportunity here to develop more all-Ireland services and to recognise the importance of the service for the people of the north-west?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you for that. I know that healthcare is of enormous importance for the wider north-west because of the distance from so many other services. At the end of last month, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement continued to roll with the theme of all-island healthcare, which is very welcome, and Professor Heenan stated that cooperation was not enough and we needed a collaboration of resources and agreed outcomes. I absolutely concur with that statement. How we can work together and deliver better outcomes for people is a challenge for everybody. We should not limit our ambitions when it comes to improving people's lives. With regard to healthcare more generally, an all-island model of healthcare would absolutely lead to better outcomes for individuals.

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

First Minister, your statement references how engagement continues across all North/South Ministerial Council sectors on areas of importance to both Administrations. If all-island healthcare is so important, why is there no mention of it in your statement? In an Assembly question to your office, I asked the TEO to outline whether all-island CAR-T therapy was discussed at the most recent North/South Ministerial Council meeting, and your response was that Ministers provide updates on a wide range of collaboration, including healthcare issues. Can the First Minister detail whether the important issue relating to all-island CAR-T therapy for cancer treatment was discussed?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I know that the Member has taken a particular interest in that. I, too, would like to see a service across the island because there is a dearth of services North and South. Unfortunately, some people have to travel to England to get treatment, so it makes good common sense. I have no doubt that it was discussed within the health remit. There are sectoral meetings for each area, whether it be health, infrastructure, education, agriculture or food, so I have no doubt that it was discussed in that meeting.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Investing in infrastructure, Casement Park and our people is to be welcomed and supported. Can the First Minister provide an update on the Shared Ireland initiative?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Taoiseach advised us that he is keen to work with us to identify and develop other areas that fall under the remit of the Shared Island initiative. As the Member will know, there have been a lot of really positive developments. Casement Park was one of the projects that have benefited. We have also seen cooperation across a raft of areas, whether it be in education, agriculture, bioeconomy demonstrations and cooperation between our enterprise agencies. I spoke at the TCI global conference, which involved Enterprise Ireland, Invest NI and InterTradeIreland coming together and looking towards collaboration and growing our economy. Those are really positive developments, and I want to see a lot more of them.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chéad-Aire as ucht a freagraí.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the First Minister for her answers.]

It is evident from what the First Minister has been saying here today that cooperation and collaboration on an all-island basis is delivering positive outcomes for all our people, yet much more can and should be done. Does the First Minister agree that now is the time for the British Government to clarify the parameters and the date for a border poll, as set out in the Good Friday Agreement?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you for that. Over the weekend, at the Irish Labour Party conference, Ivana Bacik spoke about the need for clarification and for the Irish Government to prepare. There is an exciting and energetic debate under way, and more people are offering up their view. That is a good thing and a healthy thing, and I absolutely encourage it. The practicalities of all-island cooperation and the North/South Ministerial Council demonstrate how we can practically improve people's lives by working together. As we approach the 30th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, now is the time for clarification to be provided so that we know the parameters within which we will be working.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Paragraph 7 of your statement deals with matters that relate to the freedom of information code of practice. Currently, it is not possible to FOI the North/South Ministerial Council, yet we pay millions of pounds each year for it and its tentacles. What steps are being taken to open that body to scrutiny in order to permit questions to be asked and answered through FOI?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

You are right: whilst the North/South bodies are not currently subject to freedom of information legislation in either jurisdiction, they follow a code of practice that reflects similar principles regarding access to information. The code is undergoing a review in order to ensure that it remains up to date, particularly given changes to legislation. We will have to come back to that and consider the outcome of the review at a future meeting.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That concludes questions to the First Minister. I invite Members to take their ease for a moment while we change the Table before moving to the next item of business.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Private Members' Business

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes the findings of the Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee’s inquiry on strengthening Northern Ireland’s voice in the context of the Windsor framework; agrees that the UK Government must work urgently to address the democratic deficit created by the Windsor framework, as well as the overwhelming complexity of the present arrangements; is alarmed that 3,500 products supplied by Marks and Spencer require daily checks when moving to Northern Ireland, as well as 300 pages of paperwork per lorry; stresses that such barriers are leading to added cost and delay for businesses, reducing consumer choice and causing the diversion of trade outside the UK internal market; believes that mere tinkering at the edges of a fundamentally harmful system will not suffice; condemns the failure of successive Governments to implement pre-existing agreements and honour commitments to restoring Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom; and calls on the UK Government to bring forward solutions that challenge the flawed foundational assumption at the heart of the Windsor framework that the direct application of EU law in Northern Ireland is necessary.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other contributors will have five minutes.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I am pleased to move the motion in my name and those of my colleagues. We can come to the debate and attempt to refight, as some parties seem to want to do, the old wounds of the Brexit years. They can call out the democratic decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. I can respond by challenging Members' views on the rigorous implementation of the protocol, and we can have back and forth on those issues. From my perspective, however, that does not move the discussion or the debate forward by one iota.

Every week at the Committee for the Economy, my colleagues and I hear from a wide range of people with diverse perspectives who are concerned about the ongoing impact that the Windsor framework is having on them. They do not come to have a discussion of the constitutional consequences of it. My colleague Mr Buckley will continue to set out our party's constitutional objections to the Windsor framework. That is why we, as a party, have on two separate occasions voted down the Northern Ireland protocol in the House of Commons and opposed the Windsor framework in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. This debate is an important opportunity for all Members of the House to stand together and state that the current operation of the Windsor framework is not ideal by any stretch of the imagination and that its impact on consumers, businesses and communities across Northern Ireland is clear.

Some statements that were issued by political spokespeople in advance of the debate have set it out that they wish to re-fight the Brexit wars. However, at this stage, I will be happy to give way to any Member who wishes to articulate any objection to what we have set out in our motion. The motion makes clear the impact on our businesses and communities. I will read some of those impacts into the record. Just two weeks ago, the Road Haulage Association (RHA) came before the Committee for the Economy, and members of all political parties were united in supporting the views that they made clear, which I will read into the record. We heard from a businessman from south Antrim who has operated a logistics company in Northern Ireland for the past 30 years. He operates all over the world, but he stated that the border in the Irish Sea is:

"the most complex border in the world"

when it comes to moving goods, and that is within the internal market of the United Kingdom. That company alone is being billed a quarter of a million pounds as a result of paperwork, additional administration and the need to take on additional staff as a result of the Windsor framework. As a UK-wide representative, he made it clear that 450 haulage firms across the United Kingdom had closed in the past three years.

The evidence that the Road Haulage Association submitted in advance of the meeting clearly spelled out the impact of the framework. Goods sales from Great Britain to Northern Ireland dropped by 2·4% last year, and there has been a 30% drop in goods moved from Great Britain into Northern Ireland since 2002. That is not just a unionist issue; it impacts on every community across Northern Ireland, as they have less choice and higher bills and, come 1 January, will face even more difficulties. The Road Haulage Association made it clear that, as a result of the Windsor framework, the majority of businesses that source or transport their goods from Great Britain have additional costs and that delays have been created.

Let us not just take the RHA's word for it; let us turn to the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB). Week after week, Members from all sides of the House stand to praise the work of our small businesses, because they recognise that over 90% of our businesses in Northern Ireland are microbusinesses or small businesses and that they are proudly the backbone of our economy. The FSB set out a report in the summer which highlighted the implications of the Windsor framework for its members. Trade disruption is widespread. Of the businesses that responded to its survey, 58% of those that trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland report significant challenges in operating across the UK internal market. Over one third have already ceased trade rather than deal with new compliance demands. Strategic confidence is plummeting, with 50% of affected firms not confident in planning for the year ahead. Do not take my word for it; take it from the FSB.

I will move on to the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA), representatives of which appeared before the Committee six weeks ago. They made it clear that, from 1 January, vehicles registered in Northern Ireland must have EU type approval, while cars registered in Great Britain will follow rules under the UK Government. As a result, consumers will have less choice; car sales in Northern Ireland will plummet; and taxes on consumers will be increased.

Do not take my word for it. Let us take the word of the Member for Lagan Valley, who sits on the Committee for the Economy and made it clear that those regulations were "a nonsense" and that for car traders in Northern Ireland:

"it's the worst of every world for you".

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

With that, I assume that the Alliance Party will support our motion. However, the words at the Committee will be very different, no doubt, from its members' words in the House today, because they will want to turn the debate into a constitutional one, rather than send a clear view from the House that businesses are being negatively impacted on by that.

The Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee and Lord Murphy produced reports in recent weeks, and I want to read some of the content of those into the record. The Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee is made up of members who supported the United Kingdom leaving the European Union and those who did not. It concluded:

"The current arrangements have created a complex and opaque structure difficult for business and civil society stakeholders to navigate."

