Northern Ireland Assembly, 14 April 2026

387 contributions from 63 members. The official report.

Members' Statements

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I congratulate Cahal Clarke, Aoibh Clarke, Rónán Johnson and Craic Theatre and Arts Centre in Coalisland on their production of 'Called Out', which was written by Cahal and directed by Aoibh, with Rónán playing all the characters in a one-man show. It truly was a hard-hitting production, exploring the courage required of young men in particular to call out their peers' harmful behaviours and attitudes. It was a thought-provoking piece of work, delivered through funding provided by Mid Ulster District Council through the Executive strategy to end violence against women and girls.

The difference with that production and how if differed from other things that I have seen that funding used for is that it was very aware of its target audience and how to reach it and of how it had the potential to make young people ask themselves whether they are willing to question harmful behaviours and attitudes among their peers. The play tells the story of what happens when, because they are their friends, they know them, they like them and they have grown up with them, men and boys do not challenge harmful behaviours displayed by other men and boys. It is for those very reasons that they fail to challenge such behaviours.

The production was shown to many post-primary schools across mid-Ulster, and the feedback from the young people, their parents, their teachers and the adults around them has been outstanding because of the conversations that they were having afterwards. I spoke to some parents who went to see the play on the Friday night, and they said that, because of the opportunity to have a conversation after seeing it, all parents should see the production with their young people.

The thoughtful way in which the production was presented has real potential to change how people think about harmful behaviours and attitudes towards women and girls. It is important that more young people across the North get the opportunity to see the play. We are well aware that 30 women have been murdered in the North since 2020, but we also need to understand that, in many cases, the men who killed those women displayed harmful behaviours before killing their partner, their wife or their mother. Were they challenged by their peers and their family? Many women and girls who are the victims of domestic and sexual violence will tell you that those men were not only not challenged by their peers and their family but were defended by them. Their behaviours were explained away.

I will finish with a quote from Margaret Atwood. It comes from the 1980s, but, unfortunately, it is still the case:

"Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them."

Julie Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the Chamber not only as a representative of the Foyle constituency but as a community member who has long seen the devastating effects of mental ill health in Foyle and beyond, most recently in my home. I offer hope, compassion and genuine care to those who are walking the complex journey that is mental illness. To anyone listening who is currently walking that journey, I say this: you are seen, you are valued, and your struggle does not define your worth.

Poor mental health is a universal human experience. It does not discriminate. It does not care about your postcode, your politics or your profession. Whether you live in the Waterside or the Cityside and whether you are a business owner or a student at Magee university, the pain of depression or the grip of trauma can affect anyone.

In Foyle, we are a resilient people, but resilience does not have to mean suffering alone. It means being able to say, "I am not OK", knowing that your community will rally around you. Saying that you need help is a brave step to take, not an easy one.

We must be honest about the consequences of inaction. In Northern Ireland, we carry a unique legacy of trauma that continues to cast a long shadow on our citizens. When mental health support fails, the ripples are felt everywhere, most tragically in the home, where heartbreak is felt from suicide. One life lost is one too many. We know that one in five adults here will face mental health challenges. Those people are not just statistics; they are our neighbours, friends, colleagues and family members. They are valued individuals.

Importantly, there is always hope. In Foyle, we are blessed with incredible organisations, therapists, the NHS, charities and churches. There is help out there. Those services are the heartbeat of our city's recovery, but they cannot do it alone. As an MLA, I am committed to doing my part, to listening, to learning and to being proactive on the issue. Let us replace the stigma of past attitudes towards mental health with compassion and the hope of a bright future, of help when it is required and of a deeper understanding by us all.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I welcome you officially to the Chamber, Julie. This is the first time that I have had the opportunity to do so in person in the Chamber. On behalf of everyone, I know, I also express our best wishes to Gary for a full and speedy recovery.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I also welcome Julie to the Chamber today and wish Gary all the best. He was always a pleasure to work with.

I will speak today about breast cancer referral times. I have spoken about that in the Chamber many times over the past year and, indeed, since being elected as an MLA for North Belfast. Over the past two weeks, we have had Easter recess, when many people took a break to recuperate and perhaps took some time to spend with their family. During that time, however, many women in Northern Ireland were having to wait anxiously for an urgent, red-flag breast cancer diagnosis appointment.

Over the past 14 days, we saw statistics come out from the Department of Health that showed the Department patting itself on the back. The Minister's response was to welcome the improvement, yet the statistics showed that just 6% of women who were waiting for a red-flag appointment were seen in that two-week window. We also had women coming forward in the media during that time, highlighting that they had waited up to 10 weeks for their appointment and, indeed, had unfortunately been diagnosed with cancer after that time. We all know the importance of early detection and treatment for the likelihood of success in battling a cancer diagnosis. Seeing such a small proportion of women being seen in that two-week window is nothing short of a disgrace.

I pay tribute to the many clinicians who work overtime on the ground. They are trying to see improvements in that area. Unfortunately, that will not be sustainable.

How long do we expect those clinicians to run themselves into the ground for? How many extra shifts, including weekend shifts, can they do to see all the women who are waiting for that life-changing diagnosis?

We urgently need a workforce strategy and a service strategy from the Department because the situation is not the fault of clinicians on the ground; it is a systemic issue. There are fundamental problems that need to be structurally addressed. We want to tell women that they can receive their life-changing diagnosis and treatment in good time, but, unfortunately, over the past year, many people have waited for up to 10 weeks to begin that treatment, and that has often made things worse. Rather than trying to frame those statistics as an improvement, we need long-term ambitions for breast cancer diagnosis so that women in all of our constituencies can be seen in good time, rather than having the overwhelming stress and anxiety of that wait.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Yesterday, at the end of questions to the Infrastructure Minister, I pointed out that, far from our Government paying billions to the war against Iran, we are, in fact, paying nothing towards that conflict. Rather than believing the spin from Sinn Féin, we should concentrate on the real and diminishing state of our national defences. To add to that rather hypocritical position taken by a Sinn Féin Minister and in yet another nugatory debate that was brought to the House by the Sinn Féin MLA for South Antrim later the same day, not only is the United Kingdom not investing enough in its defence but it has now taken on the responsibility for defending the airspace, cyberspace, sea space and subsea space of the Irish Republic at a cost of millions to the UK taxpayer, while the Irish Government find half a billion euro for fuel subsidies. While we defend the Irish Republic, it shows no indication of moving away from its freeloading approach to defence, and the Irish lecture us and others about security concerns.

This morning, in the 'Financial Times', Lord Robertson, an ex-Labour Secretary of State for Defence, former secretary-general of NATO and co-author of Starmer's latest strategic defence review, gave a damning indictment of the state of our nation's defence today. He said:

"We are underprepared. We are underinsured. We are under attack. We are not safe ... Britain’s national security and safety is in peril."

The first duty of any British Prime Minister is, supposedly, the defence and security of our nation. Paradoxically, we have also committed ourselves to the defence and security of our neighbour — a neighbour who seems more interested in taking us to court than investing even a modicum of its tax-avoidance revenues in support of the rest of us in defending our values. Any normal Prime Minister would rectify both of those issues with urgency. That should be a matter of concern for all of us. Sticking proverbial heads in the sand will do neither and should not be supported.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome Julie Middleton to the Chamber. It is great to see you here. I know that you will be a strong voice for the people of Foyle. It goes without saying that I wish Gary all the best as he works towards recovery.

At a time of growing uncertainty across the world, we are beginning to see a shift in Europe. There is a renewed sense of unity, and a recognition that the challenges that we face, whether economic instability, geopolitical conflict or external interference, are best met together, not alone. Across the continent, countries are choosing cooperation over isolation. They are rejecting outside influence that seeks to divide and destabilise. In doing so, they offer a clear sense of direction and purpose. We also see signs of new hope. The recent election result in Hungary has been viewed by many as a moment where voters have signalled a desire for a different path that is more open, more outward-looking and more aligned to European values.

At the same time, even here, on these islands, there has been a shift in tone. The British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has been clear in his assessment that Brexit did deep damage to the UK economy. That is a significant acknowledgement that should prompt serious reflection right here in the Chamber.

While others are moving forward together, we are still dealing with the consequences of being pulled apart from our closest neighbours.

The timing could not be more critical. As we watch the devastating situation unfold in the Middle East, where civilians are caught in conflict and instability spreads across the region, it is clearer now than ever before that we live in a really interconnected world. No region and no country can stand alone in the face of these challenges. That is why closer alignment within the European Union is not just an economic argument, although the economic case is overwhelming. It is about stability. It is about security. It is about ensuring that we are part of a collective voice that stands for peace, cooperation and with international law. For us here in the North, that matters deeply. Our economy, our society and our future are tied to strong relationships across these islands and across Europe. As Europe moves forward in greater unity, the question for us is simple. Will we continue to stand on the outside looking in, or will we take the steps needed to rebuild those relationships and secure our place within the shared future? I believe, today more than ever, that the answer is clear.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I also welcome Julie, wish her well in her role as a Foyle MLA, and extend my best wishes to Gary.

I take this opportunity to highlight Autism Awareness Month. This year, Autism NI is using this month to celebrate the spectrum and colour and to highlight unique differences. This month presents an opportunity to remind ourselves that we still have much work to do to better support children, young people and adults who live with autism, particularly when it comes to timely assessment and appropriate support, including post-19 provision.

Just before recess, the all-party group (APG) on autism met the Independent Autism Reviewer. First, I thank Ema Cubitt for her time and the information that she was able to provide us with. It was clear from the reviewer's evidence that good progress has been made on her work. However, it has been disappointing that, in my opinion, the Department of Health was not prepared for the establishment of the reviewer's office, even though it should have been aware of what was in the legislation. Had the Department been in a better state of readiness, the reviewer could have got down to work before now. Instead, she has had to focus on establishing her office while exercising the statutory functions that she is responsible for.

I welcome the reviewer's comments that she believes that there were barriers to progress within the Department of Health and across other Departments. Those barriers are now being addressed, which will lead to better cooperation. I agree with the reviewer, and what needs to be recognised across all Departments is that the changes needed to better support people with autism do not always cost a huge amount of money. However, the changes require a willingness to adapt. Take, for instance, the focus that the APG has had on the development of a special autism mental health service. That has not progressed in the way that we would like to see. As a result, people with autism continue to experience difficulties in accessing mental health services. That is not acceptable.

From our recent meeting, the overriding message is clear: the autism strategy needs to be given the priority that it deserves across all Departments, arm's-length bodies and other organisations. The delivery plan must see measurable targets that can be monitored and delivered to ensure that people with autism see impact on the services that they access.

I look forward to reading the reviewer's first annual report in the near future. I also look forward to supporting her in her work alongside the rest of the all-party group as we continue to demand improvements for people with autism.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

In recent years, teachers, youth workers and parents have raised growing concerns about the problems facing our boys and young men. The problems are not anecdotal. Last March, the Centre for Social Justice published its 'Lost Boys' report: sobering research that gained national attention. It highlights serious issues across employment, education, family life and fatherhood, crime, health, technology and porn. It shows that boys are falling behind girls at school, are less likely to get into stable work, are significantly more likely to be involved in crime and are three and a half times more likely to take their own life. Two and a half million children in the UK are growing up without a father figure in the home, and, in the absence of positive male role models, many boys are turning elsewhere for identity and guidance.

Louis Theroux's 'Inside the Manosphere' has sparked a national conversation about what is shaping young men. It uncovers the dark world of hyper-masculine influencers. Without better alternatives, they then quickly become counter role models, promoting a misogynistic, conspiratorial and violent distortion of masculinity, leaving boys insecure, anxious and under impossible pressure to conform to a narrow, toxic view of what it means to be a man.

Northern Ireland is not immune to those challenges. Men accounted for 79% of suicides in 2024, and suicide remains our leading cause of death in males under 50. Our economic inactivity rate is higher than the UK average, especially amongst working-class men, and our young men are the most likely in the whole of the UK to watch porn. Evidence suggests that the type consumed is increasingly violent. We also face additional unique pressures as paramilitary groups continue to lure some young men into criminality, compounding their existing challenges.

Many young men are growing up without the guidance, purpose and mentors they need to thrive. The consequences are felt far beyond those individuals by families, communities, women and our whole society. We must ensure that those issues get attention, and we must deliver solutions, invest in youth and mental health services, support mentoring and strengthen online safety. Many of those young men lack aspiration and self-belief. They do not have anyone to champion them or even to listen. By acknowledging the crisis and committing to solutions, we can send a clear message: our young men are valued, and our society needs them.

Yesterday, I hosted an event to explore these issues with those in education, business, the PSNI and justice. These challenges cannot be solved by government alone; we need community groups, Churches, sports clubs and families to collectively consider solutions. Let me also be very clear: this is not a competition between boys and girls and women and men. It is about starting a holistic conversation on how we can build a society where everyone can flourish together. The conversation has just begun. Please join it.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

Just before Easter recess, I attended what I can describe as a crisis meeting at Ledley Hall in east Belfast. The focus that night was the recent decision by the Education Minister to remove ring-fenced funding for youth services across Northern Ireland. That decision is an absolute catastrophe for youth services here, and the anger and tension in the room that night was clear for all to see. The decision puts Ledley Hall at risk and could close the doors of an organisation that has been operating in east Belfast for 80 years and impact on close to 1,600 youth organisations across Northern Ireland. What does that impact look like? It jeopardises support for over 165,000 young people who use those services each year as well as the volunteers and staff who prop them up.

Following the meeting, I got home that night to urgently write to the Education Minister seeking an urgent meeting with Ledley Hall, the Youth Work Alliance and me to discuss the very real impact that his decision was going to have. Someone there that night told me not to get my hopes up, but I thought that it was a fairly standard request from an MLA to meet a Minister. For example, recently, the Infrastructure Minister met me with a day's notice. The Health Minister, just yesterday, met me about ADHD. Unfortunately, despite us advising in the request that we would make ourselves fully flexible due to his busy diary, he responded a week later that, on this occasion, he would be unable to attend, as if we had specified a date and time to meet when we had not. Quite frankly, I find that completely disrespectful to the issue at hand, to the concerns raised that evening and to the residents in the surrounding area that make regular use of Lesley Hall and other organisations like it.

Research from Queen's University found that 73% of 10-year-olds and 79% of 16-year-olds identified youth clubs and centres as places where young people will always feel mostly respected. Their impact is proven across the world, but what we have here is what I heard from many that night: a Minister focused on academia, elitism and the upper class, forgetting that working-class communities who use those services deserve to have their children and communities supported and invested in as well. Farming this out to the Education Authority, with the budgetary pressures that it is already under, will not lead to the potential increase in budget that the Minister previously told me about during Education Question Time. Instead, youth services will be absorbed, looked over and then simply forgotten about.

The independent review of education estimated that over £70 million should be put into youth services, yet their funding is now being gambled with. Youth services are not even asking for more money in this instance; instead, they are simply asking for their current level of ring-fenced funding to remain intact.

I call on the Education Minister to urgently reverse the decision, to see the benefit of youth services and to meet Ledley Hall, Youth Work Alliance and me to hear how the decision — let us be clear that it is his decision — will affect services and families across Northern Ireland.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

On Friday 27 March, Ryan Gray, a volunteer with K9 Search and Rescue, and his search dog, Max, were attacked by a group of 15 to 20 youths in Bangor. The police said the incident began after a verbal exchange, when the youths launched a vicious assault on Ryan and Max. Ryan suffered a fractured eye socket, loss of teeth and facial injuries that required hospital treatment. Max was kicked several times and left shaken. One 13-year-old boy and two 15-year-old boys were charged with ABH, which is very serious, and a 16-year-old girl was charged with affray and common assault.

I have worked with Ryan and the wider K9 team, which provided me with a fluffy K9 search dog, which sits on the desk in my office upstairs. The assault was completely unprovoked and completely unacceptable. Ryan, the wider K9 team and its chair, Joanne Dorrian, know that they have my full support and the support of my party.

Recently, the Justice Minister's party colleague the Alliance MLA for North Antrim tabled an amendment to the Justice Bill that would raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility to 14, meaning that one of the boys would not even be charged with a serious offence. That is wrong. It does not support the victims of crime; in fact, it will erode confidence in the justice system. I have a son in P6 who is 10. He knows the difference between right and wrong and that actions always have consequences.

In conclusion, I make it clear to folk who wish to support Ryan and Max that a GoFundMe page has been established: if you want to donate to that, you can look it up online. My thoughts remain with that amazing charity and with Ryan and Max. I hope that they both recover fully from the injuries that they suffered that night in a vicious and unprovoked assault.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome Julie to the Chamber: I look forward to working with you, and I send my best regards to Gary as he undergoes his recovery.

In recent weeks, we have witnessed an exceptional surge of sporting success across Northern Ireland at local, national and international level. That success has been keenly felt in my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, where sporting ambition continues to be matched by sporting achievement. Dungannon Swifts' reaching the Irish Cup final again is testament to that momentum, as they seek to build on last season's remarkable success. I wish them well as they prepare to retain the cup at the final at Windsor Park on 2 May.

The past weekend delivered a truly historic, famous victory for Enniskillen Rugby Football Club's men's first team over Boyne RFC in Armagh on Saturday, sealing promotion to the All-Ireland League for the first time in the club's long and proud history. It was not just a win; it was a statement. The Skins produced a commanding, high-intensity performance, running out as 46 points to 8 points winners. In doing so, they demonstrated the dedication, discipline and sheer hard work that is put in week after week by players, coaches and back-room staff.

That victory caps what can only be described as a remarkable year for Enniskillen Rugby Football Club. Adding to the sense of history, the women's team also secured promotion to the All-Ireland League for next season. Having men's and women's teams competing at senior all-Ireland level is an extraordinary achievement, and one that firmly places Enniskillen RFC on the national rugby map.

The double promotion is a moment of real significance. It reflects years of careful planning, sustained investment and a belief in long-term development. It speaks of a humble club that has consistently exceeded its expectations, fuelled by the commitment of its volunteers, the loyalty of its supporters and, above all, the determination of its players.

The future is just as bright. That strength runs deep through the club, down to youth and academy level.

I also congratulate the Skins under-21s side, which defeated Rainey RFC at the end of March in an emphatic 22-7 victory, lifting the Club Academy Cup. That underlines the quality, skill and ambition that is coming through the ranks.

Enniskillen RFC is a historic club. It was the birthplace of women's rugby in the British Isles, and its success is a landmark moment not only for the club but for the entire Enniskillen and Fermanagh community. It is a source of enormous pride for everyone back home, and I record my sincere congratulations to all involved.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

I welcome the publication of the Music Venue Trust annual report for 2025, which gives us, for the first time, a detailed and sobering picture of the state of grassroots music venues in Northern Ireland.