The Chair of the Committee said:

"We strongly support proposals to enhance Northern Ireland's voice early in the EU legislative process".

He also said:

"It was clear from the concerns raised by businesses, civil society and political representatives"

— through formal and informal evidence —

"that the democratic deficit in Northern Ireland remains unresolved."

That is what is clear in our motion. We make no attempt in the motion other than to reinforce the words of the Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee.

I want to turn Lord Murphy's report. Lord Murphy, who came to our Committee just two weeks ago, recognised the challenges that the Windsor framework represented for businesses and communities across Northern Ireland. Despite his terms of reference requiring him to have cross-community support for any changes, he still set out a list of changes that needed to be made to the current Windsor framework. UK veterinary medicines was a huge issue, and he highlighted that, on 1 January, up to 40% of those may no longer be available. That point was reinforced by the former leader of the SDLP who now sits in the House of Lords, Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick, who made it clear that the current position on veterinary medicines under the Windsor framework was intolerable.

We have on the record the Federation of Small Businesses, the Road Haulage Association, the National Franchised Dealers Association, the Member for Lagan Valley Mr Honeyford and the former leader of the SDLP all criticising the current Windsor framework arrangements. The House has an opportunity not just to sit in Committee and support businesses when they come here but to send a clear message today that it wants to see the Government deliver on their commitments to the people of Northern Ireland and that the border in the Irish Sea be removed for the benefit of all people in all communities across Northern Ireland.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Just a few weeks ago, the DUP brought a variation on today's motion to the Chamber for discussion, so I find it difficult not to think that Groundhog Day is beginning to be played out once again. In the meantime, workers and families continue to face an ongoing and relentless cost-of-living crisis. Our schools are crumbling, the health service is under constant pressure and we face an unprecedented ecological crisis in our waterways and lakes. Instead, the DUP chooses to fixate on and rehearse the fallout from the Brexit calamity — the mess that the DUP helped to bring about.

Once again, the Assembly is subject to another DUP revisionist sham fight, and it is all to save its blushes from the ongoing onslaught and attrition from the TUV. In a similar debate only weeks ago, I predicted that we would see a lot more of this type of negative politicking in the time ahead, and here we go again. We might as well all strap ourselves in between now and the next Assembly and council elections, because DUP race-to-the-bottom politics will become the constant order of the day, and all to shore up an electoral base that is now under pressure from the TUV.

Ten years ago, the DUP was in the vanguard of the Brexit campaign. At that time, its representatives told us on the airwaves that they did not care about the consequences of Brexit so long as we left the European Union. On those same airwaves, I and others warned the DUP that that was a wrong-headed agenda, but, like lemmings and following their hero Boris Johnson, the DUP representatives quipped that really nothing else mattered.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Not at the moment.

It was a case of right-wing, zero-sum politics, and, since then, the DUP has thwarted and opposed every effort to find solutions to the Brexit debacle. However, while the DUP was cheerleading for the hardest, most destructive exit from the European Union, others were, thankfully, working to minimise the impact. Then, in another British Government sop to assuage DUP anxieties, the Windsor framework was brought forward.

Brexit inevitably created a whole new economic and trading context. The Windsor framework is not a panacea, but it has mitigated many of the challenges that we have had to contend with. All the experts on business and trade say that it is protecting us from the worst effects of Brexit. Business exports are up 7% in the North. At the same time, other regions caught up in the Brexit headwinds have experienced significant declines. According to NISRA, sales from the North to Britain increased by over 12% between 2022 and 2023. Cross-border trade continues to flourish. Yes, our businesses need support to help them navigate the new trading realities, and Sinn Féin firmly believes that whatever is needed should be provided. At no time in the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee or other Committee meetings have business groups challenged the potential of the Windsor framework to drive economic growth. The DUP knows that, because you sit on the same Committees as I and others do.

Friends, the framework is here to stay, and our focus needs to be on how we can refine its further implementation. This afternoon, I say this to my colleagues in the DUP: stop wasting our and your time. Deal with your TUV problems away from the Assembly, and start to work with the rest of us to maximise opportunities for our businesses by building the regional and all-Ireland economies.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

I, too, have a sense of déjà vu coming to the Chamber once again to rehearse the damage of Brexit. It was interesting that Mr Brett said that that was not his intention, because that is what he proceeded to do. He was keen to use not his own words but the words of businesses. I say gently to the Member that, if only he had listened to the voices of the FSB and other business organisations during the referendum, we may not have found ourselves in this position, for the consequences that he listed were entirely predictable and inevitable.

It has been fascinating to watch as those who tabled the motion have slowly come to terms with the consequences of their actions, as they seek to rewrite history and blame everybody else for the Brexit that they campaigned for. You won, guys: own it. Alliance warned that there was no such thing as a good or sensible Brexit and that leaving the EU would inevitably mean increased borders, barriers and friction. The only question was about where that friction would occur, not whether it would occur. We said clearly that that was much more likely to happen at ports and airports than at a porous 300-mile land border, not because we wanted to see those checks happen there but because logic necessitated that that is where they would happen.

Of course, logic was a concept that the DUP never applied during the Brexit process; indeed, the DUP dismissed such concerns, telling those of us who warned of red tape and food supply chain issues that we could, "Go to the chippy". Its former leader said that he could live with 40,000 job losses as the cost of Brexit freedom. The DUP was out of touch then, and it is just as out of touch today. The motion spells out the gulf between those on the DUP Benches who are lamenting the price of food in Marks and Spencer (M&S) and those whom we represent who rely on food banks and expect us to be in the Chamber debating the cost of living and how we tackle poverty in our society.

M&S has been mentioned in the motion, so I will say that supermarkets have a choice either to go through the red lane or to use the retail movement scheme, which is also known as the "green lane". The reason that some supermarkets cannot avail themselves of that scheme is that they supply Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. M&S relies on being able to supply the Republic of Ireland through ports, including Belfast, and, because its loads are mixed, the system is bureaucratic and complicated. That is true. From my perspective, the way to address that is through a comprehensive veterinary agreement, for which the Alliance Party campaigned and to which the Government have committed. I hope that the Government will move forward at pace with that agreement. That will require building trust —.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

No, I will not, because we heard enough from the Member in his opening contribution.

Alliance called for a veterinary agreement during the Brexit process, but Arlene Foster and the DUP dismissed our call. I am grateful that the DUP has undertaken probably the longest U-turn in history and got to a better position, but had it listened to those of us who warned of such issues at the time, our businesses would now be in a better place.

The Windsor framework is far from perfect, but it is a function of Brexit. It is intended to insulate us from its worst excesses. It has contributed to a situation in which Northern Ireland's economy has outperformed that of the rest of the UK. In 2024, economic output in Northern Ireland grew at a rate of 3·6%, compared with just 1·4% in the UK as a whole. To be blunt, the framework is also the only game in town. The Government have made that clear. My hope is that, over time, as issues arise, the framework can change, evolve and become less bureaucratic. The Lords Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee's report and Lord Murphy's review can inform that process, but the framework itself is going nowhere. It will be the starting point.

Alliance supports the framework not because it is seamless or perfect but because it is the better option when faced with a choice between a hard border and a soft border, a choice between friction and facilitation and between stability and chaos. The Members who have railed loudest against the framework, including in today's debate, have provided no credible alternative over the past eight years.

We have set out our proposals and clear asks for how the framework could be improved in order to ease the burden on businesses, including the provision of enhanced support and advice, the promotion of dual market access and the relaxation of the at-risk category. Only a full reversal of Brexit, however, can undo all the tensions and contradictions that the framework poses.

We have a choice about how we present Northern Ireland to the world. Will we continue to pick at old wounds and create uncertainty and instability or embrace the opportunities of dual market access and send a signal that we are open for business and are serious about doing business? I hope that Members choose the second option.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I declare an interest, both as a member of the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee and as someone opposed to then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's official recommendations, which evolved into the so-called Stormont brake. It is just a pity that Rishi Sunak and the Prime Minister after him did not listen to the rest of our party's advice.

For the avoidance of doubt to some, our party supported Remain. We voted Remain precisely because we envisaged the chaos and damage to our economy that has occurred. We pointed out time and again that Brexit was never the best of both worlds; rather, it was the worst of both systems on steroids. That is also why the UUP opposed the protocol and then the Windsor framework when it was imposed. We did so because they were deeply flawed instruments that were drafted to solve UK and EU dilemmas rather than problems with Northern Ireland trade.

Northern Ireland was and remains a bargaining chip in UK-EU relations. The words "faithful implementation" are the genesis of the problem that we now face, which is the rigorous implementation of the entire acquis communautaire of the European Journal's rule book that applies, in its broadest interpretation, to Northern Ireland. It is the implementation of rules that many EU members, including our Irish neighbours, do not even bother to implement rigorously unless they are forced to. Those rules, which spread well beyond trade issues, impact on everyday life here. There is a huge democratic deficit in which, despite all the Windsor framework spin, our Assembly has absolutely no say. Safeguards, such as our ability to pray against legislative consent motions pertaining to EU regulations, do not work, because we are not even informed of them in time, never mind the fact that our vote counts for nothing. The Stormont brake and the grossly misnamed Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee have failed. Lord Murphy's view on membership of the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee, which he gave to the Economy Committee, is well worth a read. I encourage everybody here to read it.

We have been told that many of our problems will be settled by the UK-EU reset, but, despite the hype last week that sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) talks were commencing, some Ministers have made it clear that it will be 2027 at the earliest before any agreement can be made. Anyone with even the faintest understanding of EU's relations with other countries will know that that is a highly ambitious timescale.

What is to be done? If the Government believe that they have been a faithful throughout, it is time to use the provisions in the protocol to stop any further damage. If our Government really believe that the EU is a faithful and not a traitor, they should activate article 16 of the protocol to protect article 6(2) on protecting our internal UK market. If there really is faith between the UK and the European Union and if the protection of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement really is central to those relations, pausing the implementation of further provisions of the EU acquis until all is solved by the UK-EU reset and the SPS community should be straightforward. The evidence of hard damage to companies —.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Thank you for giving way. This is really important. Part of the issue is the Labour Government's inability to do or simply not doing the diligence that is needed to improve things. There is no greater testament to that than the issue of veterinary medicines. From 1 January, we will see a significant problem with veterinary medicines, even those that have never been opened in Great Britain but need to come to Northern Ireland, yet, last week, the House of Lords Committee said that the Government were saying, "We are doing nothing about it". Worse still —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Sorry. Member's interventions —.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

— DAERA is not intervening. Does the Member agree that it is important to make some progress?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member has an extra minute for that minute and a half.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I definitely agree, and I thank the Member very much for reading the last part of my speech. Principal Deputy Speaker, you will be glad to know that I will not repeat it.

There is a key point: we are fewer than 50 days from there being real problems for our agriculture sector. Our party has pointed that out for the past year, yet we have still not reached a resolution on it. Government Ministers have basically said, "Suck it up", because they want to be seen as being faithful implementers, even though it will do real damage to the Northern Ireland agriculture sector. That is unacceptable. The evidence of hard damage being done to our companies and to the UK internal market from divergence in trade is abundantly clear. We need our Government to have the will to act, because, frankly, the Europeans do not really care about Northern Ireland. They want to see agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union about things such as defence.

We have an opportunity to solve the problem, and we have, in the protocol, the processes to do so. I therefore call on Labour and the Secretary of State to get off their proverbials and do something. Let them do it. More important, we support the motion.

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

Bob Dylan is playing in Belfast on Wednesday night.

[Interruption.]

Somebody asked who Bob Dylan is: he is a famous musician from the United States. The debate is almost like a greatest hits, except that it is not as great that as those that Dylan will be playing, we hope, on Wednesday night. It is the same old stuff that we have heard before.

In many ways, I am happy to play those tunes. I came into the Assembly because of Brexit. I literally would not have been here without it.

I have talked many times in the Chamber about my personal and professional experience. I could rehearse that and give you guys all the gory details of how the interests of this island, including those of the North and of unionists, were ignored systematically throughout the Brexit process, but I will not do that, because I have only five minutes. We have talked about it before and will talk about it again.

We will not support the motion. To be substantive, however, I will go through the various bits of the motion in good faith in order to explain why we will not support it. First are the practical disruptions that are felt by sectors of our economy, specifically east-west, that exist. We have never trivialised them and have always sought practical solutions to them. There are small retailers who need to move partials and who now face new barriers because of that. That is a fact. Clearly, there are questions around veterinary medicine. That is a fact, too, and we do not diminish it. We have never diminished any of the consequences of Brexit, and those are both consequences of Brexit. The electronic travel authorisation (ETA), which is now required for the 70% of tourists who come to Northern Ireland via Dublin, is another consequence of Brexit. That would not have happened had the UK not left the EU. Those are all practical consequences that we need to resolve. How we do that is the next question, and that will happen via a number of means. None of those has been outlined in the DUP motion or in the remarks that we just heard from Dr Aiken. They are just saying, "Turn the table over, because we are angry about all this".

I am angry about Brexit. I do not like the constitutional disruption of Brexit, and neither do lots of the people who vote for my party. However, it is about practical solutions. I will list a few, none of which are mentioned in the motion. Number one relates to most of the checks on food and veterinary medicine. Mr Tennyson mentioned the comprehensive veterinary agreement, which we had called for for ages. That is a critical part of softening the burdens. Let us be absolutely clear: it is not possible, in practical terms, for England or GB to be outside the EU's SPS rules and for Northern Ireland to follow. Why is that? It is not because the SDLP, Sinn Féin, the Irish Government, the Alliance Party or some inchoate mass of liberals are trying to do down unionism; it is because there are cattle that graze in both Cavan and Fermanagh. That is how our agriculture works, so we have to have an integrated SPS zone on the island. Our food production is integrated. Cattle that produce milk in Donegal are processed in County Tyrone. That is literally the way in which our agriculture system works. That covers the comprehensive veterinary agreement.

Number two is about how we interact with the EU. That is mentioned in the motion. I totally agree that we need better mechanisms. Lots of this was talked about in Lord Murphy's report. I am unabashed about saying that we are the most pro-EU party in this place. We want to be back in the European Union, although I think that that will happen only via a new Ireland, if we are honest with ourselves. In the meantime, I want to have representation for Northern Ireland in the European Parliament so that unionists, nationalists, the left and others can make representations there on behalf of our constituents and businesses. We should also have an EU Commission office in Belfast. Why not? That would not change the constitutional position, given that we had an EU Commissioner —

[Interruption.]

I can see Mrs Dodds complaining vociferously about all the evil EU things. Why not bring the EU Commission to Belfast? It could set up an office. I will give way to the Member. Will you make it relatively concise, so that I can have a bit of time left in which to respond?

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I will indeed. When the Member reiterates this nonsense, I often wonder why he does not want to do his own job, which is making laws that are for Northern Ireland in Northern Ireland.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member has an extra minute.

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

I would love to do that in Northern Ireland, Brussels or Dublin. Any of those would be great to me. I wish, however, that the Member would face up to the consequences of the Brexit that she challenges. She is a former MEP, so she knows these things all too well.

That is all set out in our policy paper. More representation for the North in the here and now and for its businesses and workers who face those EU rules can, and should, happen.

There is a range of other practical consequences of Brexit. The consequences for traders and people who use veterinary medicine need to be examined, but so, too, do the consequences for the all-island economy. As Mr Kearney rightly said, the all-island economy is growing. Northern Ireland has massively outperformed Britain in economic growth. Many economists think that that is to do with us being shielded from a significant number of the consequences of Brexit. That is a reality with which the DUP will not engage. Why has Northern Ireland grown faster than every other part of the UK over the past number of years? That is a remarkable thing.

We should also deal with the disruption to people moving across the island of Ireland, whether they are French students who are backpacking in Galway but cannot now easily come to Derry or tourists on coach trips to the Giant's Causeway. Those are all consequences of Brexit. One way to deal with that, rather than taking Dr Aiken's nuclear option of using article 16, is very simple, and it is to use article 14 of the original protocol, now the Windsor framework. That allows the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) to raise specific concerns to the Joint Committee on the operation of the protocol. The deputy First Minister was not even here.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

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

I will not give way, because I will not get another minute, but I am happy to debate it in another place.

I have not heard anything about article 14 being triggered by the Executive. The First Minister was here earlier. Are the Executive doing anything via the NSMC to raise those issues? There are practical solutions to these problems. The ultimate one is, of course, to rejoin the EU via a new Ireland, but, in the meantime, let us get real about solutions.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Time is up. Thank you, Matthew.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I laughed at Mr O'Toole's comments, comparing the debate to a Bob Dylan record. Now, I would not insult Bob Dylan with that particular analogy, but I see the Member's point, and I have to agree with it.

The proposer's premise was that he did not want the debate to be a rehashing of the benefits or negatives of Brexit but that he wants to have a conversation about the part of it that he does not like. Look, we all make mistakes. You made a mistake, and we are where we are now. There are parts of it that you do not like. That is fair enough. However, we have to be realistic and pragmatic in how we deal with the problems that some businesses are encountering. People have referred to the FSB report. I sat through Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee and Economy Committee sessions where we dealt with that sector. Of course, we want to do anything that we can to aid those businesses to secure their recommendations on the easing of paperwork, bureaucracy and burdens. However, the proportion of businesses that are affected by that is the 100 respondents to the survey out of 130,000 businesses across the North. To present that in a way that suggests that it is a massive problem for the vast majority of our business sector is being disingenuous. It is not a massive problem.