We should be immensely proud of the sector. For a population of just under two million people, we have produced globally recognised artists across multiple generations. Every one of those artists started out somewhere, however. They started out in small local venues, learning their craft, building their confidence and connecting with audiences. Such venues are not just cultural spaces. As someone who volunteered for a decade before being employed by one such music venue, I know that they are economic contributors, community hubs and pipelines for future success. In 2025, just 17 grassroots music venues hosted over 22,000 performances across more than 3,700 events, attracting 460,000 visitors. That is an extraordinary amount of activity for such a small number of venues, and it translated into an £11·85 million contribution to our economy.

Behind those headline figures, however, lies a far more fragile reality. Only half those venues made a profit. Employment in the sector has dropped sharply, down 21% in just one year. Perhaps most striking of all, live music is now operating at a loss, with venues subsidising performances to the tune of £1·63 million simply to keep music on their stages. That means that, although cultural output is thriving, the business model that underpins live music is under severe strain. That matters, because, without intervention, we risk losing the very spaces that nurture our artists, animate our towns and cities and enrich our communities. We also risk losing opportunities, particularly for young people, to participate in music, be that as performers, workers or audience members.

The report, which is being launched in the Long Gallery today, shows clearly that grassroots venues are not just nice to have. Rather, they are essential infrastructure in our cultural and creative economy, and, like any infrastructure, support, strategic thinking and long-term planning are required. The question therefore for us as policymakers, and for the Minister for Communities and the Minister for the Economy, is this: what do we do next? How do we ensure that venues are sustainable? How do we recognise their value, not just culturally but economically? If we get it right, the cultural, social and economic returns will speak for themselves.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Two points of order were raised yesterday, and I will now deal with them briefly.

First, Pat Sheehan raised the issue of comments that the Minister of Education made in the Chamber on 23 March about allegations of bullying and in the contents of a written ministerial statement from him from 27 March. Mr Sheehan contrasted the contents of the two contributions, accusing the Minister of misleading the Assembly, and asked me to direct the Minister to come to the Chamber to correct the record. Mr Sheehan will be aware that the Speaker does not have the power to direct a Minister or a Member to come to the House to correct the record. I have reminded the House that it is not the role of the Speaker's Office to fact-check the contributions of Ministers or Members. Rather, it is for Members to pursue issues with any individual Member or Minister and for that Member or Minister to assess whether they need to correct the record of anything that has been said in the Assembly.

It is important to note, however, that written ministerial statements are part of official proceedings. On 23 March, the Minister gave a response, saying that he was happy to respond to any specific allegation. No specific allegation was forthcoming. On 27 March, the Minister issued his written ministerial statement, having reflected further, in which he returned to the issue to add to what he had said in the Chamber and provide further context and information to the House on the record.

That is a step that we have encouraged others to take in the past. Therefore, clarification of an issue is appropriate and, indeed, welcome. Whether Members are content with the details of the Minister's statements is a matter for them. I note that Mr Sheehan has tabled questions for written answer to the Minister on those issues. However, there is nothing further for me to address.

On the second point of order, Mr Gaston raised a point of order about whether Linda Dillon had breached the standards of debate by using the term "stupid" in exchanges with Mr Buckley. I was in the Chair yesterday, and our standards of debate are assessed in terms of context and not just words alone. Mrs Dillon was responding to sedentary comments from Mr Buckley, who was shouting at her:

“Net stupid.” — [Official Report (Hansard), 13 April 2026, p9, col 1].

Therefore, while I am not encouraging any Member to use the term "stupid" to refer to another, Mrs Dillon was using Mr Buckley's word back at him, albeit personalising it, which was inappropriate. I therefore called for order at the time. I am content, however, that, in the specific context, no further action needs to be taken.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is on not your second point but your first point. I note that Mr Sheehan's point of order, which was a further attempt to smear the conduct of the Education Minister, omitted the fact that the report fully exonerated the Minister from any allegation that was made. Before Easter, the Association of First Division Civil Servants (FDA), which is the union that represents some senior civil servants, including permanent secretaries, released a press statement following the written statement by the Education Minister, Paul Givan, in which it referred to the provisions of the ministerial code and was critical of the Minister's providing information to the Assembly. Can the Speaker confirm that the first duty of any Minister is, when asked, to provide information to the House and that, if there is any concern over the nature of the information that is provided, that is an issue for the Member who asked the question and not the Minister who answered it?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Member for raising the issue. Members will note that, on numerous occasions, I have encouraged Ministers to come to the Chamber to provide accountability to the House, because the House is the accountable body to the people of Northern Ireland. What I expect of Ministers I also expect of senior civil servants. I do not expect any civil servant not to be open, frank, honest and accountable to the House, either through Ministers in the Chamber or directly to Members in Committees. At all times, I expect openness, honesty and frankness, not attempts to cover up or emasculate facts that the public are entitled to know. I would express surprise that any civil servant, in particular senior civil servants, would wish that that was not the case. Therefore, from the Chair this morning, I make it clear that we expect honesty, integrity and accountability from everyone, both those at ministerial level and the civil servants who work to the Ministers.

Let us move on.

Executive Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call the Minister of Health. Mr Mike Nesbitt, to move the Further Consideration Stage of the Hospital Parking Charges Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Nesbitt (The Minister of Health).]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you. As no amendments have been tabled, there is no opportunity to discuss the Hospital Parking Charges Bill today. Members will, of course, be able to have a further debate at Final Stage. Further Consideration Stage of the Hospital Parking Charges Bill is, therefore, concluded. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I beg to move

That the Local Government Auditor’s draft code of audit practice 2026 be approved.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to 30 minutes for the debate. The Minister will have five minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes.

Please, open the debate.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Article 5(1) of the Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 2005 requires the Local Government Auditor to prepare and keep under review a code of audit practice that prescribes the way in which local government auditors carry out their functions in relation to district councils and other local government bodies. Article 5(2) of the 2005 Order provides that such a code shall embody what appears to the Local Government Auditor to be:

"the best professional practice with respect to the standards, procedures and techniques to be adopted by auditors."

Article 5(3) provides that a code will not:

"come into force until approved by a resolution of the Assembly, and its continuation in force is subject to its being so approved at intervals of not more than five years."

The existing code of audit practice came into force on 1 April 2021.

The Local Government Auditor consulted interested parties about the proposed draft code of audit practice 2026. The eight-week consultation period ended on 1 December 2025, and 12 responses were received as part of the consultation. I therefore ask the Assembly to approve the Local Government Auditor's code of audit practice 2026 to come into force on 15 April 2026.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I rise as Chairperson of the Committee for Communities to support the motion to approve the Local Government Auditor’s draft code of audit practice 2026. As Members will be aware, under the Local Government Order 2005, the Local Government Auditor is required to prepare and keep under review a code of audit practice. The code prescribes the way that auditors carry out their functions in relation to district councils and other local government bodies, and it must be approved by a resolution of the Assembly every five years. The previous code was approved in 2021.

On 12 March, the Committee received a comprehensive briefing from the newly designated Local Government Auditor, alongside officials from the Audit Office and the head of local government finance at the Department for Communities. During that session, the Committee explored the substantive updates in the refreshed code. We noted that, following the consultation, which yielded 12 supportive responses, the code retained a principle-based approach. The auditor explained to the Committee that that approach is essential, as it provides the necessary flexibility and adaptability to respond to the changing nature of public-sector audit and evolving financial reporting standards.

Members of the Committee sought firm assurances about the robustness of the scrutiny regime applied to local councils. The officials provided reassurance that the standardisation of accounts directions ensures consistent reporting across all 11 councils. The Committee welcomed the fact that, unlike other jurisdictions, we do not currently face a backlog of local government audits in the North. Statutory target dates for draft and certified accounts are consistently met and are supported by regular and proactive engagement through the finance working group.

The Committee also questioned the mechanisms for accountability and enforcement. Members enquired about the consequences for governance failures and the specific powers available to deal with councils that fall foul of their statutory duties. The Local Government Auditor confirmed that significant judicial powers exist to address serious issues, such as wilful misconduct or items of account that are contrary to the law. It is a positive note that all 11 councils have recently received unqualified audit opinions.

Furthermore, the Committee raised the ongoing public interest in tracking the efficiencies that were promised during local government reform. Officials acknowledged that, while a comprehensive picture may take further time to fully crystallise, enhanced and highly detailed financial data is now being shared with the Audit Office, which, hopefully, will allow for better analysis of how each council spends its money and help to identify and promote cross-council efficiencies.

Finally, the Committee welcomed the additions to the 2026 code, which place a stronger emphasis on professional scepticism, the safeguarding of independence and a renewed commitment to conducting comparative value-for-money studies to share good practice across the sector. The Committee was satisfied that the draft code provides a transparent and proportionate framework for auditing our local government bodies. Therefore, on behalf of the Committee for Communities, I am content to recommend that the Assembly approve the Local Government Auditor’s draft code of audit practice 2026.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the draft code of audit practice. Overall, it represents a positive and necessary step forward in how local government audit is carried out. The move to a principles-based, risk-led approach is the right one. It reflects the reality that councils operate in different contexts and require a degree of flexibility in how audit is applied. However, that flexibility must be balanced with consistency. If the code is to work effectively, there needs to be clarity in how the principles are applied in practice. Without that, there is a risk of uneven expectations across councils.

The broader scope of audit is also welcome. Moving beyond financial compliance to include governance, value for money and performance improvement aligns with what the public rightly expect. It is not enough for accounts to be technically correct. There must be confidence that public money is being used effectively. We have seen clearly, through the work of the Audit Office, why that broader focus is necessary. In its extraordinary audit of Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council, published in July 2022, it found non-compliance with statutory requirements in land disposals, alongside inadequate procedures, weak internal controls, poor record-keeping and deficiencies in governance and oversight.

The focus on continuous performance improvement is positive, but we need to ensure that that remains proportionate and does not become an administrative burden that detracts from the delivery on the ground. The strengthened emphasis on public reporting and transparency is also to be welcomed, particularly where it leads to clear, practical recommendations that support improvement. Finally, the code's firm grounding in independence and professional standards is essential. Public confidence in the audit process depends on it. In summary, this is a balanced and modern framework. If applied consistently and proportionately, it will not only strengthen governance but help rebuild and sustain public trust where it has been tested.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call the Minister to make a winding-up speech on the motion.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome the support from the Chairman and the Committee. I commend the motion to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Local Government Auditor’s draft code of audit practice 2026 be approved.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members, take your ease for a moment, because the Minister is not here for the next item of business.

Private Members' Business

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill [NIA Bill 28/22-27] be agreed.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

In accordance with convention, the Business Committee has not allocated any time limit to the debate.

I call Pat Sheehan to open the debate on the Bill.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

Some of my remarks will be in Irish during this contribution. Tá áthas orm an Dara Céim den Bhille um Oideachas trí mheán na Gaeilge (Plean don Lucht Oibre) a mholadh.

[Translation: I am delighted to move the Second Stage of the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill.]

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

At the outset, I place on record my thanks to a number of people who have assisted me throughout this process and played a vital role in the development of the Bill. In particular, I thank Alison Belshaw for her professionalism and expertise at every stage. I also thank Frank Geddis and Barbara Love for their advice and support throughout.

Irish-medium (IM) education has flourished here, not because it was strategically planned for or consistently supported but because parents, teachers and communities were determined that it would flourish. For decades, the sector had to fight for very basic rights. One respondent to my consultation captured that history clearly:

"The IM sector has had to plead its case for over 50 years for very basic rights."

Today, Irish-medium education is one of the fastest-growing sectors in our education system. However, underneath that growth lies sustained and serious workforce pressure. The aim of the Bill is to address that pressure in a structured and proportionate way.

We undertook extensive consultation. The online survey received 529 responses, 95% of which came from individuals directly connected to the sector, including principals, teachers, classroom assistants, early years practitioners, SEN professionals, parents and grandparents. The findings were decisive. Almost 98% agreed that the Department of Education needs to do more to facilitate and encourage Irish-medium education. Ninety-eight per cent agreed that the Department should identify and address workforce shortages, and 97% agreed that there should be a formal mechanism to assess how well the Department is fulfilling its statutory duty. Some 97·2% agreed that legislating in this area would enhance the right to education under the European Convention on Human Rights. One respondent put it plainly:

"There’s no long-term vision, we’re firefighting staffing year on year."

That firefighting culture is not sustainable. It is also disrespectful to a vibrant and growing section of our education system.

At the outset of this process, I wrote to the Minister to outline my intentions. The Minister advised that the Department is working on a strategy for Irish-medium education and that it is expected in mid-2027. A strategy is welcome, but strategies can be delayed and deprioritised and Ministers can change. Moreover, of course, mid-2027 happens to fall just after the next Assembly election. I am sure that that is entirely coincidental, but it reinforces the point that strategies tied to election cycles are not the same as statutory duties.

Is amhlaidh atá dualgas ar an Roinn cheana féin oideachas trí mheán na Gaeilge a spreagadh agus a éascú. Cuirtear an dualgas sin uirthi le hairteagal ochtó a naoi den Ordú Oideachais naoi déag nócha a hocht. Neartaítear an dóigh a gcomhlíontar an dualgas céanna leis an Bhille seo. Neartaíonn sé oibleagáid reatha, agus tugann sé creat feidhme di.

[Translation: Article 89 of the Education Order 1998 already places a duty on the Department to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education. This Bill strengthens the way that duty is delivered, and it reinforces an existing obligation and gives it practical structure.]

The workforce pressures facing the sector are now well documented. In a way, the Irish-medium sector is a victim of its own success.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for giving way and commend him for bringing forward the important Bill. The fact that its scope goes beyond teachers is particularly welcome. Can the Member outline how important it is that we address the recruitment and retention of the wider workforce, including classroom assistants and educational psychologists?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Well, it is absolutely vital. Every child has a right to be educated through the medium of Irish. Where some children have additional needs or require extra support or intervention, it is only right that those services are delivered by professionals who are fluent in the language so that their support is consistent with the language that the children are speaking and the fact that they are in an immersion situation within the Irish-medium sector.

Is maith is eol dúinn na brúnna atá ar an earnáil ó thaobh an lucht oibre de. Tá sé ar shlí a ráite gurb é bua na Gaelscolaíochta bunrúta a cuid fadhbanna.

[Translation: The workforce pressures facing the sector are now well documented. In a way, the Irish-medium sector is a victim of its own success.]

Research from Professor Noel Purdy OBE, Dr Claire McVeigh, Dr Mark Ballentine and Dr Emilia Symington shows that Irish-medium teachers work on average 47 hours per week, significantly beyond directed time. Much of that time is consumed by translation, resource creation and compensating for the lack of Irish language materials and specialist support. There are also persistent shortages of Irish-speaking subject specialists, substitute teachers, classroom assistants and SEN professionals.

Restricted subject choice is emerging at post-primary level because recruitment is so difficult. In early years settings, particularly within the voluntary sector, staff instability and underfunding are placing enormous strain on naíscoileanna

[Translation: nursery schools]

, which are rightly described as the foundation of the sector.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat

[Translation: Thank you]

for giving way. I commend the Member for bringing forward the important Bill. Can he outline just how important the early years sector is to the success and sustainability of Irish-medium education, and why it is really important that it is truly reflected in workforce planning?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat.

[Translation: Thank you.]

Yes: the early years sector is absolutely foundational. That is the beginning of a child's entrance into an immersion setting. It is where they develop their relationship with the language. If we do not have a well-supported workforce in the nursery sector — the naíscoileanna

[Translation: nursery schools]

— the entire pipeline into the primary and post-primary sectors will be affected and undermined. That is why it is essential that workforce planning fully reflects early years, ensuring the recruitment, support and retention of staff at that critical stage. Access to staff is not an abstract issue. It affects class sizes, curriculum breadth, staff well-being and children's experience in school. Ní féidir an dualgas reachtúil leis an oideachas trí mheán na Gaeilge a spreagadh agus a éascú, ní féidir sin a chomhlíonadh ar dhóigh fhiúntach gan pleanáil struchtúrtha don lucht oibre.

[Translation: Without structured workforce planning, the statutory duty to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education cannot be meaningfully fulfilled.]

The consultation looked at workforce planning not only as a policy issue but as a rights and equality issue. Concerns were raised about equality of access, particularly for children with special educational needs, Irish Traveller children and newcomer pupils.

Data suggests that children in Irish-medium education have similar rates of special educational needs as the wider school population. Significantly fewer have statements in place, however. That points to systemic gaps in access to appropriate assessment and support through Irish. My Bill is therefore about not just workforce planning but equality of opportunity and ensuring that children who are educated through Irish are not placed at a disadvantage.

The Bill is deliberately focused. It contains two clauses. It does not attempt to solve every challenge that faces Irish-medium education. Instead, it addresses one foundational issue, which is workforce sustainability. Clause 1 inserts new article 89ZA into the Education Order 1998. First, the new article requires the Department of Education to:

"prepare and then publish a workforce plan in respect of Irish-medium education within 12 months"

of the legislation's coming into operation. That ensures that planning will begin promptly and will not be open-ended.

Secondly:

"The Department must keep the workforce plan under review and publish a revised workforce plan at intervals of not more than five years."

Workforce planning must be routine, forward-looking and, at all times, responsive to projected growth and emerging pressures.

Thirdly:

"The Minister of Education must lay a workforce plan before the Assembly as soon as possible after it has been published."

That ensures transparency and allows for scrutiny by Members and the Committee for Education. Importantly:

"Within 18 months of laying a workforce plan before the Assembly",

the Minister must publish and lay a report on the implementation of that plan. Planning is one thing, but demonstrating delivery is another. That provision will ensure both.

Clause 1 also sets out consultation requirements. In preparing a workforce plan, the Department must consult schools that provide Irish-medium education, teachers, pupils, parents, Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta (CnaG) and others as appropriate. That ensures that future plans are grounded in the lived experience of the sector.

Ina theannta sin, cuirtear ceangal ar an Roinn leis an chlásal an t-éileamh reatha agus an t-éileamh ionchais ar an lucht oibre a chur san áireamh, chomh maith le leordhóthanacht an lucht oibre reatha, earcaíocht, coinneáil agus forbairt an lucht oibre, na róil éagsúla taobh istigh den lucht oibre, agus gach cineál soláthair trí mheán na Gaeilge, lena n-áirítear suíomhanna luathbhlianta, bunscoile agus iar-bhunscoile.