The motion refers to Marks and Spencer. In bringing the motion to the Chamber, the Members have displayed just how out of touch they are at a time when most of our constituents are in a cost-of-living crisis, and some are relying on food banks. As we come towards Christmas, we have people across our communities who are in genuine hardship and face real difficulties. They do not want to hear another debate in this place on why the DUP did not get the Brexit that it wanted, which is due to its following the TUV and being afraid of that party in the polls. That is what this is about. We have to be realistic when we have conversations like this. We are here to govern and to work for all people across the North. I am really sorry that the British Government have let you down again, but that is where we are at.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I want to pick up on a few points that have been made already, particularly by Mr Kearney and Mr Tennyson. Mr Tennyson used the phrase "pick at old wounds". Two thirds of their speeches did not address the motion but simply attacked my party. Now, we have different positions, but their speeches did not actually address the motion. Mr Honeyford finds it very funny, but, actually, what we are discussing are the impacts on customers and businesses, which affect people's real lives. To be fair to the leader of the Opposition, while I did not agree with what he said, at least he addressed the motion at hand. Hopefully, with the Bob Dylan reference, he was not suggesting that anyone was 'Knockin' on Heaven's Door'. If he has not got the album 'Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid', I very much recommend it to him as it is one of Dylan's finest.

I will pick up on the issue of veterinary medicines, which has been touched on already, because, over the past week, a number of constituents have contacted me about it, and when I told them about the debate, they asked me to raise the issue. As some Members have already reflected, the grace period for veterinary medicines comes to an end on 31 December.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. He points to the DUP's reason and motivation for tabling the motion, which is simply because we have been contacted by people, consumers and small businesses in our constituencies. It seems that the only MLAs who are being contacted about those issues are Members on this side of the House.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member has an extra minute.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

I agree with my colleague. I can only reflect the correspondence that we get. People have concerns. This is affecting people out there, and it is our job to raise such things in this place and to find solutions to them. That is the most important thing in the debate.

Some Members have referred to the evidence received last week by the Scrutiny Committee. My colleague, in opening the debate, reflected the fact that up to 40% of medicines could be discontinued from 1 January 2026. Some reference was made to colleagues who sit on that Committee. In fact, Baroness Ritchie said that it was more or less her view that the Government had, essentially, decided to do nothing until they see how serious the situation becomes in 2026. Baroness Foster, picking up on comments from my colleague to my left, usefully pointed out that article 16 of the protocol allows His Majesty's Government to take unilateral action to resolve problems if they see a diversion of trade. Surely that should happen. The Committee heard that over 90% of medicines currently supplied are likely to be diverted to Northern Ireland via Dublin rather than GB. It sounds as though the Government are suggesting that they will wait to see how bad this gets before they decide to do something. That is an atrocious position when it comes to animal health.

It is also deeply worrying for businesses and pet owners. The Government have to urgently address it. Pet owners are receiving notifications about important medications that they purchase online from GB firms, such as eye gels and ointments, being discontinued. Are we seriously expected to believe that those products represent a clear and present danger to the EU single market? Such a position is ridiculous. I have been contacted by constituents involved in supplier-to-customer relationships who say that they will simply not be able to get those medicines from 31 December. That is unacceptable. They want some answers. I spoke to two veterinary medicine firms in GB — one on Friday and one this morning — about the issue. The Government must acknowledge that the trade diversion, including veterinary meds, needs to be sorted out. I thank my colleague Carla Lockhart, who has raised the issue at Westminster. In addition, last week, my colleague the deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly met Nick Thomas–Symonds, who leads on the issue for the Government, and directly raised with him the provision of veterinary medicines to Northern Ireland. His Majesty's Government's Ministers need to stand up for the integrity of the UK internal market and the United Kingdom as a whole.

I encourage anyone who is watching the debate and is concerned about the impacts of the framework or the workings of the protocol, be they businesses or customers who are simply buying products from GB, to contact us. Members on these Benches will be more than happy to raise those concerns on their behalf. The Government will not be able to resolve the challenges through the full-throated implementation of EU customs. I simply say this: whether it is on customs, food labelling, veterinary meds or the movement of goods, inflicting more EU law on trade flows within the market will simply damage it. I encourage all Members to support our motion this afternoon.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I am feeling really special today about the call-outs and the constructive debates that we are having, yet we spend all of the time focused on ourselves. I repeat what I said in Committee: I was not the one who brought this situation about. I did not want any barriers to trade. I will continue to look at how we can simplify this. Unfortunately, here we go again with the DUP. We have not heard from the TUV yet, but it will say exactly the same, as will the Ulster Unionists. They continue to talk Northern Ireland down and look to promote problems, rather than to deliver anything. They want everybody else to come up with solutions; they do not have any thinking or thought for them.

A Member

Will the Member give way?

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

No, I will not give way to you.

The values behind the slogan, "Making Northern Ireland Work", have not changed since the 1960s. It simply means, "Make Northern Ireland work for us". That attitude can be seen with the Irish language, the GAA, Casement Park, hosting the Euros in west Belfast or simply letting our kids share a classroom, and it all reinforces the default entitlement —.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

No, I am not giving way to you. I have heard enough of you, Peter, to be honest.

It is the default entitlement that we see and hear about again and again. When we look at the motion, we need to be honest about the facts and not inflate the problems for clips that are simply for TikTok and Instagram reels: facts such as that Marks and Spencer describes itself as viewing its entire store network on the island of Ireland, North and South, as one and, therefore, does not use the green lane. Sadly, the DUP leaves that bit out, but facts matter.

The Member referenced one of the trade guys and mentioned the problems that they have, and they have a lot of problems. I asked them a simple question about why there were no problems coming into Dublin, and they said it was because there was one thing. The Member needs to be careful about moving stuff that is trying to make Northern Ireland work to another constitutional difference. I say that because that was the alternative that that same person said. Again, the Member left that part out.

Ultimately, Alliance wants to be back as members of the EU, but what we have is the best that we are getting. We need to get on with delivering for the people, using the advantages to deliver growth. Northern Ireland's ability to sell into the UK internal market and the EU single market is a huge opportunity. It is a unique opportunity that differentiates us from others, and, unfortunately, the positives are what the DUP is pushing against. In fact, the DUP, alongside the Ulster Unionist Party and the TUV, goes out of its way to talk that advantage down and to dismiss it, and we hear it again and again. However, the fact is that dual market access is already starting to drive investment, jobs, expansion and decisions to manufacture here. There are multiple examples in my area, such as PRM, with 1,000 lines of Marks and Spencer products from Europe, based in Lisburn and tripling its plant with major expansion. Leprino Foods, formerly Glanbia, moved its production to Magheralin and is expanding and growing due to dual market access. Last week, Coca-Cola announced another expansion, having extended before, with Monster drinks, to ship to the all-island economy and to GB.

The Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Federation of Small Businesses and individual business leaders do not want the framework to be scrapped; they want stability, and they want the issues to be ironed out. Each of them is calling for the highlight to be the EU access advantages. Even in the FSB report, 71% of 700 businesses across the whole of the UK said that dual market access is an advantage, not a barrier, and that they wanted it to be sold. Businesses want certainty, not constitutional fear dressed up as economics, poking everybody else in the eye just for the video clips that MLAs can post on TikTok and Instagram. I will be gutted if I am not in today's.

Alliance will continue to promote this region as a place to do business, to grow your business and to attract inward investment, because here are the facts: Northern Ireland has been in deficit since the 1930s, almost 100 years. Regardless of your constitutional position and regardless of the constitutional future of this place, that is not sustainable. It must change now. That is our focus, and we need to drive that across the House in order to deliver growth: putting people front and centre, having jobs, skills and opportunities to live in a place that is affordable for everybody and collaborating across the island to deliver better for everyone. Alliance is focused on delivering the improvements that business asks for, not re-fighting Brexit. We will all succeed when we do not turn it into an identity battle and instead start acting like a modern economy. I will not support the motion.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

In 2016, the people of the North voted decisively to remain in the European Union. That democratic expression still resonates today, and many of us continue to believe that our long-term future will be best served by eventually rejoining the EU. We note with interest and encouragement that EU leaders have given firm assurances that, in the event of Irish unity, the North of Ireland would resume full EU membership automatically. In the meantime, the Windsor framework has provided us with a means to deal with the trading realities created by Brexit, prevented the re-emergence of a hard border on the island of Ireland, safeguarded the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement and, crucially, preserved dual market access for businesses operating in this region. Dual access is a unique economic advantage that we must protect and maximise. From an agriculture point of view, for example, we export a third of the milk that we produce in the North to the South of Ireland for processing. That is 800 million litres a year.

It is important to acknowledge that the earlier backstop arrangement that was negotiated by former Prime Minister Theresa May would have prevented many of the trade divergences that we now face. Unfortunately, MPs opted for a harder Brexit. As a result, we are dealing with challenges today, including those relating to veterinary medicines, that could otherwise have been avoided.

We recognise that Brexit continues to present significant challenges in relation to trade agreements. Those are not abstract concerns; they affect farmers, manufacturers, hauliers, pharmacists and families in every community. Throughout the process, we have consistently urged the British Government and the European Union to find practical, long-term solutions that do not undermine the essential mitigations currently in place to reduce the negative impacts of Brexit. Many of those challenges could be eliminated if the British Government were willing to make a political decision to align with EU rules and regulations. Such alignment would reduce trade friction and bring clarity and stability to our business sectors.

The EU-UK Joint Committee remains a vital mechanism, especially for agriculture and agri-food trade. Its work has been instrumental in identifying and adopting solutions that strengthen food security and support rural communities. We acknowledge its importance and encourage its continued use. We know that an EU-UK veterinary agreement would significantly ease pressures, yet the British Government continue to oppose such an arrangement. That is disappointing, but it should not deter us from pressing for progress.

There has been some improvement in the risk of medicines being discontinued, with supply lines now able to reroute through the South rather than Britain. That is welcome, but challenges remain, including concerns about certain vaccines such as the botulism vaccine. It is important that the EU and the British Government continue negotiations so that the disruptions are further reduced and possibly eliminated.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

This debate will continue after Question Time, when Paul Frew will be the next Member to speak. The next item of business is Question Time. I propose therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 1.57 pm and resumed at 2.00 pm.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

It is time for questions to the Minister for Communities. We will start with listed questions. Questions 2 and 8 have been withdrawn.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

1. Mr McHugh asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the planned purchase of up to 600 homes to be used as temporary accommodation. (AQO 2685/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Housing Executive has indicated that an estimated 25 properties will be purchased in the current financial year. That will be followed by 125 properties next year, 225 properties in 2027-28 and 225 properties in 2028-29.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Aire, as an fhreagra sin.

[Translation: Thank you, Minister, for that answer.]

The Minister will know that a very large percentage of those who require temporary accommodation are single males, who often find it difficult, even in the private market, to find accommodation that is suited to their needs. How will he ensure that the purchase of those 600 homes is completed in a strategic way in order to meet the needs of that demographic?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We are taking a holistic approach. First and foremost, I am trying to deal with the cost of temporary accommodation. By allowing reserves to be used in that way, we will save significant sums of money that would otherwise be spent on hotels and B&Bs. The nature of the temporary accommodation client groups, such as single persons, will be taken into consideration.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Minister tell us more about how much savings the purchase of those homes will generate?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is rare that Ministers bring forward proposals that will save money in the long run, but that is exactly what we are doing through the scheme. It will save £75 million over the next seven years. It is important that we do not lose sight of that, because in these times of financial constraint, we need to demonstrate ways in which we can protect taxpayers' money and look for further ways in which to do that. That is exactly what I am doing through the work on fraud and error legislation, which is another way in which we can save tens of millions of pounds every year. I look forward to receiving Executive support for taking that work forward.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

I appreciate that the 600 new homes to be used for temporary accommodation will go some way towards dealing with our housing crisis. Are there any plans for the Housing Executive to look at derelict properties across Northern Ireland to see whether they can be added to the total?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We will want to make sure that we buy properties that are fit for purpose. I share the Member's concern, however, about the extensive number of derelict properties in Northern Ireland. I see them in my constituency, and I am sure that the Member sees them in hers. I hope that her party colleague's Dilapidation Bill will help in some way. We are going through a housing crisis, so it is difficult to see the many derelict homes that there are. Some of them will obviously require work, but we need to weigh up the costs of such work, because it is simply not right that we are spending so much money on hotels and bed and breakfasts when other housing opportunities are available. Of course, we are doing everything that we can to look at all options.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

Will the Minister expand on the information that the Housing Executive will use to determine where the properties will be located?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Housing Executive has said that the principal considerations for the geographical distribution of the units will include the geographical areas where exposure to high-cost temporary accommodation is most prevalent; the nature of the temporary accommodation client groups, such as single persons, couples or families; and the availability of suitable properties in areas that are available to purchase and that align with the criteria. Value for money will also be taken into account.

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

Ultimately, the need to purchase those homes is a failure of policy, particularly a result of the failure to build more social homes. Minister, you have cut the housing association grant. You have pledged to build just under 6,000 social homes by the end of the mandate, but it looks as though that target is not going to be met. Do you accept that it will not be met? Do you accept that the need to buy temporary accommodation is a consequence of the failure to build enough social homes?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, the Member misunderstands exactly what I am trying to do with the housing association grant. I am not cutting the funding for social housing. First and foremost, that needs to be made clear. I am cutting the amount of money that is available per unit so that the slack can be taken up by housing associations through the private finance that they are able to access but we are not. It makes sense to do that and make sure that the money that we have goes further, because I am not happy with the status quo. The status quo is not appropriate, which is why I have been trying to do new and innovative things since I came into office.

The Member is right: we do not have the number of social homes that we need. We do not have homes across all tenures, and I am trying to do something about that. That is why I am trying to get Executive agreement on a proposal to get easier access to public-sector land; I have brought forward the intermediate rent scheme, which will provide some relief for those who need it; and I have done more than any other Minister to put the revitalisation of the Housing Executive on the agenda. Those are all the new actions that I am taking, but, of course, I will continue to ask for more funding to make sure that we can build more social homes. However, ultimately, we are spending huge sums of money on temporary accommodation every year. Therefore, I have taken this step to ensure that we use Housing Executive reserves, which will save over £75 million over the next seven years.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I welcome the Minister's proposals to generate savings on the amount that is spent on emergency accommodation. I am mindful of the neighbours who live beside the houses used for emergency accommodation. The issue of tenants causing problems comes up time and time again, and, if concerns about tenants of the units are raised, will they be moved on from the emergency accommodation so that new and deserving people can go into them?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I am a Minister who takes antisocial behaviour seriously. I understand that it is a curse for many good and decent people who just want to live their lives but are plagued by others who, quite frankly, make their lives a misery. I am putting stronger powers in place so that we can deal with antisocial behaviour and hold those people to account. I want to make sure that that happens, which is why we are taking those actions.

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

3. Mr McNulty asked the Minister for Communities to what extent the construction of new housing developments has stalled due to insufficient water and drainage infrastructure. (AQO 2687/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My Department does not hold data on the developments that are impacted on by waste water infrastructure limitations. However, it is clear from discussions with the sector that waste water capacity constraint is having a significant impact on housebuilding.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. I find it extraordinary that the Minister for the Economy does not know the level of economic stoppages.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Wrong Minister.

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

No drains, no cranes. To what extent has the construction of new housing developments stalled due to insufficient water and drainage infrastructure?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First, to clarify, I am the Minister for Communities; I am not the Minister for the Economy any longer. The Member asked the same question twice. I do not hold that data, but, as I have said, the problem has had a significant impact. We need to make sure that we have sufficient infrastructure in place. We need to look at the areas in which sufficient infrastructure exists to make the best use of the public land that is available. I have a paper that, I hope, will get Executive agreement, which will mean that we can build more homes where there is capacity and make sure that we put in place the infrastructure where it is needed.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Minister, are you having any conversations with your counterpart in the Infrastructure Department and with the construction industry to ensure that you can start new builds in the social housing sector?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes. I have met, and recently wrote to, the Infrastructure Minister to press for the need to identify substantive actions that will begin to resolve the issue. We are already seeing better collaboration between the Departments as a result of the housing supply strategy and the common thread of wanting to build more homes that runs through it. Ultimately, we need to make sure that that continues because it is having an impact, and we need to do something about it.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

The Infrastructure Minister previously blamed the issue with waste water capacity on Tory austerity, and now she is blaming it on British Government austerity — there has been a change in the line there. Does the Minister agree with the assessment that it is the Government's fault?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My party has long made the case for fair-funding models for Northern Ireland, but we have Ministers in post for a reason. Although we want to see more funding, and believe that we are entitled to it, we have to take decisions ourselves. We have to decide on our priorities. It is for each Minister to decide how they prioritise their budget and take their own decisions, even if they are unpopular or difficult.