[Translation: The clause further requires the Department to take into account current and anticipated workforce demand, the sufficiency of the existing workforce, recruitment, retention and development, the differing roles in the workforce and all types of Irish-medium provision, including in early years, primary and post-primary settings.]

Following consultation feedback, it was clear that the workforce plan must explicitly encompass early years practitioners, classroom assistants, SEN support staff and leadership and management roles. Retention and career progression must be addressed alongside recruitment.

For me, it is crucial — it is perhaps the most important aspect of the Bill — that the workforce plan contain measurable targets. Without measurable targets, strategy risks becoming aspiration. The Bill requires there to be benchmarks against which progress can be assessed. In essence, clause 1 creates the statutory framework for structured and accountable workforce planning.

Clause 2 is technical in nature. It provides that the Act will come:

"into operation on the day after it receives Royal Assent."

It then sets out the short title of the Bill.

Some may ask why the Bill does not go further. During the pre-consultation engagement, there was a clear appetite for a broader and more comprehensive Irish-medium education Bill. That ambition is understood, and my initial objective was to introduce a wider-ranging and more comprehensive Irish-medium education Bill to deal with inequities in curriculum and assessment resources, capital infrastructure deficits and so on. However, the Speaker's Office was clear. The Members' Bills process requires a tightly defined scope, and rather than overextend and risk getting nothing, I made a deliberate, strategic decision to focus on the structural issue that underpins many of the other issues, and that is workforce sustainability.

Without teachers, classroom assistants, early years practitioners, SEN professionals and leaders, capital investment and curriculum reform, our wider strategy cannot succeed. What the Bill does is more fundamental. It ensures that decisions about recruitment, retention, professional development and workforce support are informed by structured planning, evidence, consultation and measurable targets. It creates a statutory framework within which meaningful interventions can be developed and delivered. Getting workforce planning right will lay the foundations from which the sector can continue to grow and flourish.

In conclusion, Irish-medium education has grown because of the determination and commitment of the Irish language community, but we cannot expect that growth to continue on the back of teacher burnout, recruitment crises and short-term firefighting. Is freagra tomhaiste, dírithe, cuí é an Bille i mo thuairim ar na dúshláin atá roimh an oideachas trí mheán na Gaeilge.

[Translation: In my view, the Bill is a measured, focused and proportionate response to the challenges that Irish-medium education faces.]

I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I will begin my remarks as Chair of the Education Committee, and then I will make some brief remarks in my capacity as an Alliance MLA. I do not plan to speak for long, as the Bill sponsor and Deputy Chair of the Committee has set out that the Bill is a short, two-clause Bill, and its policy intent and effect are clear and, to my mind, do not require a huge amount of commentary.

Since the institutions were restored, the Education Committee has heard evidence on multiple occasions from Department of Education officials and from CnaG on issues that are impacting on Irish-medium education. The themes that came through all those evidence sessions were clear. There have been some disagreements around the extent to which the Department's actions in the space have addressed those challenges effectively, but there is broad agreement on the nature of the challenges that are affecting Irish-medium education.

The Bill is clear and is focused on looking at the specific issue of workforce, and the Committee has heard evidence relating to that on a number of occasions. Research over a number of years has highlighted the clear need for the Department to intervene in that space. Workforce is one of the challenges. There are also accommodation challenges, curriculum and resource development challenges and gaps in continuing professional development (CPD), but, again, the Bill sponsor has set all those out.

Other Members will, no doubt, reference much of the evidence that is available to us in the space, but the CnaG research of 2023 on workforce and Irish-medium education is probably the most relevant. Its findings were clear that, among other recommendations, the Department needed to deliver a workforce plan for Irish-medium education. The Committee has not heard any evidence that that has been substantially developed, although our understanding is that a strategy is under way, which could come to us in 2027. However, on the specific issue of a workforce plan, there does not seem to be anything on the immediate, short-term agenda.

The research was clear that any workforce plan that is developed must address the current shortfalls in the Irish-medium education workforce and the likely and assessed future needs of the sector. The Bill expands and enhances that recommendation in more detail in what the plan must include, but, to my mind, it is very much in keeping with the recommendations from that particular research.

The Committee also heard about QUB's 'Fair? Shared? Supported?' research, which engaged directly with teachers and practitioners who are working in Irish-medium settings.

That, too, reflected clearly the concerns around the workforce as a key challenge. The report recommended a targeted recruitment programme to address workforce gaps. Again, it seems to me that the Bill is in keeping with that recommendation.

Through its SEN inquiry and other evidence sessions, the Committee for Education has heard evidence in relation to some of the SEN-specific aspects of the workforce challenges facing Irish-medium education. Again, the Bill sponsor set those out clearly in his opening remarks. The research points to potentially higher levels of special educational need in Irish-medium education, although the differences are maybe not terribly significant. Certainly, however, it points to an inadequate workforce available to support those needs, including a shortage of peripatetic teachers, educational psychologists who are competent in the Irish language, classroom assistants who are competent in the Irish language and speech and language therapists who are competent in the Irish language. Perhaps, if the Bill passes Second Stage today, we can assess at Committee Stage whether the Bill could benefit from any SEN-specific provisions to ensure that that is reflected in the workforce plan, given that it has been highlighted clearly to the Committee as a specific issue. It is clear that there is a SEN layer to the workforce challenge, and it will be important to make that point at that stage.

Beyond that, I have little to add to my remarks as Committee Chair, other than to say that we have heard significant evidence on the issue from the Department and from relevant stakeholders. It seems to me that the Bill is in keeping with the challenges that the Committee has learned about. It will be for the membership of the Committee, if the Bill passes Second Stage today, to assess whether it requires amendment and what scrutiny we need to apply in terms of hearing evidence from further stakeholders.

I will now speak briefly in my capacity as an Alliance MLA. I begin by welcoming the Bill, which is a straightforward and practical intervention to address an issue that, we are all aware, has been a long-standing challenge for the Irish-medium sector. The sector has grown substantially over the past number of years, but, because of the specific challenges that the Bill sponsor has set out, the workforce has not grown at the pace required to facilitate the capacity and scope that exists for further growth. As we reflect on that, I want to reference the Department's existing statutory duty to encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education. As far as I am concerned, the Bill is a clear outworking of what that duty should already require the Department to do. If the development of Irish-medium education is hampered by workforce challenges, as it demonstrably is, the Department should already be stepping in to address that.

I would not want to say that no action is being taken in this space. The postgraduate certificate in education (PGCE) bursary scheme for Irish-medium students, which will start in September, is welcome, but it feels as though interventions have been needed for many years and have, in this case, perhaps come too late. For me, the statutory duty sits well with the Bill. It seems to me that the Bill is a fair outworking of that duty.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for giving way. I will, obviously, make my remarks later in the debate when it is my turn to respond. I appreciate that the Member rightly recognises that the Department has made progress in this area, not least as part of TransformED and through the bursary schemes. When we identified shortages in some subject-specific areas, Irish-medium education was one of those, and I approved the provision of a bursary scheme in order to create more opportunities to attract people into the workforce. In line with the statutory duty on the Department of Education, however, which the Member has referenced, when there were previous reductions in the number of students coming into teaching, they never fell on the Irish-medium sector. It was protected by the statutory duty while there were reductions in other sectors.

There is clear evidence that, because of the Department of Education during my time as Minister approving nurseries that became statutory, new school builds and bursaries, the Irish-medium sector has been able to expand, and I have happily been supporting its development. The question for Members, which I will pose it again later, is this: given the work that we are already doing and the existing statutory duty, why would we place a specific statutory duty for one sector that will not apply to any other sector when it comes to workforce issues, when those challenges are being felt in every sector and are not unique to one?

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his intervention. I risked it potentially being longer than my speech. I will try to pick up on the issues that he raised. I am happy to record that the Department has made interventions in this space. I am not trying to suggest that it has not, and I do not think that my comments suggested that. The bursary scheme is welcome, but there has been a historical issue and trend of the workforce in Irish-medium education not growing at the rate that is needed to support the demand across the board for access to Irish-medium education. As the Bill sponsor's remarks reflected, it is not just about teachers but about support staff, classroom assistants, speech and language therapists and ed psychs. It is the whole picture. That is why the Bill, to my mind, is welcome.

The Minister asked why such a duty should be placed with regard to the Irish-medium sector and not others. That is similar to some of the discussions that have been held on the integrated education side of things. There is an equity issue. If one sector is particularly impacted on by specific workforce challenges, as, I think, the Irish-medium sector is — it is different from any other sector in our system, because it requires a level of specialism and expertise to allow an immersive education experience to be delivered — it is the right and appropriate thing to do, when the statutory duty is there, to ensure that the workforce is there to meet the demand. We could get into comparing apples with pears if we said that a rule for one sector should be the same for everybody.

I will not add a huge amount other than to welcome the Bill. I look forward to seeing what transpires at the scrutiny stage. It is a short, straightforward Bill. Things may be done to enhance or amend it at Committee Stage, and we will wait to see about that. From my perspective, the impact of the Bill, if it is enacted, will ultimately depend on the quality, comprehensiveness and effective implementation of the plan that arises from it. We do not have the scope to go into the detail of exactly what that will need to look like — we would be getting ahead of ourselves to do so — but there is undoubtedly a resource implication. Resource will be required to implement a plan effectively, but I return to my comments in relation to the statutory duty. There is already a duty to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education, and the Bill does not change or depart from that; it simply puts on a statutory footing what seems to me to be a natural outworking of that statutory duty. If developing Irish-medium education requires an enhanced workforce, the Department should take the steps to deliver that. On that basis, I see no reason why it should cause undue concern for the Department, the Minister or other parties. I am therefore content to confirm my support for the Bill's passage at Second Stage today, and I commend the Bill sponsor for moving it.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Second Stage of the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill. I plan to make just a few short points and concentrate on whether there is a necessity for it. The Deputy Chair and the Chair of the Education Committee have commented on that, and it is probably where the tension lies.

Both Members who spoke mentioned the statutory duty under article 89 of the 1998 Order to encourage, facilitate and develop Irish-medium education. The Bill sponsor mentioned that in his opening remarks. That is already a substantial duty, which the Chair of the Education Committee referenced in his speech. Not every sector in Northern Ireland has the privilege of enjoying it. The Committee Chair mentioned the integrated sector: the Department has two duties towards that sector in Northern Ireland and one towards the Irish-medium sector. Neither the controlled nor the maintained sector in Northern Ireland enjoy such privileges. I understand and recognise the previous comments about other sectors facing specific issues — I hope to get to those — but I just point out that question of equity. That is important. Teachers and pupils across Northern Ireland should be aware of that.

The Department has acknowledged and recognised the challenges that the Irish-medium education (IME) sector faces. Those became clear in the consultation responses that the Bill sponsor referenced. The Minister will, no doubt, talk about this, but the Department is already addressing some of the workforce planning issues through the IME strategy, including retention, recruitment, pathways, capacity and some resource development. It is fair to say that the specifics of the IME sector are different from other sectors in Northern Ireland, in that that sector requires qualified teachers to be fluent enough in Irish to teach their specific subject. In answer to a question from the Committee Chair, the Minister referenced the bursaries that he introduced in, I think, 2025 to cover off Irish-medium teacher training and tuition fees, offering, I believe, £1,000 a month is offered to student teachers to encourage them in that area.

Structural issues were referenced by the sponsor and picked up on by the Committee Chair. There are other structural issues in teacher recruitment in Northern Ireland, and they are not specific to the IME sector. There is significant pressure across Northern Ireland to get maths teachers, chemistry teachers and physics teachers. Those are not peculiar to the IME sector; they are across —

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Will the Member give way?

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

— every sector in Northern Ireland.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I think that the Chair beat you to it. I will take an intervention from the Committee Chair and then one from Mr Sheehan.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Member for giving way. There is no argument from me at all: we have heard in Committee repeatedly about some of the challenges in recruiting teachers, particularly at post-primary specialist subject level. Does the Member agree that, if that specialist subject teacher is also required to be fluent in Irish, the challenge will be maximised for that sector and it is appropriate that, given the statutory duty, the Department should step in to address that?

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I will take the Deputy Chair's intervention at the same time.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Thanks for giving way. It is, effectively, two sides of the same coin. How many speech and language therapists dealing with children in the Irish-medium sector who have speech and learning difficulties are fluent in Irish? If that person can speak only English, that puts those children at a disadvantage.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I accept both points, and I will try to address them. I have been on the Committee for only the better part of six months, so I am probably not up to speed with some of the things that the Committee has been dealing with. However, I accept the points, and, to a degree, there is an element of chicken and egg in that regard. The Member highlighted the added requirements for someone to come in and use speech and language therapy in that context. I hope that, whilst the language is immersive in a range of ways, if a child in an IME school really needed speech and language therapy, some way could be found to address that. While I accept those points, I simply make the wider point that the issue is not just purely structural, and that it is not just purely structural in IME.

On the wider issue, my understanding is that the Department has established an Irish-medium strategy steering group and a working group to address some of the issues that have been spoken about today. A range of organisations are involved, including CnaG, the Education Authority (EA), the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), the Controlled Schools' Support Council (CSSC), the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) — that is a lot of acronyms — and Altram, as well as Irish-medium principals from across the sector. My understanding is that work is ongoing in that area — I hope that the Minister will touch on that in his closing remarks — and that the issues around workforce pressures and strategies to alleviate those are being dealt with. I hope that those groups will solve some of the problems and issues that have been highlighted today by the Bill sponsor and the Chair of the Committee. We want all sectors in Northern Ireland, regardless of where they are, what language they speak or what faith tradition they come from, to feel valued and successful in their education.

In the explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM), the Bill sponsor looked at three options: the do-nothing option; the wait-to-see-what-the-strategy-has-produced option — I am paraphrasing it a little because I gave away my copy there — and the option to introduce additional primary legislation. It is my view and that of my party that the issues that have been identified and highlighted by the sponsor and the Chair of the Education Committee today and that have come out of the consultation are, in fact, best dealt with through the work that is already ongoing by the Department of Education. That is the most appropriate mechanism for addressing those issues.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

When I opened my comments on Mr Baker's private Member's Bill yesterday, I said that there is nothing more important than our young people and making sure that they have the skills, support, infrastructure and buildings that allow them to thrive. That includes the Irish-medium sector. I was criticised by some when I divulged that a member of my family was trying to learn a bit of Irish so that she could order me a pint of Guinness when we were in Donegal. I have no objection to the Irish language. It is a lovely language.

The Bill sponsor is right: there are unique factors in the Irish-medium sector. If you need a speech and language therapist, they also need to speak Irish. If you are struggling to get a physics teacher or a chemistry or a maths teacher, Mr Martin is right: it is an additional burden. It is also an additional challenge to get male teachers. We do not talk enough about the lack of male teachers throughout our education sector in our schools and the lack of positive role-modelling that that brings.

Whilst I supported yesterday's Bill for it to go through to the next stage, my problem with this Bill is that there is an existing statutory duty. We should hold the Minister to account as to how well he is discharging his statutory duty through Assembly questions for oral answer, questions for written answer and the Education Committee. I will wait to hear what the Minister says when he gets to his feet and tells the Assembly what he is doing, but, for me, in the first instance, it is not good practice to bring a stand-alone Bill to deal with a pre-existing statutory duty.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I will give way.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

When I set out to bring the Bill forward, one of the things that I had to do was to write to the Minister and ask him what he was doing. The Minister wrote back and said that he was developing a strategy that, he hoped, would be ready by mid-2027, after the election next year. The timeline may fall; the Minister may not be here; and there may be another Minister and so on. The important point is that the Speaker directed us to write to the Minister. When the response came back, the Speaker, who is the ultimate authority when it comes to private Members' Bills, decided that the Bill should go ahead, so it seemed to me that the Speaker felt that the argument that the Minister put up was not strong enough to block the private Member's Bill from going ahead. If you are talking about the processes and why a Bill should or should not go forward, there is one reason why it should go forward.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

That is a creative reason, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I thank Mr Sheehan for his intervention. It is a bit like a judicial review: a judge may say that it is perfectly tenable to apply for a judicial review and for it to be heard, but that does not mean that you have to agree with the issue being forward for review. It was quite within process for the Speaker to say, "Mr Sheehan, bring your private Member's Bill". However, as legislators, we can still say, "I personally do not think that it is necessary".

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Yes, I will.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will talk about this further later. Part of the issue is that Members get to speak, and then a Minister provides a lot of information that Members have not had the chance to hear. That may be a procedural issue for the Assembly to consider.

The inference that Mr Sheehan has drawn is that the fact that a strategy is expected some time in 2027 suggests that nothing has been happening. When I intervened on the Chairman of the Committee, I outlined how we are discharging the statutory duty. When other sectors' numbers were being reduced, that did not apply to the Irish-medium sector. We have had positive approval of development proposals in the Irish-medium sector. We have had new builds in the Irish-medium sector. Under TransformED, we have a bursary for the Irish-medium sector. For the curriculum under TransformED, there is a distinct strand to improve the curriculum for Irish-medium education, because Irish-medium schools are being failed by the current curriculum. A whole series of evidence can therefore be produced to show how we are implementing the statutory duty, and Mr Sheehan has not reflected that yet. I cannot get involved in the decision that the Speaker would have made and whether the Speaker considered my correspondence with the Member. I do not even know whether it is appropriate for MLAs to discuss openly what are ultimately the Speaker's decisions, but that is something for the Speaker to decide on.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his intervention. I concur, and I was going to address that point. The key to making informed decisions during the debate would be to hear first what the Minister is doing to discharge his current statutory obligation and then make our points, but it is being done the wrong way around. I have, however, heard enough so far — I will listen to what the Minister has to say later — to know that there is a pre-existing statutory duty. I do not think that there is a need for fresh legislation to replicate that statutory duty, even if some think that there is.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Member for giving way. I suspected that he was drawing his remarks to a close. On the theme of the statutory duty and the fact that mechanisms are in place to hold the Minister and the Department to account, does he agree that that statutory duty, as far as I understand it, came into effect in 1998? That was 28 years ago, and, as far as I am aware, we still have not had a workforce plan for Irish-medium education, and certainly not one that is regularly reviewed and, in a proactive and agile way, responds to the needs of the sector. That suggests that perhaps the statutory duty has not provided the impetus that it should have done to deliver on the issue.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I take the point that Mr Mathison makes in his intervention. Why it has not been done since 1998, I have absolutely no idea, but I have heard the Minister and will therefore wait to see what he says when he is on his feet later. He will outline the action that he is taking. He will put that on the record in Hansard. He has answered questions about a number of things that he is doing, and he has done so succinctly.

I will cut to the chase. I suspect that the Bill will proceed to Committee Stage, and the Committee will then scrutinise it. I do not believe that there is a need for another Member's Bill to deal with a pre-existing statutory obligation. We should be dealing with any omissions in the Minister's duties through scrutiny and accountability, not through creating more legislation. I imagine that any Member could put a Member's Bill to any Minister stating that a workforce plan for x, y and z is needed. On that basis, I am not minded to support the Bill, but I will listen to what the Minister has to say so that he can convince me and my party that he is discharging his important statutory obligation to the Irish-medium sector.

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

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate, and I thank the Member to my left for introducing the Bill. To echo the sentiment of the Chair of the Education Committee, we have heard extensively about the issue. We have heard a number of panels talk about the challenges in the Irish-medium sector and with workforce planning, so I really welcome the opportunity that the Bill presents.

We must celebrate the remarkable growth of the Irish-medium sector, which has seen a 400% increase in the past 25 years. Although the demand for Irish-medium education continues to climb, teachers and school leaders in the sector rightfully contend that they feel very strongly that funding has not been matched at an appropriate level by the Department.

As has been highlighted by CnaG, the Department has failed in many ways to address serious issues: teacher retention; the production of Irish language learning resources; support for examination marking; and the need to adequately address the challenge of providing specialised staffing for Irish language-speaking students and support for children with special educational needs such as dyslexia, including the provision of support for speech and language therapy and child psychology. Those prominent outstanding concerns remain.

Despite a lack of support and investment, our Irish-medium sector teachers and staff do incredible work, as I have seen at first hand in my constituency at Gaelcholáiste Dhoire in Dungiven. So many of the staff there are on the front line, keeping the language alive and allowing it to grow and flourish every day. As someone who did not grow up speaking Irish, I find it really inspiring and encouraging to see how such schools use the language every day, which they do with our young people in such a fun and engaging way.

The workforce does that because of its incredible grá

[Translation: love.]

Its workers have a love of the language, and they bring that energy, love and effort to the classroom every day. They have a passion for our young people and a true commitment to revitalising the language in the classroom and on this island.

Whilst I recognise that many in the Department of Education equally cherish the language and work hard to support the sector, we feel strongly that that is not adequate and that more must be done to invest in our workforce and ensure that it is well supported. The Irish language has the same rights as the English language and must be treated accordingly.

Minister, I genuinely welcome your work on the Irish language. You committed funding to the Scoil Spreagtha scheme after meeting me and my colleague Patsy McGlone. I welcome the fact that, right now, we see children across the North learning the language in English-speaking classrooms. I wish that we had had that when I was at school; I would have absolutely loved it.

I will make a broader point, however. Now is the time to comprehensively deal with the real workforce challenges in the sector. Across the Irish-medium sector, staff whom I have spoken to — teachers and classroom assistants — feel frustrated and overlooked. Today's conversation is so welcome because it is about considering the investment that they will need in order to flourish.

As is well known, a disproportionate number of our Irish-medium staff teach in buildings that have long seen better days and mobile classrooms that are long past their sell-by date. They do so while delivering a first-class education, disproportionately often to children who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. There are more children in receipt of free school meals in Irish-medium schools than in English language schools.

It is perhaps less well known that children in Irish-medium schools are disproportionately likely to have special educational needs. Despite that, they lack the specialised language support that they so desperately need. Fundamentally, that is not a stand-alone education issue but an equality issue.

I also note that many talented Irish-speaking teachers often go over the border to the South, because they are better paid there, and who can blame them? Here, it is time to look at the long term to ensure continuity of Irish-medium education.

The Minister has stated clearly his aims to reduce educational inequality, to advance achievement and to support teachers across the North. We say today that the Irish-medium sector must not be forgotten, that its particular needs must be recognised and that the Assembly must lay down a framework that will finally address its concerns.

Parents, teachers and pupils in the Irish-medium sector across the North are listening to the debate today, expecting to be treated and supported in the same way as they would be in other sectors. By advancing the Bill, we will go one step further towards addressing their needs. It is important that we do so without delay.

In closing, I will be frank in looking at the wider neglect of the Irish-medium sector. Our teachers across the North are in classrooms that are falling apart. When you speak to teachers and school leaders in the north-west in particular, you hear that there is so much mould in the classrooms, which have been there since the 1970s — there are also challenges in west Belfast — and that is not fair. Our teachers and school leaders show up every day wanting to share their learning and educate our young people, but they are in facilities that are not appropriate and that desperately need investment.

The SDLP will support the Bill at Second Stage and welcome it as an opportunity to talk about the ongoing challenges in the Irish-medium sector. Thank you very much, Pat, for introducing it.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I commend my friend and colleague for introducing this important legislation. His passion for and commitment to the Irish language has not gone unnoticed in my constituency or further afield. Before I start my contribution, I will say this: I said, yesterday, that we all have the opportunity to close gaps by introducing legislation in areas that Departments may not be prioritising or on issues that are falling through the gaps. It is important that the opportunity to do that exists and that it is utilised by all Members.

The Identity and Language Act 2022 was a significant milestone in the long struggle to achieve historic recognition of the Irish language in the North. It followed many years of campaigning and is a credit to the vibrant, growing and thriving Irish language community across the island, which never gave up and the members of which made their voices heard. That is of particular importance, given that Irish speakers have been discriminated against, excluded and ignored by the state. The Identity and Language Act was not, however, the end of the journey. The work to enhance provision for the Irish language in our society goes on, and Sinn Féin will play its part in driving that forward.

Irish-medium education is one of the fastest growing sectors in the North, but growth has outpaced workforce planning, leading to concern about teacher supply, training routes and specialist support. The Bill will formalise a strategic approach to addressing serious and persistent staffing shortages across all roles, including teachers, classroom assistants and support staff. During the consultation process, a number of issues were highlighted that are specific to the Irish-medium education workforce. I will focus on special educational needs provision and assessment.

SEN provision in Irish-medium education is critical. Pupils learning through Irish face higher levels of identified need but do not receive as much appropriate support as their English-medium peers. The gap is structural, linguistic and systemic, and it directly affects equity of access and educational outcomes. Irish-medium schools have a higher proportion of pupils with SEN than English-medium schools do. A 2024 report highlighted the fact that, for the 2023-24 academic year, 22·5% of Irish-medium pupils were recorded as having SEN, versus 19·1% in English-medium settings. At post-primary level, that gap widens to 30·1% versus 18·2%. Despite those facts, Irish-medium pupils are less likely to receive a formal statement of SEN. That disparity is due, partly, to the lack of assessment tools that are available in the Irish language and the absence of specialised staff in statutory support services, such as educational psychologists who are fluent in Irish, speech and language therapists who can assess bilingually and SEN support staff who are trained in an immersion context. There is no formal structure to ensure linguistic alignment between pupils and specialised professionals. Consequently, Irish-medium pupils with SEN can be and have been misidentified or missed completely, leading to delayed interventions, inaccurate diagnoses and reduced access to statutory support.

I will finish on this point. This happens regularly across the board, but has happened a lot in my constituency. When children are learning through the medium of Irish, particularly in naíscoil

[Translation: nursery]

, and additional needs are identified but early intervention is not in place, parents are advised to take their children out of that setting and put them into English-medium settings.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. I recognise that issue and declare an interest as the parent of a child who went through Gaelscoil Uí Néill in Coalisland and is now in the Irish-medium sector, attending St Joseph's Grammar School in Donaghmore. That has been a constant issue. Does the Member agree that it puts constant pressure on the teaching staff and school leaders, who feel that they have to do extra work in order to ensure that those children are able to stay in their school? In Gaelscoil Uí Néill, the principal did Makaton with all the children in his school from day dot. He put in extra work every day, as did his teaching staff and classroom assistants. That is unfair.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

It is unfair. You have to ask yourself, "Where else does that happen?". It is very much an equality issue. That is where I want to leave it today: it is an equality issue. I commend the Member for introducing the Bill. It is so important.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

No headsets are required for my contribution. Unfortunately, I have no Irish, or very little; not enough to have the confidence to say it in any remarks today. I think that I can count to 13 confidently, but I would not get much further than that.

The Irish-medium sector has seen significant growth over the past decade. In 2001, there were about 1,600 pupils, and, in 2025, there were over 7,000. That is a real testament to the dedication of those working in the sector. When I joined the Education Committee, one of the first events that I attended was at St Mary's, where I got to see first-hand and learn about the value of immersive education. It goes beyond just learning a language. There is evidence of how it benefits memory, problem-solving and creativity, and, of course, it is essential in order to allow the Irish language to continue to grow and thrive.

The sector faces challenges that are similar to those faced by every sector across the North. However, reports from Stranmillis University College and Queen's University Belfast, and the 'A Fair Start' report, outline the fact that the Irish-medium sector faces specific and significant workforce and resource pressures. Given that that is the case and that, as has been noted today, the Department has a statutory duty under article 89 of the Education Order:

"to encourage and facilitate the development of Irish-medium education",

I will vote for the Bill to go through to Committee Stage.

I fully accept that the Department is continuing to work on the development of a strategy for Irish-medium education, which is due in 2027. I imagine that that means that some will say that a workforce plan is not required, which we have heard today, as it may come forward as part of that strategy. However, we have seen strategies come forward that exclude key facets, with things being delayed even when they are in a strategy, and the Bill addresses that. There is enough here to say that I understand why the Bill has been introduced, and I have no issue with its coming forward in that context.

From my reading of the Bill as introduced, I do not see any significant issues with it. I look forward to hearing evidence at the Education Committee. I would like to better understand what will be delivered through the workforce plan and what the sector really needs it to deliver. Clause 1 states that the Department must take into account areas such as:

"current and future expected demands upon the workforce".

Given that there are no specific interventions required in the plan, I would like to know what confidence there is that, as it stands, it will deliver what is needed for the workforce. For example, the Stranmillis research on workload in the Irish-medium sector made clear recommendations on the expansion of initial teacher training and the development of an apprenticeship route for classroom assistants. I understand and accept that the intention of the legislation is simply to establish a statutory framework in order to ensure that whatever actions the Department takes are timely and informed by robust consultation.

I look forward to working with colleagues and the Irish-medium sector to ensure that the Bill can progress. I hope that it makes a difference.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I welcome the introduction of this important legislation here today by my colleague Pat Sheehan. The work that he has done not just on the Bill but for the Irish-medium sector over many years is truly commendable. The Bill reflects the ambition and determination of the Irish-medium sector. A sector that has grown, expanded and delivered for children, often without the support that it deserves. The reality is that Irish-medium education has not been carried by the system; it has been carried by people — passionate educators, committed parents and a workforce that continues to go above and beyond day in, day out. That goodwill can only stretch so far.

Nowhere is the pressure more acute than in early years. Early years is not just the starting point of education; it is the foundation from which everything flows. Yet, time and again, I hear from Irish-medium childcare providers, early years settings, our naíscoileanna

[Translation: nursery schools]

and organisations such as Altram that they are struggling to recruit and retain staff. They are trying to build immersive language environments for our youngest children at the very stage where language development is most critical, but they are doing so with limited workforce support and very little strategic planning. If we do not get early years right, we are setting the entire system up to struggle, because that is where the pipeline into Irish-medium primary and post-primary education starts, and that is why the Bill matters. It allows us to finally start building the workforce across the entire Irish-medium sector, including early years, which is so often overlooked but is fundamental, because, without that foundation, growth simply will not be sustainable.

Alongside that, we need to talk about those who are too often overlooked in the conversations: our classroom assistants and our special educational needs coordinators (SENCOs). Let us be clear: they are not an add-on to the system; they are its backbone. They sit beside a child who is struggling to communicate, and they calm, support and encourage, often quietly and without recognition. They are the ones who know those children inside out. In Irish-medium settings, they are doing all that through the medium of Irish, supporting not just learning but language acquisition, confidence and inclusion. Yet, despite the vital role that they play, they are too often undervalued, under-supported and left out of workforce planning, and that has to change.

We also need to speak honestly about children with additional needs, because the consequences of the workforce gaps are much more profound for those children. I hear from parents who are already fighting every day to get the support that their child needs, only to face an additional barrier because that support is not available through the medium of Irish. Children are assessed, supported and sometimes misunderstood because the support is not delivered in the language that they are learning through. That is not just a gap in provision; it is a failure to meet those children where they are, and it places an unfair burden on the families who are simply trying to do what is best for their child, because, for a child with additional needs, communication is everything, and, when the communication is not in the right language, we are not giving the child the very best chance to succeed.

That is why the conversation about the workforce matters so much. It is about having the right people with the right skills, in the right language, to properly support every child. When I speak to school staff in my constituency of South Down — in Downpatrick and Castlewellan — I see the growth, energy and commitment to Irish-medium education, but I also hear the same message time and time again that the system is not keeping up. There is a clear shortage not just of teachers but of the wider workforce, including early years staff, classroom assistants and Irish-speaking allied health professionals, and the consequences are real. Children are being supported through a language that is not their language of learning; staff are being stretched to breaking point; and families are worrying about whether the support that their child needs will be there. That is not equality.

The Minister has pointed to the forthcoming Irish-medium education strategy as a reason for the Bill not being required. However, there is little confidence that another strategy will be delivered — certainly not in this mandate — and it will not be as concise and to the point as the Bill. I am not saying that nothing is happening in the Irish-medium area, but it is not enough to address the acute problems. In the meantime, the sector is left waiting, while the workforce pressures grow, children go without the support that they need and staff are stretched to breaking point. They are tired of it. They are tired of being treated as an add-on and of being something that is always promised for tomorrow but never prioritised today. The strategy will not recruit a classroom assistant or train an early years worker, and it will not put an Irish-speaking language therapist in front of a child who needs that support today. However, the Bill will, and that is why it matters.

Whilst the Bill is narrow in scope, it is about much more than numbers or workforce planning; it is about recognising the reality on the ground, valuing the people who hold the system together and finally matching the growth of Irish-medium education with the support that it needs. No child should be disadvantaged because of the language that they learn through, and no workforce should be expected to carry a system without the backing of the system itself.

If we are serious about equality, we must be serious about investing time and effort in the people who make it possible, and the Bill is a step in the right direction. I, therefore, welcome the Bill as a significant step towards bringing about a workforce that can nurture and sustain the growth of Irish-medium education.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. The Member mentioned equality. I agree with her, completely, that equality is incredibly important. Does she agree that equality across all sectors of Northern Ireland's schools — controlled, maintained, integrated and Irish-medium — is important?

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Absolutely, but, as has already been pointed out, Irish-medium education is on the back foot. That is why we are trying to bring it in line with the rest of the sectors.

As I was saying, I welcome the Bill as a significant step towards bringing about a workforce that can nurture and sustain the growth of Irish-medium education, thus ensuring that the children in that sector are placed on an equal footing with the others. I urge everyone to support the Bill.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Before I start my speech, I take the opportunity — the first that I have had — to welcome Julie to the House. I congratulate her on her new role. I wish Gary and your family the very best on what must be a very difficult path. We are thinking about you and Gary. I look forward to working with you.

Tá áthas an domhain orm tacú leis an Bhille atá á mholadh ag mo chomhghleacaí, Pat Sheehan. Cad é croí an ábhair seo? Tá, gur rud an-bhunúsach ach an-tábhachtach é an bille seo. Bille a bhaineann le rud simplí amháin agus is é sin an phleanáil. B’fhéidir go gcuireann an fás faoin Ghaelscolaíocht iontas ar chuid de na daoine, ach ní chuireann sé lá iontais ormsa. Tá athbheochan, paisean agus grá don teanga amuigh ansin. Is é an rud a deirtear agus a iarrtar sa Bhille seo ar an Roinn Oideachais ná go gcaithfidh sé coiscéim a choinneáil linn.

Leagann an Bille dualgas dlí ar an Roinn a machnamh a dhéanamh, breathnú ar an éileamh atá ann, agus a chinntiú go bhfuil an lucht oibre againn le freastal air. Ní hamháin anois, ach as seo amach sna blianta atá romhainn. Ar ndóigh, baineann sé sin le múinteoirí. Ach tá i bhfad níos mó ná sin i gceist agus tá sé tábhachtach sin a lua. Baineann sé le cúntóirí ranga. Baineann sé le hoibrithe luathbhlianta. Baineann sé le foireann tacaíochta, le soláthar riachtanas speisialta oideachais, le síceolaithe oideachais, agus le gach duine a bhfuil ról acu in oideachas ár bpáistí.

Tá a fhios ag gach aon duine a bhfuil eolas acu ar an earnáil nach ar mhúinteoirí amháin a fheidhmíonn scoileanna. Is ar fhoirne a fheidhmíonn siad; is ar phobail a fheidhmíonn siad; agus is orthu sin atá an Ghaelscolaíocht bunaithe. Tá sí bunaithe ar phaisean. Tá sí bunaithe ar fhuinneamh. Tá sí bunaithe ar dhaoine a chreideann go láidir go bhfuil luach agus fiúntas inár dteanga. Sin an bonn ar cruthaíodh an earnáil agus an Gaeloideachas air.

An rud atá de dhíth ar an earnáil anois ná tacaíocht fhiúntach le cur leis an fhás sin. Tá an t-éileamh ann. Fíor-éileamh atá ann agus tá sé ag méadú go gasta. Tá an fás sin le feiceáil go soiléir, nó tarraingníodh aird sna meáin ar na mallaibh go bhfuil fás 400% ann i líon na bpáistí atá ag freastal ar an Ghaeloideachas ó 2001 a bhí ann. Ní fás suarach é sin, ní hea, ach forbairt ollmhór. Taobh thiar de na huimhreacha sin tá tuismitheoirí agus teaghlaigh a roghnaigh an Ghaelscolaíocht dá bpáistí.

Mar is eol daoibh uile anseo, mar gur luaigh mé roimhe — agus tá mé fíorbhródúil as —gur tháinig mise mé féin tríd an Ghaelscolaíocht. D’fhreastail mé ar an naíscoil, chuaigh mé go Bunscoil Phobal Feirste, agus ansin ar aghaidh go Coláiste Feirste. Nuair a d’fhreastail mé ar Choláiste Feirste, bhí thart ar 350 againn ann. Tá breis is 1,000 dalta ag freastal ar an scoil chéanna inniu. Tá an scoil lán go doras. Ní háibhéil ar bith sin. Tá sí ag borradh léi, rud a léiríonn go bhfuil gá leis an dara campas. Is léir uaidh sin gur sin an bealach a bhfuil an earnáil ag dul.