I hope that housing is a priority for the Infrastructure Minister and for Sinn Féin and that it is backed up with sufficient funding for the social housing development programme and investment in waste water infrastructure. We need to get real. This is a serious issue, and we need to make sure that we do something about it. I am playing my role by bringing forward proposals to save money, meaning that we can redirect funding that we would otherwise spend on hotels and bed and breakfasts to help people to stay out of homelessness. It is also up to other Ministers to make sure that they allocate funding to where it needs to go.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, what impact does the matter have on the process that the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) uses to determine where homes are built?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It has an impact, of course. The Housing Executive manages the day-to-day operation of the social housing development programme and regularly engages with Northern Ireland Water. It has provided Northern Ireland Water with a list of social housing developments that will potentially require a connection to the public waste water system in the next few years. NI Water reviews each development site for a potential connection. An assessment of waste water treatment and network capacity will have to be made, and that will be put into the risk assessment for the programme. That is why it is so important that we get this right.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

4. Ms Egan asked the Minister for Communities to outline how his Department is addressing poverty in North Down. (AQO 2688/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The issues that people in North Down face with poverty are similar to those that people throughout Northern Ireland face. I am working to address those issues through the development of the anti-poverty strategy and interventions such as the extension of welfare mitigations; the adoption of the new housing supply strategy; the provision of inclusive pathways to work for everyone in Northern Ireland; work on fuel poverty; and the development of a new People and Place strategic framework.

In the Ards and North Down Borough Council area, my Make the Call outreach team supported over 1,200 people to access just under £7 million in additional benefits last year. Between 1 February 2024 and 30 June this year, the Housing Executive funded private-sector grants, including affordable warmth, totalling over £3 million. That funding supported 91 home improvement grants and helped 155 homes through the affordable warmth scheme. In this financial year, the neighbourhood renewal programme has invested almost half a million pounds in 13 projects. I have also provided half a million pounds to the independent advice and debt sector and social supermarkets. All that plays a critical role in addressing poverty.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Minister. Community organisations in North Down that deal directly with individuals who live in hardship and poverty feel the loss of your Department's hardship fund. Will you consider reintroducing that fund or introducing a similar fund to support organisations that deal with individuals who are living in poverty?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am aware of the impact that that has had, and the Member will be aware of the genesis of it and of how the funding for us to continue it is no longer in place. We will assess the implications of that and, as part of our wider anti-poverty work, take whatever steps we need to in order to make sure that we make the best use of the resources that we have for maximum impact.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

The Minister will be aware that home heating costs are particularly challenging for those who feel the cost-of-living pressures. Will he give an update on the fuel poverty strategy?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I have said that I will present the fuel poverty strategy by the end of the year, and that is still my intention. We know that, as we head into the winter, the issues become more pressing for people. I am well aware of the costs and difficulties that many people face. I will have the strategy before the Executive by the end of the year, but let us not forget that a strategy by itself does not heat people's homes. That is why, as part of the strategy, I will announce interventions that will help us as we seek to eradicate fuel poverty in Northern Ireland.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

5. Mr Martin asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the number of applications to the Olympic legacy fund. (AQO 2689/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Sport NI has advised me that it has received 44 applications to date: 16 projects have been approved; three applications have been declined on grounds of project ineligibility; and 25 projects remain under review.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. I also thank him for coming to see Bangor Cricket Club juniors, who are interested in that funding. How will Sport NI ensure that Olympic legacy funding will be equitably split? Will that split be geographical, be done by region or will it be done by sport?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The issue has been addressed by Sport NI on its web page that advertises the fund. It is not a competitive grant, and I acknowledge that not all clubs or sports may have the same capacity to access the fund. I knew that it would be popular, and I am pleased to see a big uptake, so, to ensure a fair distribution of funding by sport or geographical area, Sport NI may apply a cap in the programme. Applications impacted by a cap, should it be implemented, will be deferred to future investment rounds, subject to eligibility criteria and funding being made available.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

A lot of sports clubs here will not be ready for this round of funding. In the next financial year, will it reopen, and, if so, is the budget likely to increase?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is certainly my intention for it to be in place again in the next financial year. The number of applications that we have received so far indicate the need that exists in sport in Northern Ireland. I want to see that continue. I hope that we can have the same budget or an increased budget again because it makes a difference.

I was delighted to have been invited to Larne Leisure Centre on Saturday to visit Larne Swimming Club, which was very pleased with the Olympic legacy fund being open. It was delighted that it now has a way through because a lot of clubs do not always have those funding opportunities. I thank the club for making me so welcome and for welcoming the fact that the fund is in place. I want to help more clubs like that to ensure that they can have the equipment that they need.

We have the right approach with the crowdfunder element that is needed. It is bringing communities together and ensuring that they are part of that and that there is buy-in there. That is welcome, and I hope that it can continue.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

6. Mr Durkan asked the Minister for Communities when the Walled City public realm scheme will be completed. (AQO 2690/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It will be the summer of 2026.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his unusually and mercifully brief answer. While we all welcome any investment in the city, people in Derry will be glad to see the work finished and roads restored. Does the Department have any further public realm plans for Derry city centre? Will the Minister encourage collaboration with DFI to identify and address flaws in a previous scheme at Newmarket Street that has left a particularly perilous pavement that poses a real risk to pedestrians?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am sure that the Member will understand that I cannot comment on that because of ongoing legal issues. However, it is always a good thing if we can learn from previous schemes and any issues or difficulties that arise, and there will certainly be a willingness by my Department to do that. The Member will be aware of the significant investment coming through for the north-west, particularly through the regeneration fund. There will be other opportunities for that fund to be used for regeneration purposes.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

7. Ms Flynn asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the timeline for delivering a final draft of the anti-poverty strategy. (AQO 2691/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

There is currently no set date for the publication of the Executive’s anti-poverty strategy. However, work remains ongoing at pace in the Department to drive forward that vital work.

The public consultation on the draft anti-poverty strategy ran from June to September, and input was received from a wide range of stakeholders. Officials are currently analysing all responses received throughout the process. That analysis will be shared with all Departments and Executive colleagues. The Executive will then give direction on any further development required on the strategy, including any changes deemed appropriate.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for his response. I am conscious that the strategy has not been fully launched or implemented yet, but will any immediate actions flow from the strategy that might help to offset some of the real, harsh impacts of the cost-of-living crisis that people are feeling at the minute? Can any immediate, short-term actions be delivered on that issue?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Executive have taken some moves already. We have not waited until full publication of the strategy to move forward. We have included — we have been criticised for it — some of the work that we are already doing. Good progress has been made on the implementation of some of those issues. The Department for Communities has been running the discretionary support fund for some time, and that is continuing, as are other actions.

It is important that we do not wait for the final publication of the strategy before we help and provide support in different ways. The Member will be aware that we are always willing to look at how we can help outside the timelines for the strategies as well. Take, for example, the action that was taken after the Labour Government took the callous decision to remove the winter fuel payment. I was able to bid for funding from the Department of Finance and get Executive agreement so that we could put that measure in place. That is something that we will always look at, depending on the circumstances that arise. From the Executive's point of view, however, we want to make sure that the anti-poverty strategy is fit for purpose, makes a real difference, has long-lasting impacts and, importantly, tackles the root causes of poverty.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

It is a wee bit disappointing that we still do not have a timeline. I feel that we waited quite a long time until the draft strategy was initially released, and now it feels like we are back in a holding pattern. Will the Department publish the responses that were received from the stakeholders, and is the Minister able to indicate whether those responses were supportive of the current draft document? When we will hear about the sector's responses?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We certainly have not been in a holding pattern. We had a 14-week consultation period to give people the opportunity and the time to have their say. It has been less than two months since that consultation closed, and, in that period, we have been looking at the responses, analysing them and taking them forward. I am keen to share those responses with the public. The responses will inform Executive conversations as well. We will release that information in the normal way, and I look forward to that happening so that people can understand what the public have had to say. We will present all of that information to the Executive so that they can make their final decision on how we take the strategy forward and get it ready for publication.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

9. Ms Ní Chuilín asked the Minister for Communities for an update on whether his Department will publish a strategy for the arts sector. (AQO 2693/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

In July 2024 I established the heritage, culture and creativity programme, through which I will fill the void created by the absence of an Executive policy for the arts and for the historic environment. I look forward to bringing that forward soon.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his response. The question was about the publication of a strategy for the arts. Can he ensure that that publication happens? I am sure that he will appreciate the economic and health and well-being benefits that the arts sector contributes to the economy and, indeed, to all our lives.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I will just repeat my answer: through that programme, I will fill the void created by the absence of an Executive policy for the arts. That means that I will be bringing forward that policy.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

The Minister has done an important job in ensuring that the Arts Council and the arts sector are now more reflective of working-class communities across Northern Ireland. Will he commit to continuing to ensure that all communities benefit from arts funding, not just one section of society?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Absolutely. The Member will be aware that I have set that trajectory already. I have sent a letter of expectation to the Arts Council, outlining some of the issues that the Member has raised. I have also had the privilege of welcoming Nora Douds as the new chair of the Arts Council, along with new board members. I am absolutely delighted that she is in post. I have been reassured by the Arts Council's response, and I will continue to work with it to ensure that the arts are for everyone, regardless of class, religion, geography or background. The arts are not just for the few, the elite or the privileged.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Minister, you have just said that the arts sector is not reflective: what support are you giving to ensure that it is reflective?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am not sure whether the Member is aware of the feeling, but I have received many letters from constituents and had meetings with people who feel that the support has not been there for them. Many people outside of Belfast and Londonderry do not feel that there has been enough funding for the arts and for their organisations. There are some small groups and some groups that are doing great work in disadvantaged areas. Some great groups in the arts, particularly amateur dramatics groups, feel that they have not had support. They often feel that no one is interested in them. That is a common and recurrent theme: they feel that no one is interested in what they do. I am surprised that the Member has not received some of that feedback.