D’oibrigh mo mhamaí mar chúntóir ranga i mBunscoil an tSléibhe Dhuibh ar Bhóthar na Carraige Báine. Tá mo dheirfiúr ag obair mar chúntóir ranga riachtanas speisialta oideachais anois ar Bhóthar Seoighe. Tá cairde de mo chuid ag obair mar mhúinteoirí i naíscoileanna, i mbunscoileanna agus i meánscoileanna. Tá siad mar chuid de ghluaiseacht atá ag tacú le páistí, ag tacú le teaghlaigh, agus ag neartú ár dteanga lá i ndiaidh lae.

Mar sin de, nuair a labhraímid faoi phleanáil lucht oibre, táimid ag neartú na hearnála, táimig ag neartu na n-oibrithe agus na ndaltaí. Táimid ag caint faoina chinntiú go mbeidh na deiseanna céanna ag an chéad ghlúin eile de pháistí a thiocfas isteach sa Ghaelscolaíocht.

Aithnítear sa Bhille seo an rath atá ar an Ghaelscolaíocht agus tacaíonn sé leis. Cinnteofar leis nach gcuirfidh an easpa pleanála cúl ar an fhás. Tá teachtaireacht shoiléir chugainn ann nach athsmaoineamh í an Ghaelscolaíocht. Is cuid ríthábhachtach dár gcóras oideachais í atá ag fás léi, agus a bhfuil cothrom na Féinne tuillte aici. Mar sin de, tacaím leis an Bhille, agus impím ar Chomhaltaí tacú leis chomh maith.

[Translation: I am delighted to support the Bill from my colleague Pat Sheehan. When you strip it all back, it is about doing something very basic but very important. It is about planning. Irish-medium education is growing at a pace that does not surprise me but which might surprise others. There is a revival, a passion and a love for the language. What the Bill says to the Department of Education is this: you need to keep up. The Bill places a legal responsibility on the Department to sit down, look at the demand and make sure that we have the people in place to meet it. Not just now but into the future. Yes, that means teachers. Of course it does. However, it is much bigger than that and it is important to state as much. It is about classroom assistants. It is about early years workers.It is about support staff, SEN provision, educational psychologists and every person who plays a role in a child’s education. Anyone who knows the sector knows this: schools do not run on teachers alone. They run on teams, on communities and on people who care deeply about what they do. That is what Irish-medium education is built on. It is built on passion. It is built on energy. It is built on a real belief in the value of our language. That is the basis on which Irish-medium education is built. That was the basis upon which the sector and IME were built. What the sector needs now is worthwhile support to match that growth. The demand is there. It is real, and it is rising fast. We have all seen it. It was even highlighted recently in news articles that pointed to a 400% increase in children attending Irish-medium education from 2001. That is no mean increase. That is huge. Behind every one of those numbers are parents and families choosing Irish-medium education for their child. Everyone here knows, because I have said it before —I am very proud of the fact — that I am a product of Irish-medium education. I started in naíscoil, went through Bunscoil Phobal Feirste and then on to Coláiste Feirste. When I was in Coláiste Feirste, there were perhaps 350 of us. Today, that same school has more than 1,000 pupils. It is bursting at the seams. Literally. It is thriving, but it also shows that there is a need for a second campus.That is a clear sign of where the sector is going. My mother worked as a classroom assistant in Bunscoil an tSléibhe Dhuibh on the Whiterock Road. Now, my sister works as a SEN classroom assistant on the Shaws Road. I have many friends who are teachers in naíscoileanna, bunscoileanna and meánscoileanna. They are part of building something bigger: supporting children, supporting families and strengthening our language every day. Therefore, when we talk about workforce planning, we are strengthening the sector, we are strengthening workers and we are strengthening pupils. We are talking about making sure that the next generation of children can come into Irish-medium education. The Bill is about recognising success in Irish-medium education and backing it. It is about making sure that growth is not held back by a lack of planning. It is about sending a clear message that Irish-medium education is not an afterthought. It is a vital, growing part of our education system, and it deserves to be treated that way. Therefore I support the Bill, and I urge others to do the same.]

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Tacaím leis an Bhille seo. Is reachtaíocht é atá ciallmhar, riachtanach agus atá i bhfad thar téarma. Tá ceist shimplí i gcroílár an ábhair seo: an ndéanfaimid pleanáil cheart do thodhchaí na Gaelscolaíochta, nó an bhfágfaimid faoin chinniúint í? Tá an Ghaelscolaíocht ag fás ar fud an Tuaiscirt. Ní raibh riamh oiread tuismitheoirí ag roghnú na Gaelscolaíochta dá bpáistí, agus tá pobail á tógáil ón bhun aníos, nó tá bród orthu as ár dteanga. Feicim é i mo thoghcheantar féin. D'fhreastail mo thriúr páistí féin ar Ghaelscoil Phádraig Naofa i gCrois Mhic Lionnáin, atá ar cheann de na Gaelscoileanna rathúla ar fud an Iúir agus Ard Mhacha. Ní hé amháin go bhfuil na scoileanna sin ag cur oideachas roimh ár n-aos óg, is amhlaidh atá siad ag cur leis an chiall atá acu dá bhféiniúlacht agus leis an mhuinín atá acu astu féin. Níl aon teorainn leis na buntáistí.

[Translation: I rise in support of this Bill. It is legislation that is practical, necessary, and long overdue. At its heart, this is about a simple question: will we properly plan for the future of Irish-medium education or continue to leave it to chance? Across the North, Irish-medium education is growing. Parents are choosing it in record numbers, and communities are building it from the ground up with real pride in our language. I see that in my own constituency. Gaelscoil Phádraig Naofa i gCrois Mhic Lionnáin is where my own three children attended school. It is one of many thriving Gaelscoileanna across Newry and Armagh, schools that are not only educating our young people but strengthening identity and confidence. The benefits are endless.]

Despite that success, however, the workforce needed to sustain the sector is simply not there. We see teacher shortages, limited subject choice and staff under real pressure, and children, particularly those with additional needs, struggle to access support in their native language. That is not sustainable and not acceptable. Some will point to strategies that are in development, but strategies come and go, Ministers change and priorities shift.

What the Bill does is different. It places a legal duty on the Department of Education to plan, act and report. It moves us from short-term thinking to long-term accountability. The demand for action is clear. More than 500 consultation responses were received, with overwhelming support for addressing workforce shortages and strengthening Irish-medium education. That is not a marginal issue but a clear mandate.

Baineann sé seo le cearta: an ceart chun oideachais, agus an ceart chun rochtain a fháil ar oideachas trí do theanga féin. Mura bhfuil an lucht oibre ann, níl na cearta sin á mbaint amach go hiomlán.

[Translation: This is also about rights: the right to education and the right to access that education through your own language. Without the workforce in place, those rights are not being fully realised.]

That is not bureaucracy; it is responsible governance.

Tá an Ghaelscolaíocht ag troid le blianta fada ar son an chomhionannais. Tá an Bille seo ag iarraidh na hiarrachtaí sin a shárú. Tá sé in am pleanáil a dhéanamh. Tá sé in am infheistíocht a dhéanamh. Tá sé in am beart a dhéanamh. Impím ar Chomhaltaí tacú leis an Bhille.

[Translation: Irish-medium education has spent decades fighting for equality. The Bill is about moving beyond that. It is time to plan. It is time to invest. It is time to deliver. I urge Members to support the Bill.]

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Bill is not about fairness. It is a Bill about special treatment and elevating one section of our education system above others. In light of the provisions in the Bill, let me spell out why I say that.

Clause 1 places a legal duty on the Department to produce an Irish-medium education workforce plan. The only legislation for our schools that even comes close to that is the Integrated Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. Let us look at what that Act states. It requires the Department to "encourage and facilitate" integrated education, but it does not require a workforce plan.

Clause 2 of the Bill sets out what the plan must contain. There must be an assessment of the current workforce, an assessment of future need and proposals to meet that need, not for all schools and not for every child but just for Sinn Féin's special category of school — schools in the Irish-medium sector — which, as the Bill shows, it wants to elevate above all others.

Clause 3 then requires the Department to consult specified bodies in preparing that plan. Again, that is not general good practice; it is a statutory consultation tied to a single sector. Where is the equivalent legal requirement for controlled schools, maintained schools, special educational needs and integrated schools? Again, they are treated as secondary at best, not worthy of consideration in the Bill.

Clause 4 requires the Department to publish the plan and report on its implementation. The Bill wants us to move from planning to accountability mechanisms in law — accountability, but only for one sector.

Clause 5 completes the picture, because it requires the Department to review and update the plan at defined intervals. That is not simply a one-off exercise; it is a rolling statutory planning cycle being imposed for one sector and one sector alone.

Let us be clear about what the Bill does. Under clause 1, the Department must produce a plan. Under clause 2, the Department must include specific workforce detail. Under clause 3, the Department must consult in a prescribed way. Under clause 4, the Department must publish and report. Under clause 5, the Department must repeat the process. That is precisely what the Integrated Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 does not do. It sets direction; this Bill sets instruction. Therefore, a question arises: if it is right to legislate to that level of detail for Irish-medium education, why is it not right to do so for the rest of the education system?

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Where is the statutory workforce plan for the controlled sector? I am happy to give way.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I am just wondering where the TUV's workforce plan is for other sectors that, you feel, are being discriminated against. Yesterday, you said that you were not an MLA at the time and missed some deadlines. However, your predecessor was here: where were his ambitions?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Here, we have deflection. I was hoping that the Bill sponsor would come in to alleviate some of my concerns, but, no, Mr Baker decides to rise to deflect from the questions and concerns that I have raised.

Sinn Féin is deliberately, in the Bill, trying to elevate one sector over the others. Mr Baker, where is the legislative framework for SEN staff? I know that you are passionate about that issue. The Assembly went into recess a number of weeks ago, so where is the legislative framework? Why is not contained in your mate Mr Sheehan's Bill? Where is an equivalent duty placed on the Department for all the education sectors? I am happy to give way to the Bill sponsor.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

First, thanks for giving way. Secondly, if you have been listening to the debate, you will have heard that there are unique challenges for the Irish-medium sector that do not exist in any other sector. That is part of the rationale behind the Bill: to bring the Irish-medium sector up to an equal footing with all other sectors. It is not about discriminating against other sectors.

I suppose that I would like to ask a question, because I honestly do not understand why there is such hostility from you and your party not just towards the Irish-medium education sector but towards the Irish language in general and anything connected to Irish culture. Why does that hostility exist in that way? It also exists in the DUP.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The hostility that you talk about exists because the Irish language has been weaponised against unionism. You can put your fingers in your ears and close off unionist concerns, but Irish creates a chill factor. There are polls that back that up.

You talk about discrimination, Mr Sheehan: that is exactly what the Bill creates by prioritising Irish-medium education over all other sectors. There are challenges in all sectors in education. You sit on the Education Committee: you should know that. I sit on a board of governors. I am acutely aware of the problems that exist in all sectors in the education system. What you want to do in your Bill is not to bring Irish-medium education up to the same level but to elevate it above every other sector.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for giving way. I do not understand how it is discriminatory to ask that a workforce, including child psychologists and speech and language therapists, be planned for, particularly when it comes to children with SEN. Is it not discriminatory not to plan ahead and make sure that those people are in place for children coming through Irish-medium education?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Where is that request for the rest of the sectors?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Bring it forward.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I am not the one who has introduced a private Member's Bill; Mr Sheehan is. Where is that request for the rest of the sectors? That is why I say that it is discriminatory. Today, the House must decide whether it is content to move from supporting sectors in principle to designing and directing one sector above the others.

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

I thank the Member for giving way. I say firmly that there is nothing to fear from the Irish language. Members of the Protestant community have been some of the biggest advocates of protecting our language and heritage. There is a saying in Irish: ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine. While it translates literally as "in each other's shadow we live", metaphorically, it means that we rely on each other for shelter from the storm. Would it not be better if that philosophy and approach to our shared language were to be adopted by your party and unionism in general? It is a language that is owned by us all.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I have no problem with the Irish language, but I have a problem with what, as the Bill eloquently shows and exposes, Sinn Féin and nationalism are trying to do, which is to put Irish above English. That is what it is all about. In response to the junior Minister, where are the workforce plans for the rest of the sectors?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will the Member give way?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I am happy to give way. Point me to those plans.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Why do you not bring those proposals forward for the other sectors? The Bill is about a plan for Irish-medium education. If you want one for other sectors, bring it forward.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Once again, I say that you have introduced this private Member's Bill. You have chosen to elevate Irish above the rest of the sectors. You do not have a response to that, apart from saying, "Oh, why do you not bring those plans forward?". Do we then bring plans forward for each sector? Is it not up to the Education Minister to bring a plan to the House that puts everybody on a par with one another and on an equal footing, instead of what Mr Sheehan is trying to do? It will be no surprise, because of what he is attempting, which is to prioritise Irish-medium education above all other sectors and make it a special case, that I will not support the legislation moving to the next stage.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call the Minister of Education to respond to the debate.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Deputy Speaker.

I acknowledge the intent behind the private Member's Bill, and I recognise the many teachers, school leaders, classroom assistants, other support staff, parents, pupils and representatives of sectoral bodies who have contributed to discussions about the future workforce needs of Irish-medium education. Their commitment to ensuring high-quality education through the medium of Irish is clear, and I record my appreciation of their ongoing work and dedication.

I have visited many Irish-medium schools. Colleagues in the Assembly invited me to do so, and I thoroughly enjoyed those experiences. I was made very welcome, and I admired the education that was being provided to those young people. I have sought to address concerns that have been brought to me by the Irish-medium sector when it comes to education and the sector's needs, as you would expect any Education Minister to do for any sector. Those needs vary, and I will outline a range of issues on which the Irish-medium sector has concerns, as well as how we seek to support it.

As a Minister, I have been actively involved in taking decisions to provide development proposals for nursery provision. I have also actively taken decisions to move forward new builds for the Irish-medium sector. I know that the narrative of having a DUP Education Minister who is proactively engaged with and is encouraging towards Irish-medium education does not always suit some Members in the House. At times, I have listened to political comments made by some commentators and some in the House, and I have said to myself, "That must not be relevant to the Department of Education", because I do not think that Members will find any evidence of any form of inequality of treatment of the Irish-medium sector by me as Minister of Education.

Mr McNulty talked about unionism collectively and broadly having nothing to fear. This unionist Minister has absolutely nothing to fear, nor have I shown any concerns in that respect. Indeed, Cara Hunter rightly said that, when she and her colleague Patsy McGlone came to me about a particular project — Scoil Spreagtha — that had experienced funding cuts, asking me to engage in finding a solution in order for that organisation to continue to provide a taster of Irish for pupils in English-speaking schools, I proactively engaged and found a solution and provided funding of some £100,000 to that organisation. Therefore, I am content that I have a track record that demonstrates my bona fides as a Minister for all when it comes to Irish-medium education.

I will give way to Mr McNulty.

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

I thank the Minister for giving way. We were very grateful for your interventions in respect of Scoil Spreagtha and for your continuing support for that scheme and the competence with which you acted to save that scheme and protect it going forward. Go raibh maith agat.

[Translation: Thank you.]

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr McNulty. Forgive me for not noting that you were at that meeting and made the case for the organisation as well.

Today's debate gives us an opportunity to consider the strengths and the pressures in Irish-medium education and to reflect on how the Executive and the Department can best support that important and growing sector. Before I turn to the detail of the Bill, let me signpost briefly what I intend to cover. I will speak first about the aims of the Bill. I will then address the current workforce challenges in Irish-medium education. After that, I will outline the work that the Department is already taking forward, including the development of a dedicated Irish-medium education strategy. Finally, I will set out my initial view on the legislative proposals that are before the Assembly today.

At its core, the Bill seeks to place a statutory duty on the Department to prepare and publish a workforce plan for Irish-medium education and progress reviews against it. It proposes that the first plan be published within one year of the Act's coming into operation and that updated plans be published at intervals of no more than five years. It also places duties on the Minister to consult widely with schools, teachers, parents, — let me try — Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, more commonly known as CnaG, and others across the sector. It requires measurable targets and a report to the Assembly on the implementation of each plan within 18 months.

My Department understands that the sector faces a number of well-recognised and long-standing pressures. Irish-medium education has experienced sustained growth in recent years, and that brings with it new demands on staffing, training, leadership, resources and support services. Consultation responses on this private Member's Bill, as well as research from Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, Stranmillis University College, Queen's University Belfast and others, highlights shortages of teachers, classroom assistants and SEN professionals with the requisite level of Irish. Teachers also report considerable additional workload from preparing appropriate resources, translating materials and supporting pupils with differing levels of language exposure. Additionally, school leaders highlight issues with buildings, classroom space and access to specialist support. Those are real challenges across the whole education system, some of which are felt most keenly in Irish-medium education and other sectors. They can affect not only staff but the quality of provision for children and the ability of schools to plan for growth.

Some Sinn Féin Members are keen to attack TransformED, but I think that they understand it, and, in understanding it, they will know that TransformED has recognised the importance of the workforce in the delivery of quality education and for Irish-medium education and our system as a whole. While I recognise the intention behind the Bill, I believe that it is important to note that a substantial programme of work is already in place. The Department has established an Irish-medium strategy steering group and a working group that involves CnaG, the EA, CCEA, CCMS, CSSC, Altram and representatives from Irish-medium schools. Those groups are already in the process of developing the Department's first dedicated Irish-medium education strategy, which will set out actions to address teacher supply, leadership development, SEN provision, early years capacity and the availability of immersion-appropriate resources. That work reflects extensive consultation with the same stakeholders that have been identified in the Bill. It ensures that all voices are heard without introducing statutory rigidity.

Initial teacher education intake numbers for Irish-medium education have been protected, even at times when reductions were required elsewhere. Members have referenced equality. Whenever reductions took place, preferential treatment — inequality, if one could describe it as that — was afforded to the Irish-medium sector. People will say that that was the right thing to do. When reductions were applied to every other sector, that did not apply. There was not equality of cuts to the Irish-medium sector, which was given preferential treatment. People can justify that as being the right thing to do. It is not the case that the Bill addresses inequality or the Irish-medium sector being treated as inferior to other sectors. Members have highlighted that there is already a statutory duty and an enhancement of protection that is not afforded to other sectors. The Bill adds further rights on top of existing rights that do not extend to other sectors.

Through TransformED, a new teacher training bursary scheme is being introduced, with Irish-medium education highlighted as one of the priority areas that is experiencing the most acute shortage. I say to the Sinn Féin Members that that shows that TransformED is delivering for the Irish-medium sector.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Education Authority is progressing innovative work on the use of artificial intelligence to reduce teacher workload in Irish-medium education settings and plans to appoint accredited AI leads in every Irish-medium school. The Department of Education continues to work with partners to explore additional pathways for fluent Irish speakers to enter the profession, including for entrants from other jurisdictions and alternative training routes. All of that demonstrates that the issues that are highlighted by the Bill are already being not just actively considered but addressed.

The question for the Assembly today is not whether workforce challenges exist — they clearly do, and I agree — but whether legislation is the most appropriate mechanism to address them. My view, which I have set out previously in correspondence — Mr Sheehan referenced that — is that legislation is not necessary and may, in fact, constrain our ability to respond flexibly to changing circumstances. A statutory requirement to publish a workforce plan within 12 months, followed by fixed five-year cycles, does not reflect the dynamic nature of the sector. Growth patterns vary, recruitment pipelines shift and needs evolve in ways that may require more responsive action than a fixed review period would allow. Furthermore, the Bill creates a planning framework that would require funding for the potential measures that a workforce plan might identify. As the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum acknowledges, additional resources would be required to deliver the administrative duties that would be created by the Bill.

Introducing a statutory duty in one specific education sector may also, rightly, raise questions about parity of treatment for other sectors, which are also facing significant workforce challenges. Introducing statutory-based planning now risks creating a structural imbalance between sectors. It also risks creating unknown and unintended consequences that could have a negative impact on the broader workforce and that within Irish-medium education. I am keen to avoid duplication of effort or diversion of focus. The development of the Irish-medium education strategy already provides the mechanism for targeted, evidence-based planning. It involves all the key partners that the Bill has identified, and it will allow for ongoing review, refinement and collaborative decision-making.

Let me be clear: I share the ambition that Irish-medium education should continue to thrive and that it should do so on a strong and sustainable foundation. Our children deserve high-quality education, access to the right support at the right time and school environments where teachers and staff have the resources and professional development that they need in order to deliver excellent education. The work that is already under way in the Department is aimed squarely at delivering on those ambitions. The TransformED work will make a positive difference across all schools, and the Irish-medium education strategy will mark a significant step forward in strengthening the sector, ensuring stability in teacher supply, improving SEN support, enhancing leadership capacity and addressing the operational pressures that schools have articulated.

In conclusion, I acknowledge the genuine concerns around workforce issues in the Irish-medium sector and in the wider education system. I reaffirm recognition of the Department's statutory duty to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education, and I emphasise that a major strategic programme of work is already under way to address the challenges in the sector. The most effective way forward is to complete and implement the Irish-medium education strategy, which is already designed to provide the coordinated, evidence-based and responsive approach that the sector needs. I look forward to continuing to work closely with Members, with Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta, with teachers and with the wider community as we take forward that important agenda.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Minister, thank you.

Members, before I move to my next point, I will add to the welcome expressed by Aisling Reilly to Julie Middleton, our new Member. I had the pleasure of speaking to Julie privately yesterday, and I know that she was welcomed separately from the Chair, but I formally add to that and extend my best wishes.

The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm. I therefore propose, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the next Member to be called will be Pat Sheehan to conclude and wind on the motion.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.56 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Justice

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

1. Mr Dunne asked the Minister of Justice for an update on the evaluation of the Substance Misuse Court, due for completion by the end of March 2026. (AQO 3394/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

To date, two evaluations of the Substance Misuse Court have shown positive outcomes. Work is ongoing on its cost-effectiveness, and it is anticipated that the full evaluation will be completed by the end of June 2026. I fully endorse its use and effectiveness.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her answer. As of 2024, of the 276 people who had participated in the court since 2018, 117 have been convicted of a further drug-related offence, which is alarming. Given that almost £3 million has been spent on the programme since 2018, does the Minister have any concerns about its value for money to the taxpayer and, importantly, its effectiveness and efficiency?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Substance Misuse Court issue goes much wider than the criminal aspect; it is about trying to tackle the underlying causes and complexities of addiction. It is often challenging to get people to break the cycle of addiction and related offending. The evidence from the evaluations to date shows that the Substance Misuse Court has been of use in getting people to engage with services, but it is well established that the first attempt at breaking people's addiction may not always be the successful one, particularly when it comes to substance misuse. It may take a number of attempts. I would prefer it if that were taken forward proactively by our healthcare system, because that is where the problem fundamentally lies and where the biggest change can be made, rather than waiting for people to find themselves in contact with the criminal justice system before we make such interventions.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, I totally agree with everything that you have said. How is the mandatory treatment element of enhanced combination orders (ECOs) working? What evaluation has been done of that?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Enhanced combination orders and the work in the Substance Misuse Courts are two separate things, but part of the challenge has been that, in order to pilot that work, much of the resource has gone through partners in the community and voluntary sector, as they deliver much of the care and intervention. There will be people referred to the Substance Misuse Court who, after a four-week period, may not be determined to be suitable, so it is only after that period that a defendant will be accepted on to the programme. There has to be a willingness on the part of defendants to engage with the programme substantively. In order for defendants to be accepted, they have to be in a position in their life at which they are able to do that effectively and efficiently.

I am happy to engage with the Member about ECOs. Some of the work that we have been doing is being closely followed by colleagues in Scotland, who recognise that enhanced combination orders offer an alternative to dealing with some of the more complex recidivism in the criminal justice system whilst maintaining high levels of public protection.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Will the Minister elaborate on the Substance Misuse Court referral process and how it works?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Yes. As I said, set criteria are available for referrals to the Substance Misuse Court, and defendants can be assessed as not being suitable. After a four-week engagement programme, they are assessed to see whether they are in a position to engage effectively with the programme. It is only after that initial screening and assessment period that a defendant will be accepted on to the programme. That individual will be required to attend court and probation, initially weekly, and to engage in drug and alcohol testing and counselling or treatment. That will include undergoing psychological assessment and intervention, if appropriate. Participants can also be removed from the programme for a range of reasons. While there is no straight-line approach to dealing with the issues of substance misuse and addiction, the programme allows people who are in a position to do so to maximise the support that is available to them to desist from their addiction and the offending behaviour that initially brought them before the courts.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

2. Dr Aiken asked the Minister of Justice to outline the present challenges in relation to recruitment and retention in the Northern Ireland Prison Service. (AQO 3395/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The only challenge facing the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) in relation to recruitment and retention is uncertainty around funding to allow them to recruit in sufficient numbers to respond to the rising prison population. The Prison Service has no difficulty attracting applicants, with 525 individuals recruited into operational roles since June 2021. Their assessment process is robust, and staff are supported through a range of well-being initiatives, both in the workplace and when they are absent for work-related or non-work-related reasons.

Staff retention rates in the Prison Service compare favourably with similar organisations. There has been a significant reduction in the number leaving over the last four years from 103 in 2022 to 60 in 2025. Exit interviews are offered to all staff who leave the Prison Service to help the service to get a better understanding of the reasons for leaving and to address any issues raised that can further improve retention rates.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her reply. The Minister will be aware that there is a significant issue in the Prison Service with staff on long-term sickness absence and how they were dealt with in the past. Will the Minister update us on how approaches to dealing with long-term sick absences in the Prison Service are being dealt with now? Have we turned a corner on that issue, and are we beginning to treat our staff who are on long-term sickness absence better and with much better treatment?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Prison staff, as you know, are members of the Civil Service. That being the case, they are dealt with through Civil Service HR mainstream procedures. However, the support offered to them by the Prison Service itself has been enhanced during my term in office. Initiatives have been introduced on peer support; counselling and access to counselling; enhanced access to the Police Rehabilitation and Retraining Trust (PRRT), for example, so that those who are, for any reason, exiting the service or require rehabilitation or occupational therapy are able to access that in a safe and secure way. There have been significant improvements, but it would be wrong to suggest that we are at the end of a process. We need to constantly re-evaluate what we can do to support people who do a job that is hidden from view but is, nevertheless, absolutely critical to ensuring that the public are kept safe and that those who are in our custody are able to access rehabilitation and, hopefully, emerge from prison without further reoffending and without creating further victims in the community.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

In relation to recruitment and retention, I would like to mention volunteers, particularly those from the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB). When members of the Committee met with them, the volunteers were running at a very low capacity. At that stage, it was around 50%. Are you aware of that, and will you look at that? There are current members who have done their 13 years of service and now have to leave. They have been told that they cannot, even though it is 15 years elsewhere. Will you also look at that? They are keen to stay on, and they provide an exceptional service.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The work of the IMB is often overlooked. It is a demanding role and, in terms of the spectrum of volunteering that people can be engaged in, volunteering in the IMB in our prisons is probably one of the most challenging. It has proved hard both to recruit people into that role and to retain people, particularly in the first few years of service. However, we have a recruitment campaign under way to recruit new members. It is a regulated position. Therefore, under Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments for Northern Ireland (OCPANI) rules, we need to be careful about extending people's terms. In addition, given the challenge and pressure that it places on the individuals who volunteer in that role, it may not always be wise to continually extend those terms beyond the initial regulated periods.

Some extensions were made as a result of lack of interest in new recruiting in the last mandate. However, we have had some more interest this time. I encourage any Member who is aware of people in the community who would be interested in working in that role — one that is there to provide independent oversight and monitoring of what happens in our prisons to give prisoners a voice and to see first-hand what is happening in those facilities — to look at the applications to the IMB and get involved. It is not only a challenging role, it is a rewarding one. The IMB members to whom you have been speaking would certainly reflect on their time spent in the prisons as something that they welcomed very much.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, it is deeply regrettable that you say that the only issue pertaining to recruitment and retention in the Prison Service is funding, when there is clearly a culture problem in our prisons. Today's headline in the 'Belfast Telegraph' reads:

"Prison officer’s jaw broken ... after drugged-up inmates go on rampage".

Staff say that the prison is descending into chaos. They talk about almost a dozen alarms that were sounded in just one day.

Minister, that is on your watch. Your prison officer staff are living in fear. Inmates are going on the rampage. Will you please tell us this: is there a drug problem in our prisons? Have they turned into drug dens? That headline and those accounts suggest that we have serious problems.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I am not sure where the Member has been over the past five, six, seven, eight years or, indeed, for much of the rest of his life if he thinks that there is not a problem —

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

In our prisons?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

— with addiction and drugs in prisons.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

In prisons?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

If he is not —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Please continue.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Thank you. I stopped because I assumed that the Member was not interested in the answer, given that he was interrupting.

There are issues with drugs in prisons. However, we have introduced, for example, full body scanning to reduce the amount of illicit material being smuggled into the prison. That is helpful, and we have seen a downturn in the amount of drugs, in particular, in prisons. There is still a market in prisons for prescription medication, and we work hard with the Department of Health and the healthcare in prisons teams to address and manage that. That has been reflected in recent reports.

For the Member to stand up and use an appalling incident to try to attack me

[Interruption]

— he can wave the paper all he likes, but my understanding is that, in the Chamber, props are not permitted. Maybe some people need props to make their point, but I am happy to make my point.

I listen to our prison officers, and I am regularly in our prisons. Yes, it is a matter of funding, because we now have more prisoners in custody than we have had at any time since the Good Friday Agreement. We have no more accommodation, and that leads to potential crowding on our landings and in our cells, which leads to a more volatile situation. If the Member has a solution to that that does not involve waving around newspaper articles but provides for additional prison officers and additional accommodation, I will be happy to meet him. As with every occasion, he comes to the Chamber with no solutions but simply with his little TikTok planned out in advance.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

On how the Department looks after our prison officers, what well-being support services are available for prison officers, who, obviously, undertake a challenging and stressful role?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, where officers are assaulted, it is standard policy that the Prison Service will support them in taking those responsible to court. It is not literally a " Be in Jail Free" card, in this case, where people can assault whomever they wish in the Prison Service and expect that not to have consequences.

All of our staff can access the wider Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS) welfare support services, which offer an independent, confidential service to help staff with work stress and personal work-related issues that may affect their ability to work. Operational and non-operational staff can also avail themselves of a self-referral facility to confidential counselling through Lena by Inspire workplace services, and staff can access online resources in the Inspire support hub, which provides expert information and advice on mental health, lifestyle and well-being. NIPS also has arrangements with the Police Rehabilitation and Retraining Trust for prison officers for counselling and physiotherapy. Between 1 April 2025 and 31 January 2026, 45·7% of operational prison grade staff reported no sickness absence.

It is not an easy job to be a prison officer. In some of our prisons, they deal not only with some of the most dangerous people in society but with some of those with the most complex and challenging needs. They have to manage those people in confined spaces through difficult periods, particularly at the moment, when there are such high numbers of people in custody. We should not underestimate the challenge that that presents to individual prison officers and to the prison system as a whole, and it is our job to secure the resources to recruit more prison officers, as we have done over recent weeks and months, and secure the capital to invest in the prisons estate so that prisons are able to continue to do the good work that they do.

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

Minister, you have said repeatedly that recruitment and retention is contingent on adequate funding. I presume that you have been in conversation with the Finance Minister about your budget. Have you agreed your allocation for the multi-year Budget, and is it sufficient to recruit the requisite number of prison officers over the next three years?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have been in contact, but no Executive member has yet been asked to agree their allocation, and it is not adequate to meet the needs of the justice system over the next three years. I have been open about that and put the figures on the record. To take a one-year snapshot, at the end of this year, we would be overspent by about £100 million on the basis of simply doing business as usual, which means only essential business, not the other things that may crop up during the mandate.

Having just reflected on capital, I will say, if I may, that, as things stand, we would not have the opportunity to invest in modular accommodation for our prisons to expand our current capacity, because we would not be able to fund that from our capital budget on the basis of our capital allocation in the draft Budget. We would not have any money beyond what is required for us to meet our contractual obligations.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

3. Mr Gaston asked the Minister of Justice to outline the amount of money spent in her Department on ending violence against women and girls in each of the last two years. (AQO 3396/22-27)

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

8. Ms Egan asked the Minister of Justice to outline her Department’s contribution to the cross-Executive programme on ending violence against women and girls. (AQO 3401/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 3 and 8 together. I ask you to indulge me with extra time, as it is quite an involved answer.

The Department of Justice is responsible for a number of actions in the cross-departmental strategic framework to end violence against women and girls (EVAWG) delivery plan. Ongoing engagement between my officials and the Executive Office, formally under the auspices of the EVAWG programme board and the domestic and sexual abuse strategic oversight board, helps to provide continued alignment and cohesion to promote a comprehensive, cost-effective and joined-up response. Under the EVAWG delivery plan, my Department is working with the PSNI and the Executive Office to deliver the Power to Change public awareness campaign to tackle the underpinning misogynistic behaviours and attitudes that can fuel sexual offending and gender-based violence. The second phase of the campaign, which will launch in May, aims to address rising online misogyny and harmful gender narratives.

Much of the wider work of my Department is aimed at addressing sexual offending and domestic abuse and at supporting victims in these cases. Whilst not all domestic and sexual abuse victims are women and girls, and not all violence against women and girls happens in domestic relationships, there is a significant overlap. Implementation of the domestic abuse offence, which captures patterns of controlling, coercive and threatening behaviour, as well as associated aggravators, is continuing. A pilot for domestic abuse protection notices and orders is under development. Work has been prioritised to establish revised and improved domestic abuse risk response arrangements. I aim to address a legislative gap by introducing new offences to address the creation of non-consensual sexually explicit deepfake images of adults online, which, again, disproportionately affects women and girls. I recently secured legislative consent to extend several provisions of the UK Government's Crime and Policing Bill to build on sexual offences that were introduced in 2022. Together, those measures contribute to a legal framework that allows the criminal justice system to deal effectively with sexual offending, of which most victims are women and girls.

In the past two financial years, my Department has allocated £1·9 million specifically to ending violence against women and girls. Total spend by my Department and non-departmental public bodies was £0·8 million in the 2024-25 financial year and £1·1 million in 2025-26. We have also committed £8·4 million over a seven-year period, commencing in 2025-26, to ASSIST NI to deliver advocacy services to high-risk and high-impact victims of domestic and sexual abuse. Alongside the Department of Health and the Department for Communities, my Department jointly funds the 24-hour domestic abuse helpline delivered by Nexus NI, which will cost £3·2 million over the next seven years. Similarly, whilst our investment of over £0·5 million on remote evidence centres over the past two years is beneficial to all vulnerable or intimidated witnesses, it has disproportionately benefited women and girls.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Can the Minister give an assurance that all the money that her Department spends to address this scourge on society is being spent on biological women, or is some of it being diverted to men who pretend to be women? Does the Minister realise that this is not a culture war issue but rather something that deeply concerns more than 50% of the population in Northern Ireland?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, I advise the Member not to speak on behalf of all women on this issue — that is the first thing — so I do not know where his saying "more than 50% of the population" comes from. Secondly, what we are doing here is trying to protect vulnerable women and girls from domestic abuse, but my Department is also trying to protect vulnerable men, vulnerable trans people, vulnerable straight people and vulnerable gay people from domestic and sexual abuse. That is what my Department is here to do. We are here to protect every citizen to the best of our ability, defending them against violence against the person or domestic and sexual abuse.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Minister, you have delivered a huge amount of change and legislation to tackle violence against women and girls. What more needs to be done to make that change in our society?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have introduced a diverse range of measures aimed at addressing sexual offending and coercive control and domestic abuse, and further measures are planned that will, I believe, tackle online and technologically aided abuse.

I recognise, however, that legislation alone will not bring an end to the violence and abuse that exists in our society, and I have said that many times in the Chamber. We need a cultural shift in our community. I am absolutely committed to playing my part in protecting women and girls from harm through the law and in recognising new types of harm and creating new offences. Although it is good that we can do this, it is not good enough to be able to tackle violence and take people through the courts whenever harm has occurred. We have to focus on the prevention of that harm. There is no short-term solution to tackling the complex issues around that. Addressing abusive attitudes requires sustained, cross-departmental approaches with an emphasis on preventative actions. I am committed to and have consistently been working with others to ensure that we, along with other stakeholders, can tackle the drivers of abuse and violence. Part of that is not allowing our concern about violence against women and girls to be weaponised in a way that makes other minority groups in our society more vulnerable to abuse.

This is about tackling a very serious crisis that our society faces. We need to work together as a community and across the community, irrespective of race, religion, creed, sexual orientation or how people identify their gender, to ensure that our women and girls are kept safe and that our young men and boys are educated in a constructive and positive way about what it is to be a good man, because, sadly, whilst women and girls are the focus of the campaign, they are not the problem.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Ending violence against women and girls must be a priority for us all. We must be aware, however, of its impact on families and the need to protect children from further harm. Will the Minister outline whether, to that end, she has done any work to explore introducing here the equivalent of Jade's law, which concerns the suspension of parental responsibility for a parent who kills their partner or ex-partner?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

That has been raised with me and is something that causes many of us concern. In recent months and years, we have seen situations in which one co-parent has taken the life of the other co-parent, leaving their children, in most cases, without a mother. We have seen the distress that is caused to families when that person continues to have parental rights.