I want everyone to have confidence that they can apply for funding and that it will be there on a fair and equitable basis. The big challenge for the Arts Council is that it does not have enough funding, but I want to make sure that we get extra funding and that people feel that it is for everybody.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

10. Mr Gildernew asked the Minister for Communities whether he will bring forward any proposals to strengthen renters’ rights. (AQO 2694/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My programme of private rented sector reform is focused on addressing the key issues of affordability, security and quality in a way that balances the rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants. The key actions that I have already delivered are improving safety for tenants by setting minimum standards for fire and electrical safety; transferring the landlord registration scheme to councils to help to increase landlords' knowledge of their duties and responsibilities; and restricting the frequency of rent increases to once in every 12 months with a three-month written notice. The remaining actions that I will deliver in this mandate are introducing much longer notice to quit periods; amending landlord registration regulations to make the scheme a more meaningful tool in raising property standards; and exploring minimum energy efficiency standards for the private rented sector.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat.

[Translation: Thank you.]

I thank the Minister for his answer. Westminster recently passed its Renters' Rights Act 2025, which has ushered in a significant number of reforms to private tenancies in England, such as a ban on no-fault evictions, the abolition of fixed-term tenancy contracts and increased rights for pet owners. Will the Minister commit to bringing forward legislative reforms to strengthen renters' rights before the end of the mandate?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

All that will be kept under review. If we need to bring in additional measures and legislation is required, we will do that. I note what the Member said about banning no-fault evictions, but, of course, that is not watertight. There are always reasons why people can be evicted; in fact, in Scotland, there are 18 reasons and exemptions. In all those things, it is about getting the right balance. I am progressing measures to which the Assembly agreed in the previous mandate. I am always happy to keep some of those other issues under review, but we also need to be aware of the unintended consequences that might come from those.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Minister, do rent controls work?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I go by the evidence. The evidence indicates that they do not work; in fact, all the evidence demonstrates that. For some, the solution to affordability is introducing regulation on rent controls, such as freezes or reductions. However, the independent research highlights the potential unintended consequences of such actions, including landlords exiting the private rental market, resulting in a greater shortage of properties in an already stretched market. I have previously discussed and debated the issue with Members in the House. I am glad to see Mr Carroll in his place: just over a year ago, I asked him to bring evidence on rent controls to me, if he had it, but, unfortunately, we have —.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

It is coming.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Oh, it is coming. It has taken him only 11 months, but it is on its way. I look forward to seeing that research. I will be guided by the research on this one.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

11. Ms Murphy asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the proposed introduction of a gambling industry levy. (AQO 2695/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My officials are undertaking a scoping exercise on the feasibility and sustainability of a Northern Ireland industry levy that is anticipated to be completed by the end of the financial year. The outworkings of that exercise will be used to help inform decisions on a way forward.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Minister, my question is on the work that you have done to date. What discussions have you had with counterparts in other jurisdictions?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Clearly, there has been engagement with the relevant UK Departments on the issue. There has also been significant cooperation in Northern Ireland. In my correspondence with the UK Government, we have written jointly, because gambling is an issue that does not affect the Department for Communities alone. I have worked closely with the Minister of Health and the Minister of Education, and we have made a joint representation on the wider issue. I look forward to working with others, because it is important that we have this in place and use the funding that is there for the right purposes.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Minister explain and describe the engagement with the Department of Health on this serious issue?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We have been engaging with the Department of Health at official level on our correspondence with the UK Government and to make sure that other Departments are aware of their responsibilities. As the Member will be aware, the purpose of the levy is to tackle gambling harm, for which the Department of Health has a responsibility. Therefore, it has an important role to play in advising my officials on gambling harm. It should also be advising on the types of projects and services that a levy could support.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We now move to topical questions.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

T1. Mr Durkan asked the Minister for Communities, noting that sport can be a roller coaster, with the highs of victory that supporters of both our international football teams on this island have enjoyed recently, the lows of defeat and draws that sometimes feel like a win and sometimes like a defeat, how he feels about the draw for the European Championships 2028 that Belfast will host. (AQT 1771/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First and foremost, I am disappointed that we will not host any matches in Belfast. I would have very much appreciated the opportunity for that to happen, but we know why it will not. In the absence of hosting matches, it is incumbent on all of us to look at the ways that we might still benefit from the Euros being hosted by the UK and Ireland. That is why I am glad of that first step of ensuring that the draw will take place here. We will have representatives of 54 nations and many journalists coming for the draw. Obviously, that is no substitute for holding matches here, but we should be in the mindset of doing everything that we can to promote Northern Ireland and ensure that we play whatever role we can. That is the first of what, I hope, will be more announcements.

What is more important will be the legacy that comes from the tournament as a whole. I am delighted that the Irish Football Association (IFA) has already signalled its intention to put a significant amount of money into that. I look forward to Executive colleagues also providing support so that we can build a sporting legacy from the tournament.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

While we host the draw for that prestigious competition, Dublin will host seven matches and generate hundreds of millions of pounds. Does the Minister have no regrets that the Executive did not do more to secure the investment needed in Casement Park to allow Northern Ireland to play a proper role in hosting and benefiting from one of the biggest sporting tournaments in the world? Will steps be taken to ensure that we do not miss out on similar opportunities in future?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My goodness, the Member is brave in asking the question that he has just asked. He is wondering why we are not able to host any games here. We know that Windsor Park does not have the required capacity. He has mentioned Casement Park in the past. We all know that to have built Casement Park in time for the Euros required cash and lots of it. My skills and abilities do not extend to magicking £300 million-plus out of nowhere.

Yes, I am disappointed that we did not get matches, but maybe the Member would, for once, like to consider the role that he played in all of that. If he really wants, we can go back to the original planning application in 2014. Why did the original planning application fall at judicial review in 2014? It was because of the Member: a judge ruled that he acted unlawfully in granting planning permission. He did not take into consideration all the relevant factors. The judge said that the decision was "irretrievably flawed". There is more blame to go on Mark Durkan than on anybody else in the House. It was Mark Durkan who unlawfully approved the original planning application. That is why we are in the situation that we are in today. I would rather that all those projects had been completed in 2011. If they had, we would not face the cost that we face now. If the Member wants to blame someone, maybe he should look in the mirror.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

T2. Mr Carroll asked the Minister for Communities, noting that he hopes that the Budget to be announced at Westminster in the coming days will retract the cruel, Victorian and deeply damaging two-child benefit cap, to give an update on any discussions that he and his officials have had with the British Government on reversing the decision on that cap. (AQT 1772/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member should not be surprised to hear that the UK Government have not provided us with information on their intentions. I am not sure how much use any information would be anyway, because it would probably change within a few hours.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Thank you, Minister, sort of. If they do decide to scrap the policy, presumably there will be a financial benefit, with extra money coming here to cover the cost. If not, will you give a commitment that your Department will cover it?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The difficulty is that there is a huge cost involved in our doing that on our own. I hope that the Government do the right thing and reverse the policy. That has been the united position of the Assembly, but, as we finalise the anti-poverty strategy, we will look at all options in order to ensure that we provide help where it is needed most.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

T3. Ms Forsythe asked the Minister for Communities, after stating that it is great to see his work and engagement to realise the full potential of the America250 celebrations in Northern Ireland, why some Members have voiced their opposition to his attempts to increase awareness, knowledge and understanding of Northern Ireland in the United States, which she has been disappointed to hear. (AQT 1773/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I heard some of the comments from the Chair of the Communities Committee at the Public Accounts Committee last week. He was very negative about what we are trying to do on our connections with the United States. I do not know whether that is because of his distaste for Ulster-Scots culture or because Northern Ireland will have special status in next year's celebrations. The celebrations here are important, however, because of the benefits that they can bring to Northern Ireland, including tourism, investment and greater understanding in the United States of who we are. My goal is clear: to promote Northern Ireland, who we are, what we have done in the past and what positively lies ahead for us in the future.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. You know that I am passionate about Ulster-Scots culture, and I look forward to welcoming you to some more events in the Mournes. Can you outline some of the tangible outcomes that you foresee from the investment resulting from the America250 celebrations?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

We will stand out on the international stage next year at the special event that the US is organising. We also have the memorandum of understanding, which contains key benefits for Northern Ireland. We are also raising the cultural connections, which I would have thought the Chairman of the Communities Committee would welcome. We will also host our own event in the US next year that will give us the opportunity to tell people about Northern Ireland. Through the United States Semiquincentennial Commission, we are getting some significant players in the room with us, and that should be welcomed by all.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

T4. Mr Kearney asked the Minister for Communities, given that it is not lost on the public that, of all the towns in the North, the three to which the Minister awarded a total of £150,000 for Christmas lights were either in his constituency or in the wider Mid and East Antrim Borough Council area, why he deemed Larne, Ballymena and Carrick to be the only towns deserving of that significant financial uplift. (AQT 1774/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is up to individual councils to identify their priorities for regeneration funding. My Department applies a consistent approach that is based on the applications and priorities, and it is great to see towns taking the initiative to apply for funding to deliver projects that enhance their town centre. Funding for festive investments has also been provided to four other council areas in the current year and in recent years: Ards and North Down; Lisburn and Castlereagh; Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon; and Newry, Mourne and Down.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.

[Translation: I thank the Minister for that answer.]

I am sure that the Minister will agree that many councils are now struggling with the effect that the slashing of the rate support grant has had on their financial management arrangements. Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council, which is in my constituency, faces the invidious challenge this year of trying to work out which towns will get Christmas lights and which will not. Minister, are you saying that Mid and East Antrim Borough Council's was the only application that you received for financial support to invest in Christmas lights this year?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I will confirm that for the Member, but the information that I have is that applications are open to everyone and everyone can apply on the same basis. It is up to councils to decide how they allocate their regeneration funding.

Let me cut to the chase: you think that something untoward has gone on and that I am prioritising my constituency.

I will always want to stand up for my constituents, but I assure you that this is available on the same basis for everybody. The Member is barking up the wrong tree.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

T5. Mr Bradley asked the Minister for Communities for an update on the community infrastructure fund and whether there is any scope for it to receive additional funding from any other Department. (AQT 1775/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes. I am pleased to confirm that the fund has received over 800 applications. I am also encouraged by the fact that we have had interest from a wide range of sectors, spread across every council area in Northern Ireland. That is a clear indication that we have a great need for the fund, and my officials are working to ensure that it becomes a rolling programme of support, which is much needed by the voluntary and community sector.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will the scheme and its positive impact on communities be evaluated, and will it be rolled out year-on-year?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes, there certainly will be an evaluation. I hope that the scheme can be funded again next year.

I apologise that I did not answer the second part of the Member's first question, which was about funding from other Departments. I have had correspondence and discussions with the AERA Minister, and I will write to him formally to request his support for the fund because the majority of the applications come from rural communities. As the Member knows, the primary responsibility for policy in the area falls to DAERA. I hope that we can work together on the fund, because there is huge demand and it will have a hugely positive impact.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

T6. Mrs Guy asked the Minister for Communities what actions his Department is taking to support the organisations that will put 650 staff on redundancy notice at the end of the calendar year due to uncertainty around the local growth fund. (AQT 1776/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

That is an issue about which we will all have been contacted. I am concerned about it because so many really good organisations that do brilliant work have had uncertainty for some time. There does not seem to be any clarification coming their way. The Executive, with the Finance Minister taking the lead, will continue to make those representations. Those organisations do brilliant work and deserve to have long-term certainty, which they do not have right now.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his answer. What exactly have you done to put pressure on Westminster to provide the support that we need for those organisations?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Obviously, all work with the Treasury goes through the Department of Finance. That is how the Executive operate. I assure the Member that there has been strong support from across the Executive, including me, for the issues that the Finance Minister is raising. I know that that does not bring much comfort to the organisations that are so badly affected, but it is clear that we need answers on the matter and very soon. I will play whatever role I can in that.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

T7. Mr Honeyford asked the Minister for Communities whether the Casement Park and Northern Ireland Football Fund allocations, which were set in 2011, should increase in line with inflation and the rise in construction costs given that their value has been significantly eroded. (AQT 1777/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It absolutely is the case that the funding is not worth as much as it was in 2011. That was the commitment that was made at that time, and I am disappointed that progress has not been made. In the case of the football fund, Ministers did not take it forward when they should have, and, in the case of Casement Park, Mr Durkan acted unlawfully and the project was held up for that reason. Obviously, any further allocations would be subject to Executive agreement, and we have to balance those against other pressures.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

The question is whether you agree that the value of those projects should be increased in line with inflation. As Minister, will you argue on the Executive that those two figures are increased to the value of what they were in 2011?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Of course I want to see more money for sport and sporting infrastructure. However, I am aware that there are other pressures in my Department and across the Executive. Do I want to see more money for sport in Northern Ireland? Absolutely. Should it be allocated on a fair and equitable basis? Absolutely. However, there is a huge financial requirement on us right now. Those increases in and of themselves will not meet some of that need. Those things have to be weighed up together.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

It is time to move on to questions to the Minister for the Economy.

Oral Answers to Questions — Economy

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

1. Mr Harvey asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any plans her Department has to further develop tourism in rural areas. (AQO 2700/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Regional balance is a key priority of my tourism vision and action plan, and rural tourism presents a valuable opportunity to support regional balance and promote the sustainable development of our rural communities.

We know that visitors, particularly those from international markets, come to experience our amazing landscapes and scenery. Whether they are our coasts, lakes, countryside or parklands, our rural areas have them in abundance. Tourism NI will continue to work directly with tourism businesses in rural areas as well as in collaboration with local councils. That focus on business development supports and promotes their authentic and unique appeal across all regions to develop their profitability, innovation, visitor appeal and long-term sustainability. The work will be further enhanced by an upcoming destination stewardship approach that will focus on achieving regional balance in rural and urban areas through carefully designed sustainability and regenerative plans.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, our local councils play a vital role in the promotion of many of our rural tourist sites. However, success varies from one local authority to the next. What can the Department do to ensure that best practice models and ideas are shared across Northern Ireland?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. Some of our council areas, including mine and the Member's, have a particularly strong focus on tourism and will have strong tourism development departments. Working alongside Tourism NI, there is an opportunity for them to share best practice. Through the tourism vision and action plan, I encourage that and will continue to encourage Tourism NI to play that important role. Through the local economic partnerships (LEPs) that we recently established, there is an opportunity for each council to design its own economic plan and, where it is relevant and council members feel that it is appropriate to do so, ensure that tourism is appropriately represented in it. Again, I actively encourage councils to do that.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Minister, what representation are you making to your counterparts in the Republic of Ireland to ensure that all-island branding, such as Ireland's Ancient East, is extended into Northern Ireland, as doing so would benefit many in the tourism industry, not least in South Down?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question, and I completely agree with him. Work is ongoing with Tourism NI, Tourism Ireland and Fáilte Ireland to bridge those visitor experiences across the island. For example, the Causeway coastal route and the Wild Atlantic Way have a Shared Island project fund of some £7·6 million to do that. A review of the current Causeway coastal route visitor offering has been completed, following consultation with public and industry stakeholders and having gathered insights to shape an infrastructure strategy. That has the potential to develop things along the route such as the discovery points that are similar to those along the Wild Atlantic Way. That project also includes the delivery of a small capital investment scheme to improve interpretation, provision and the visitor experience. Recognising the brands that Fáilte Ireland owns, Tourism NI is in final discussions with Fáilte Ireland on licensing the use of Ireland's Hidden Heartlands to the Fermanagh region, and I hope to be in a position to welcome progress on that in the very near future.

I have previously updated Members on Ireland's Ancient East. Fáilte Ireland is evaluating that brand's effectiveness and considering the next steps. I am keen for the North to be represented in any discussions on that, and I will continue to make that case to Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland.

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

Minister, we share the beautiful constituency of East Derry. It has areas of outstanding natural beauty and a stunning coast. What developments do you have in mind to expand rural tourism in our constituency?