Ultimately, the family courts make the determination on that, and, when it comes to the area of parental rights and so on, it is for the Department of Finance to introduce any change to family law. That does not lie in the criminal justice sphere, which is where my responsibilities lie. I have looked into that, however, and, in the engagement that I have had with officials in the Department of Finance, there has been a view that, given that the courts have discretion to grant access to children and are genuinely supposed to put the needs of the child rather than the demands or desires of the parents first, there is sufficient scope for a similar approach to be taken within the courts, without any substantive change to primary legislation. I am happy to continue to engage with the Minister of Finance on that issue, but it is for the Minister of Finance to do the policy development work on that, rather than for my Department.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I acknowledge the efforts of the Minister to tackle the scourge of violence against women and girls, which needs a whole-government approach and a whole-society approach. Minister, what investment and efforts are being made to rehabilitate perpetrators of domestic abuse in order to prevent or reduce reoffending and reduce the risk primarily to women and girls?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

We do a number of things, such as perpetrator programmes. There are opt-in perpetrator programmes for those who, for example, are on remand in the prison system for domestic abuse-related offences. They have the option of taking such a course and engaging in that process. Once people are there as sentenced prisoners, a needs assessment of their rehabilitation is done. A number of desistance programmes are undertaken in prisons. There is one on healthy, happy relationships. Anger management courses are also available to people, and those are often allied with courses on substance misuse, which can trigger some of those incidents. That is happening in prisons.

In addition, the Probation Board runs a number of courses for people who have been convicted of domestic abuse offences that are about changing attitudes. Much like drug rehabilitation therapy, part of the issue is that, unless a person has a desire to change, and unless there is a willingness on their behalf to engage properly and thoroughly with those programmes, it can be very difficult to change patterns of abuse. Many of those in prison come forward as victims of abuse or were, for example, exposed to extreme violence as children. Therefore, part of what we try to do as we go through those desistance programmes is look at how we deal with the trauma that they often carry forward into their adult life and adult relationships and the patterns of behaviour that they learned from those around them as a child and that have led to their being an abuser. Breaking that cycle is not straightforward, but it is something that we invest in.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Minister, given that an independent report found clear evidence of sexism and misogyny in the PSNI and that the report and its findings were accepted by the Chief Constable, how appropriate is it for that organisation to deal with violence against women and girls?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, I thank the Chief Constable for asking Rachel Langdale to come in and do the review that she did, because that was welcome oversight. The best disinfectant is sunlight. I therefore believe that the openness and transparency with which the Chief Constable has addressed the issue is important. I have no doubt that both Rachel Langdale's report and, indeed, the work being done by the Office of the Police Ombudsman on abuse of position for sexual purposes will cause people to have second thoughts about reporting domestic and sexual abuse to the police. I want to be certain, just as everyone in the House does, that, when a vulnerable victim or witness approaches the police seeking help, they are not inadvertently engaging with another predator. It is important that we do everything at every stage, through vetting and barring, how we approach the recruitment process and how internal vetting in the PSNI works as people perhaps move towards more contact with vulnerable victims and witnesses, to ensure that any red flags that are raised in the organisation are taken seriously and followed up competently. That is the very least that people should expect.

Having said that, I do not wish to overplay the issue in the context of the PSNI versus other forces around these islands. Very often in hierarchical organisations, which are predominately male in nature, the culture needs to change. It is good that that has been acknowledged by the Chief Constable. That leadership from the top is important. I will support the Policing Board and the Chief Constable in every effort that they make to ensure that this is stamped out and that victims can have full confidence that, when they go to the PSNI, they will be protected and kept safe.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

4. Ms Forsythe asked the Minister of Justice to outline the criteria used when decisions are made on which cases should progress through the courts during the current restrictions of the criminal Bar strike. (AQO 3397/22-27)

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

10. Mr K Buchanan asked the Minister of Justice for an update on the current position with the ongoing industrial action by the Criminal Bar Association. (AQO 3403/22-27)

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

15. Mr McGlone asked the Minister of Justice for an update on the steps she has taken to resolve the dispute with members of the Criminal Bar Association over Crown Court legal aid fees. (AQO 3408/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to answer questions 4, 10 and 15 together.

It is incredibly disheartening that I am, once again, updating the Chamber on the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) service withdrawal. The ever-decreasing resources at our disposal should not be focused on mitigating avoidable levels of harm, and neither should we be trying, through derogations, to balance the needs of those who have already suffered immeasurable loss and trauma, but, unfortunately, that is the very real outcome of the CBA decision to continue with its withdrawal. The withdrawal continues to unnecessarily harm victims and witnesses and will cause damage to the system, which we do not have the resources to repair. It is also to no end, as it will not change outcomes. Furthermore, I have already repeatedly demonstrated my commitment to resolving what have been ever-changing asks from the CBA.

I demonstrated that commitment again when I commissioned the accelerated review, dedicating yet more of my already depleted resources to it and appointing two independent leads in an effort to address at pace the remaining issues. The review is due to conclude no later than 27 April, and I hope that it will bring that unwarranted action to an end.

In the interim, it is for the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) to determine which cases should proceed while the withdrawal is ongoing. That was a condition of my commencing the review. It is right that those who properly understand the detail and impact of offences and who are directly supporting victims and witnesses assess which cases most need to proceed. That assessment will be based on the individual facts of cases, including the nature of the offence and the level of risk of further offending towards complainants and others. I do not underestimate the challenge that that presents for the PPS, and it should not be in the pernicious position of making those decisions. I therefore call on all Members to press, as I am doing, the CBA to return to full service as a matter of urgency.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We have to move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr McGlone asked the Minister of Justice, given the recent security alert at Lurgan police station, to share her assessment of the current situation and state whether there is any cross-border cooperation being undertaken against organised crime and paramilitary activity. (AQT 2231/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to place on record in the House my absolute abhorrence towards those who forced a person, at the point of a gun, to drive a live device through Lurgan, placing everyone in the community from Kilwilkie to the police station at significant risk. The trauma inflicted on the individual, who was trying to make a living by delivering food and was probably on minimum wage, is unimaginable, as is the trauma inflicted on the officers who were at the station when the car arrived there. I commend those officers for their quick thinking and quick response and for keeping people safe while the issue was dealt with.

As I have already said publicly, there is nothing to suggest that that represents a significant change in the capacity or intent of the organisations involved. It has always been the case that, for as long as a rump of individuals wishes to try to target and attack the PSNI, it will have some capability to do so, albeit that capability may be depleted. We should not be complacent, however. One of the reasons why we see very few such attacks is because of the disruption and suppression undertaken by the PSNI in those communities to ensure that they do not happen. Work is done in those communities to build confidence and trust in the PSNI. I pay tribute to the Minister of Finance, who spoke at length about the good work that the PSNI is doing in Lurgan to reach out to the nationalist and republican communities to work cooperatively with them to ensure that neither they nor the PSNI is put at risk.

The organised crime task force (OCTF) continues to do cross-border work as part of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA). The Minister —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

— for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration and I were recently at a conference that dealt with those issues.

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

Thank you for your answer, Minister. I am sure that everyone in the House shares the views that you expressed about that very dangerous act at the police station and the danger that was caused to civilians, not least the driver of the vehicle.

Minister, can you indicate whether there are any additional cross-border initiatives taking place to ensure that organised crime, such as drug trafficking and human exploitation, and paramilitary crime can be tackled?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Through the organised crime task force, there are regular meetings between officials in the PSNI and an Garda Síochána, and those meetings have been very fruitful. As a matter of routine, there is cooperative working not just in border communities but further afield. That is very helpful, because we recognise that many of the issues to which the Member refers are not limited solely to Northern Ireland or the border counties, as there are elements of organised crime that extend way beyond both jurisdictions and into others. It is therefore important that we have the opportunity to work collaboratively and cooperatively.

There are a number of initiatives taking place. The Member will be aware of the work being done around drugs, which is one of the themes, but, through the IGA, we also look at wider issues, such as human trafficking. I had a conversation with Jim O'Callaghan about that issue.

It is important to recognise that it does not matter to organised criminals whether they traffic people or goods. They treat them all as simply collateral from which to make money. They have no compassion for the people who receive those goods and, if it is drugs, can end up with serious addictions or worse. Nor do they have any compassion for the people whom they traffic for other reasons of exploitation. It is, therefore, important that there is that good, collaborative working relationship.

The recent conference that I attended, which included the like of the Office of the Revenue Commissioners and HMRC, is just one example of how law enforcement comes together on a regular basis to look at how we can shut down those organised crime gangs and ensure that the path that enables them to cause mayhem and destruction is frustrated.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

T2. Mr Buckley asked the Minister of Justice what interaction she has had with the Prison Service following a serious incident in one of our prisons that he referenced earlier, in which a prison officer had his jaw broken whilst prisoners went on a drug-fuelled rampage, an issue about which Members would have expected at least a ministerial statement. (AQT 2232/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I am in contact with my colleagues in the Prison Service on an almost daily basis. I visit the prisons on a regular basis. I do not feel that it is appropriate to, on every occasion, discuss on the Floor what I discuss in those interactions at an operational level, nor is it necessarily the wish of the individual prison officers who have been subjected to assault to have those issues plastered on the pages of newspapers or raised in the House. Therefore I have to act with sensitivity.

I recognise that every prison officer who gets up in the morning and puts on a uniform, goes to work in the evening as a night custody officer or gets into a van to transport prisoners does so at significant risk. I never underestimate that. I am grateful to them for the work that they do and the initiative that they show. However, the painting of our prisons as inherently dangerous places does not reflect the findings of the Criminal Justice Inspection. We have two of the three best-functioning prisons in the UK. That is a transformation from the time when, under devolution, responsibility for prisons was handed over to this place, and we were dealing with some of the most dangerous prisons in Europe. I hope that the Member will reflect on that fact and on the efforts that prison officers make to maintain order and ensure that incidents such as the one he referred to, are kept to an absolute minimum. I certainly respect the work that they do and the compassion that they show as they do that work.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, with respect, you have not answered the question, so I can only conclude that you have not met prison officers and senior prison officials following that attack. That attack took place when, according to the staff amongst whom you say the culture is well, the prison was in chaos and prison officers feared for their safety. You have not addressed that point. Minister, did you meet senior prison officials following that rampage, which has been reported in today's newspaper? Or, do you think that it is fake news?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, I answered the question and said that I did not believe that my regular meetings, on an almost daily basis, were a matter for airing in the House due to the sensitivities of the conversations and the potential impact on the individuals involved. Nor can I respond to every piece of news that is going to be put in the newspapers or every report that talks about how prison management or prison officers feel at any point in time. To do so would be unwise. I can only go by what I do on a regular basis, which is attend our prisons, remain open and engage, on an almost daily basis, as I said earlier, with the staff, including individual prison officers. I spoke to the director general of prisons as recently as yesterday, if that gives the Member any comfort. Again, I have to drive this point home: suggesting that our prisons are in chaos is a falsehood. I am not saying that the 'Belfast Telegraph' is engaging in false news and fake news, but I am saying that the Member's portrayal of an incident that took place within the prison as being proof of that prison being in chaos —

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Those are the prison officers' comments.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

— simply does not stack up against the evidence.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

T3. Mr Brett asked the Minister of Justice, after stating that, based on correspondence from him, she will be aware of the growing concern in his constituency about the use of e-scooters on the public highway and footpaths, to outline any discussions that she has had with the Police Service of Northern Ireland to try to ensure that there is a targeted campaign before someone is seriously injured or, worse, killed. (AQT 2233/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Campaigns on the use of e-scooters and their legality is a matter for the Department for Infrastructure rather than the Department of Justice. I have, of course, during our regular meetings, had conversations with the PSNI about the concerns that have been expressed to me in this House and elsewhere about the proliferation of e-scooters and the risk that they pose to life.

Ultimately, e-scooters are illegal, so, when the police see people using e-scooters on a public thoroughfare, they are at liberty to take action. I suspect that, again, the issue comes down to what resources are available. In some areas where e-scooters have been a systemic problem for some time, the PSNI has done very good work to target groups of young people who are engaged with e-scooters, scrambler bikes and other such vehicles. The PSNI has worked with those young people, not to dissuade them from having an interest in those vehicles but to educate them about their safe use and the dangers of using them on the open road.

Given that that is a particular issue in the Member's constituency, it may be worth contacting the policing and community safety partnership (PCSP) to see if something can be done between the it, the PSNI and, perhaps, even some of the Member's colleagues on the Policing Board, because I know that they, too, have shown an interest in this issue.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for that. Will she commit, in the House, to discuss with the Minister for Infrastructure emulating clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill in England and Wales, which looks to strengthen legislation on seizure powers and reduces the amount of time that the police have to hold on to e-scooters before they are able to destroy them?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Given the late stage of the mandate and the fact that we are now at a point when the introduction of new ideas for legislation is probably beyond the capacity of any Department to take forward in this mandate, it is unlikely that that would come to fruition quickly. There are things that can be done quickly to achieve desistance, and that is why I suggested that the PCSP and Policing Board colleagues may be able to assist. I am happy to continue to engage with the Department for Infrastructure on the basis that that Department is the policy lead and has said that e-scooters are illegal, which means that there is no grey area. The PSNI and my Department have looked at seizure of vehicles, impoundment and so on, but we have mainly been doing so in the context of the costs that the PSNI carries as a result of having to impound vehicles regularly.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

T4. Ms Nicholl asked the Minister of Justice how her Department is planning for the proposed draft multi-year Budget. (AQT 2234/22-27)

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I recognise that the Executive as a whole will not receive sufficient levels of additional funding during the multi-year Budget period, and I am incredibly conscious of the significant pressures that Departments face and the difficult decisions that we will have to take as an Executive. However, it is extremely disappointing that the proposed Budget allocations will leave my Department facing stabilisation pressures of £101 million in 2026-27, £141 million in 2027-28 and £215 million in 2028-29. That is before exceptional pressures for holiday pay, McCloud and legacy are taken into account.

A pressure of £215 million in 2028-29 sounds like a large figure, and it is, but, as an indication, it represents the entire current budgets of the Prison Service, the Probation Board, the Youth Justice Agency and Forensic Science put together. It is fairly clear that that gap cannot be closed by reducing the number of civil servants with a tweak here and a tweak there. That is a significant shortfall in the available budget, and I would go as far as to say that it would be catastrophic for the justice system in Northern Ireland.

Considering the magnitude of the pressures that remain, it is difficult to see how any Department will be able to live within budget, and the limited funding to my Department, which has gone on for a significant period of time, makes that all the more difficult. There are no savings left to be found in Justice. All that we can do is start to cut the services that we provide. Most Members have been saying today that they want more of a good thing: more intervention, more protection and more engagement with communities. It is almost impossible for us to do any of that, even at the current level, with the budget as it is.

We will need to look very carefully as we approach the point at which a decision must be made on that budget.

I am also conscious, and I have raised it here, that we do not have an Executive Budget and we are now almost two weeks into the new financial year. That, in itself, is a worry. If we do not get a Budget, we can allocate only 45% of last year's starting Budget to see us through to July/August, and then only 95% of last year's starting Budget to see us through the rest of the year. That would be even more catastrophic than the draft Budget itself.

Private Members' Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Mr Sheehan to make the winding-up speech on the motion.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

First of all, I thank everyone who participated in the debate. It was a very well-tempered debate.

(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Blair] in the Chair)

Those who opposed the legislation raised two main issues: first, the fact that a strategy is being developed in the Department and, secondly, that there is an equality issue because Irish-medium education would be given a privileged position in our overall education system. Let me just clear up a few issues about equality.

Questions were raised about why Irish-medium education would require different SEN support and whether that implied preferential treatment. It is important, therefore, to state at the outset, and to clarify, that Irish-medium education does not sit within one particular sector. There are Irish-medium schools and units in the maintained sector. There is provision in the controlled sector. Most recently, there is Irish-medium provision in the integrated sector at Scoil na Seolta. While Irish-medium education spans several sectors, it constitutes a distinct education system in the language of instruction. Therefore, from a SEN support perspective, the education system operates, in practice, through two media of instruction: education that is delivered through the medium of English and education that is delivered through the medium of Irish. All controlled, maintained, integrated and special schools that deliver education through English benefit from a fully developed and system-wide SEN infrastructure that is delivered in English. That includes educational psychology, assessment and follow-up and SEN-related training and advice that is provided by the Education Authority (EA). They get support from local impact team intervention and have access to specialist professional support services.

Irish-medium schools, on the other hand, regardless of sectoral designation, deliver education entirely through Irish, which is the language of learning and assessment, not an additional or enrichment subject. Equivalent SEN services do not currently exist in a consistent or systematic way through the medium of Irish, despite Irish-medium pupils having the same statutory entitlements as all other pupils. The issue that is raised by the Bill is therefore not one of sectoral privilege or additional entitlement but one of parity of access. Irish-medium pupils with special educational needs should receive the same assessment, intervention and support as their English-medium peers. For that to be effective, it must be delivered in the language of instruction. The absence of SEN support that is delivered through Irish represents a structural gap in provision, affecting pupils across several sectors, rather than an advantage that is afforded to any one sector. Addressing that gap aligns with inclusive education principles and ensures that pupils are not disadvantaged based on the language through which they are educated.

There was talk about the statutory duty on the Minister:

"to encourage and facilitate ... Irish-medium education."

There were some concerns that there would be some sort of change to or a strengthening of that statutory duty, but that is not the case. The Bill is not trying to change the statutory duty in the 1998 Order to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education. Through the Bill, we are trying to give practical effect to that statutory duty.

When it comes to equality, how has that statutory duty been implemented and carried out by successive Ministers? After 28 years, teachers in Irish-medium education still have to translate materials themselves for children in those schools. There is a deficit of bespoke materials and resources for children who are educated through the medium of Irish. That is after 28 years. If I had had my way, as I said in my opening remarks, I would have introduced a much more expansive and wide-ranging piece of legislation. It would have included a duty on the Minister to ensure parity between children in Irish-medium schools and those in English-medium schools in the provision of resources, particularly by having resources in the language in which the children are educated. The fact that teachers in Irish-medium schools still have to translate materials themselves is a stain on the Department of Education.

Some Irish-medium schools have been in temporary buildings for nearly 40 years. Where was the statutory duty there to encourage and facilitate Irish-medium education? Coláiste Feirste, the main Irish-medium post-primary school in the North, had a major development that, I would say, opened 10 years ago for a population of 550 students. There are now more than 1,000 pupils at Coláiste Feirste. It is bursting at the seams. Iontaobhas na Gaelscolaíochta and Comhairle na Gaelscolaíochta have been begging the Department for over seven years now to provide a site for a second post-primary school in Belfast, preferably in North Belfast because many of the students who attend Coláiste Feirste come from North Belfast. What has the response been? "No sites are available". Nothing can be provided for children who want to continue their education in Irish after primary school at post-primary schools. The fact that there are so many children in that school, which was designed for 550 pupils, affects the fabric of the school, levels of wear and tear and access to toilets — everything — but there has been no urgency on the part of the Minister or the Department to ensure that a second site is provided for children in post-primary education.

I am not saying that the Department has done nothing — I am not saying that at all — but I am saying that the Irish-medium sector is growing faster than the Department is dealing with the challenges that exist in that sector.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Yes, go ahead.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Does the Member agree that some of the challenges that he outlined in respect of the Irish-medium sector estate are the same challenges that we see in the SEN sector, in that we need more special schools, and we need more sites? A big part of the problem is that the Department of Education is not resourced to the level that it needs to be in order to provide some of those facilities.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I absolutely agree that there are problems in delivering SEN support in English-medium schools as well. There is absolutely no doubt about that. The Committee has been holding an inquiry for the past number of months, and anybody who sits on the Committee and has listened to the evidence that has been given will be clear that the provision that is there at the minute does not cut the mustard.

One of the reasons comes back to an issue that we discussed yesterday, and we discussed before the Easter break. There is no cooperation at all between the Education Minister and the Health Minister. You know that, David, because you sit on the Committee, and you know that there is no cooperation there at all. It is an issue that requires cooperation and collaboration between the Health Department and the Education Department, and that is not there. We saw, on the issue —.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I will just finish this point. We saw, on the issue of the summer schemes for special schools, that the Education Minister could not even lift the phone to his counterpart in Health. I will give way.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Will the Member agree that, from the Committee's perspective, quite often, we have seen a willingness from Education officials to engage? My perception and that of the Committee is that there is more reticence on the Health side. That is not an attack on the Health Minister. That is to say that Health, with its budgetary issues, has a reticence about over committing itself, but I think that the reticence that we have seen in the Committee has largely been from the Health side.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, please return to the scope of the Bill. We have strayed somewhat beyond it. If we return to the framework of the Bill now, we can continue.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

To finish on the matter of equality, there were some concerns that we were arguing that the Irish-medium sector should be given a privileged position over other sectors. Mr Burrows is fairly new to the place, and he may not be familiar with all the procedures, but part of the process involved writing to the Equality Commission to inform it of what we were doing and of our policy intent. The Equality Commission did not identify any adverse impacts from the Bill. In fact, it highlighted the importance of properly resourced, planned provision, particularly in areas such as SEN, to ensure equality of opportunity for all children, including those in Irish-medium education. Therefore, the issue around a lack of equality for children in English-medium settings because of the proposed legislation is just a nonsense.

Let us move on to the argument that, because the Minister is bringing forward an Irish-medium education strategy, the legislation is superfluous, there is no need for it and that the Minister will deal with all those issues. We have written to the Minister on a few occasions to ask him what will be contained in his strategy, and, to be quite honest, we have not got very satisfactory answers. The answers are always pretty vague. He has told us that something is being considered, but he will not give us the full picture of what will be in it.

There is currently no statutory requirement on the Department to produce a workforce plan for Irish-medium education. That is the gap that the Bill addresses.

A non-statutory strategy, however welcome in principle, offers no guarantees of delivery, no requirement for timelines and no mechanisms for accountability.

We are being asked to place our faith in a strategy that is not due until 2027, after an Assembly election, from a Minister whose track record on the Irish language is shocking. I say that not to score any points; I say it because it is a fact. None of the people in the Irish-medium sector — the parents who send their children to Irish-medium schools; the children who attend Irish-medium schools; the people throughout the North who go to Irish language ranganna

[Translation: classes]

; and the people who do not speak Irish but have a love for it and like to see it being promoted — trust the Minister to deliver a strategy for Irish-medium education. Nobody trusts him. The Minister knows why they do not trust him. They know his history with the Irish language. They know that he was the Minister who cut the Líofa bursaries for young children from disadvantaged backgrounds to go to Gaeltachtaí to learn Irish. It was a miserly sum that he cut, and, to add salt to the wound, he wished everyone a happy Christmas at the end of his email. Against that backdrop, it is entirely reasonable to ask whether a future strategy will even be delivered.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I will give way in a second. I do not want to make it entirely personal about the Minister. His party is notorious for its hostility to the language, and that is something that I do not understand. How can you hate a language? How can you think that a language is offensive? What is offensive about a dual language sign in a public building in 2026? What was so offensive that the DUP thought it a good idea that its Minister should join a judicial review?

I will give way to the Minister.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Apart from comments being completely outwith the principles of the Bill, Sinn Féin has, up until this point, done well to resist the temptation to go down the route that Mr Sheehan has now taken with his commentary. I did not go into the history of the Irish language and the way in which Sinn Féin has used and abused it. Mr Sheehan, when I visit schools, I am told that the language needs to be protected from Sinn Féin's politicisation of it.

It does a disservice to the issues that you raise in the Bill that you have decided to go down the route that you have taken at the very end of Second Stage. You know that you have the numbers to vote the Bill through, but you could not resist the temptation to take the approach that you have taken. The Irish language deserves to be protected from the kind of approach that you have just taken at the latter point of today's process.

For the record, I never sent any email. I never said what the Member just said about wishing anyone a happy Christmas. To correct the record on that issue, it was from an official in the Department; it was not a ministerial letter.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Before we proceed, I remind Members to stick to the scope of the Bill.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

It is never a good sign when a Minister tosses an official under the bus. His name was at the bottom of that email, so it came from him.

The argument that the Bill is premature ignores the reality that the workforce issues have existed for years and years. The DUP has held the Department of Education portfolio for over a decade, and, during that time, we have not seen the structured, long-term workforce planning required to address shortages in teacher numbers, SEN provision and support staff. The idea that action should now be delayed further in anticipation of a future strategy is not credible. The Irish-medium sector cannot wait.

Fourthly, far from duplicating or constraining departmental work, the Bill strengthens it. It provides a statutory framework within which any strategy must operate. It ensures that planning is not ad hoc, not dependent on individual Ministers and not allowed to drift.

Finally, on cost, the figures show that the Bill's administrative requirements are modest. The real question is the cost of continuing to do nothing. Workforce planning is not a burden; it is a basic necessity. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Question put.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 48; Noes 34

AYES

Dr Archibald, Mr Baker, Mr Boylan, Ms Bradshaw, Miss Brogan, Mr Carroll, Mr Delargy, Mr Dickson, Mrs Dillon, Mr Donnelly, Mr Durkan, Ms Egan, Ms Ennis, Ms Ferguson, Ms Finnegan, Ms Flynn, Mr Gildernew, Mrs Guy, Miss Hargey, Mr Honeyford, Ms Hunter, Mr Kearney, Ms Kimmins, Mrs Long, Mr McAleer, Miss McAllister, Mr McCrossan, Mr McGlone, Mr McGrath, Mr McGuigan, Mr McHugh, Ms McLaughlin, Mr McMurray, Mr McReynolds, Mrs Mason, Mr Mathison, Mr Muir, Ms Mulholland, Ms Murphy, Ms Ní Chuilín, Ms Nicholl, Mr O'Dowd, Mrs O'Neill, Mr O'Toole, Ms Reilly, Mr Sheehan, Ms Sheerin, Mr Tennyson

Tellers for the Ayes: Mr Baker, Ms Sheerin

NOES

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

Tellers for the Noes: Mr Brooks, Mr Martin

Ms Ennis acted as a proxy for Miss Brogan.

Question accordingly agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Second Stage of the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill [NIA Bill 28/22-27] be agreed.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

That concludes the Second Stage of the Irish-medium Education (Workforce Plan) Bill. The Bill stands referred to the Committee for Education.

Members, please take your ease.

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

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Ladies and gentlemen, the next item of business is a motion on conducting a cost-benefit analysis of net zero policies. You will be aware of the long-standing interest in the Assembly in the A5 western transport corridor scheme, including the debates that we had in the Chamber last year. Members will be aware of recent judgements of the High Court on the A5 scheme and the implications of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. Those judgements, with a focus on departmental decision-making, are now subject to appeal. I do not wish to curtail debate on what is obviously a matter of considerable public interest, and there is much in the motion that can be discussed without straying into the matters before the Court of Appeal. However, I remind Members to respect the distinct roles of the courts and the Assembly when making their contributions.

Members may see me pause while I check with the Clerks on either side of me as we go through this. That is to make sure that we are kept correct: I am sure that you will indulge me as I do that.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses deep concern that aspirational climate targets are impeding the delivery of high-quality public services and infrastructure that ratepayers deserve; notes that the provisions of the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 have been found by the courts to obstruct the progression of the A5 road upgrade, with far-reaching consequences for other major projects such as the A4 Enniskillen southern bypass; is alarmed, furthermore, that the current legal requirement for minimum spend on active travel perversely acts as a barrier to vital investment in roads maintenance and repairs; calls on the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to withdraw the current draft climate action plan 2023-27, which contains a range of proposals that are not quantified and would place additional burdens on farmers and households during a cost-of-living crisis; and further calls on the Minister to task every Department and arm’s-length body with conducting a cost-benefit analysis of all net zero-related climate policies and funding streams within their remit.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

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

Michelle, please open the debate on the motion.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am pleased to propose the motion, which speaks directly to the everyday concerns of constituents across Northern Ireland. It is about why a number of parties in the Chamber took the decision to hamstring functionality in the race to virtue-signal and still seem determined to limp on instead of addressing the problem.

The DUP supports environmentally responsible policies and recognises the UK's long-term ambition to reduce emissions. We believe in a fair — not a fast — path to net zero. Fairness means ensuring that climate ambition does not come at the expense of working families, rural communities or the infrastructure that underpins our economy. It is abundantly clear that the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 has created precisely that imbalance. The legislation was a political compromise in response to an even more extreme proposal, and, while amendments secured by the DUP helped to protect agriculture and taxpayers, it ultimately embedded a net zero by 2050 target that we had consistently opposed. We did so not out of ideology but because independent scientific advice indicated that such a target for Northern Ireland was neither necessary nor deliverable. I very much welcome the UUP's recent Damascene conversion in recognising the folly of the net zero by 2050 target, but I note that it co-sponsored a Member's Bill that was intended to mandate a net zero by 2045 target.

The consequences of the legislation have become painfully clear. The recent court ruling on the A5 western transport corridor laid bare the stark reality. Mr Justice McAlinden warned that, if the road is to be built while emissions targets are being met:

"Other infrastructure projects may have to go by the wayside and other sectors may have to be squeezed".

We should take a moment to think about that: a road designed to save lives and support economic growth is being jeopardised by targets that largely exist on paper. When climate policy begins to block life-saving infrastructure, it is time to ask whether we have lost sight of common sense.

The implications do not end with the A5. The A4 Enniskillen bypass and other vital projects now hang in the balance. Communities in the west should not be told that their safety and prosperity are negotiable because of unworkable emissions targets. Climate ambition should not come at the cost of connectivity and safety.

The motion highlights the statutory requirement to allocate a minimum of 10% of transport budgets to active travel. Investment in walking and cycling should be made where it is appropriate and beneficial, but imposing a rigid spending quota regardless of local need is simply poor governance.

Across Northern Ireland, our roads are deteriorating. Potholes are no longer an inconvenience but a hazard, and motorists are left to foot the bill for vehicle damage. When families are dodging potholes on their way to work, it is hard to justify the ring-fencing of funding for projects that do not address the most urgent needs. Flexibility, not inflexibility, should guide our investment decisions.

Central to the motion is the call for the withdrawal of the draft climate action plan 2023-27. The DUP engaged constructively with the consultation process, and our conclusion is clear: the draft plan is built on shaky foundations. It is estimated that it will cost over £1 billion between now and 2027, yet a significant number of the policies to reduce emissions across nine sectors are not quantified at all. Assessments of the likely impact on emissions of measures such as the sustainable agriculture programme (SAP), the shift policy for reducing vehicle emissions and changes to building regulations are lacking. In any other area of government, proposing billion-pound spending without clear evidence would be considered unacceptable. Why should climate policy be any different? Furthermore, the quantification report acknowledges that Departments use varying methodologies to estimate emissions reductions, with some relying on external scientific expertise and others conducting in-house analysis. That inconsistency raises serious questions about the reliability of the data underpinning the plan. If the numbers cannot be compared, how can they be trusted?

There is a glaring absence of a level playing field. We have noted that to be the case, time and again, with policies coming from and approaches taken by the Department. While the agriculture sector faces extensive obligations, Northern Ireland Water, which is one of the region's largest landowners, is not associated with any specific policies or proposals. Farmers are being asked to shoulder the burden while other major sectors appear to escape scrutiny. That is neither fair nor sustainable. Agriculture is not just an economic sector but a way of life. It is vital to the nation's food security. The draft plan estimates that there will be a £70 million capital cost for measures affecting the sector, but it provides little clarity on who will bear the costs. Even more concerning are the assumptions that the proposals could lead to a reduction of 81,000 beef cattle and 25,000 dairy cattle by 2027. For many farming families, those are not abstract figures but representative of their livelihoods and the future of rural communities. Proposals such as methane-suppressing feed additives, alternative fertilisers and changes to livestock management may have merit, but they must be economically viable and evidence-based. A sustainable future for Northern Ireland cannot be built by making family farms unsustainable.

Of the estimated £718 million of capital expenditure that underpins the draft climate action plan, almost 47% is allocated to transport. That is largely predicated on the rapid phasing out of petrol and diesel vehicles. A transition to cleaner transport is desirable, but it must be realistic. In other jurisdictions, it has been accepted that such a timescale is not realistic. In addition, electric vehicle infrastructure remains inadequate, particularly in rural areas. Encouraging a modal shift to public transport is the right thing to do, but measures associated with achieving that are largely unquantified. Setting overly ambitious targets without having the infrastructure to support them is not leadership but wishful thinking. The DUP believes that it was premature to advance the draft plan without first establishing the just transition commission and the just transition fund for agriculture, both of which are legislative commitments. A just transition cannot be an afterthought. Rather, it must be the foundation on which climate policy is built. We cannot ask people to make sacrifices without first providing them with the support to help them adapt.

In the overarching financial, social and economic impact assessment, it is claimed that the draft plan will be financially neutral, but it is also acknowledged in that assessment that implementing the plan will require trade-offs that will potentially crowd out investments in other priorities. The A5 legal judgement provides a clear illustration of that risk. If left unamended, the Climate Change Act could require Departments to divert funding away from front-line services such as roads, schools and hospitals in order to meet emissions targets. When climate policy begins to compete with patient care or classroom provision, we should pause and reassess our approach. The current net zero target is unworkable for Northern Ireland. There needs to be transparent and evidence-based policymaking, and when I say "transparent", I also mean honest.

By tasking:

"every Department and arm’s-length body with conducting a cost-benefit analysis of all net zero-related climate policies",

we can ensure that decisions are grounded in evidence and deliver genuine value for money. Good intentions alone do not make good policy; evidence and accountability do. The question for Members is straightforward: are they prepared to support transparency, or are they content to proceed on the basis of unquantified assumptions? Supporting the motion is not about abandoning environmental responsibility; it is about ensuring that climate action is fair, realistic and deliverable. The debate is not about choosing between the environment and the economy; it is about ensuring that we strike the right balance between environmental ambition and the practical needs of our people.

The motion calls for a recognition that aspirational climate targets are impeding the delivery of essential infrastructure and public services, the withdrawal of the current draft climate action plan 2023-27 until its proposals are fully quantified and properly assessed and a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of all net zero-related climate policies across every Department and arm's-length body. It is a sensible, transparent and, importantly, honest approach to the issue. There needs to be demonstrable commitment to responsible governance, fiscal prudence and a truly fair transition that protects households, businesses and the agri-food sector while still enabling progress towards environmental sustainability.

This is not a sixth-form debating club where our decisions do not mean anything; what we decide impacts on every man, woman and child in Northern Ireland. We need to restore common sense to government. Climate ambition should not come at the expense of economic stability, public safety and the well-being of the people whom we are elected to serve.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you very much indeed, Michelle. I call Declan Kearney. Declan, you have up to five minutes.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.]

"I have been clear and consistent throughout" —

this process —

"that we should follow the advice of experts and set targets on the basis of the evidence." — [Official Report (Hansard), 9 March 2022, p2, col 2]

So said the former leader of the DUP and then DUP Environment Minister, Edwin Poots, when he welcomed the 2022 Climate Change Bill. Indeed, he went on to laud the passing of the Bill as "an historic moment".

The advice from the experts and the extensive scientific evidence on climate change are at least the same in 2026 as they were in 2022. We must meet net zero targets, protect our environment and proactively tackle the climate change challenges that we face. Is it the case that, with this motion, the DUP has done a U-turn and is now announcing its return to archaic climate change denial? Denial and inaction are not an option.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he acknowledge that the then Minister, Edwin Poots, went on to say:

Unfortunately, however, at Consideration Stage, a majority of Members of the Assembly agreed to change the headline target in the Bill to net zero emissions by 2050 — and that really was done for a headline. — [Official Report (Hansard), 9 March 2022, p2, col 2]?

I know that Mr Kearney is giving his own version of history, but perhaps he could be accurate and say that it is his party's commitment to climate change targets that is essentially driving industry to a halt in Northern Ireland.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

There is no better man to revise history than you, Jonathan.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

[Interruption.]

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The reality is that —.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Oi, oi, oi. Excuse me, gentlemen. Sorry. Give me a second to at least give Declan an extra minute before you two get stuck in again. Right. Over to you. Declan, you have an extra minute.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Thank you, a LeasCheann Comhairle

[Translation: Deputy Speaker]

.

There is no better man to revise history than you, Jonathan. The point is that we need to move forward on the basis of the just transition principles. That is the ground that the DUP needs to get on to.

Months out before this summer, we are already facing another stark reminder of the catastrophic threat to the biodiversity and ecological well-being of Lough Neagh. The livelihoods of brown eel fishermen, the commercial fishing industry and all forms of economic activity along the lough shore are being devastated. With regard Lough Neagh, let me say this: worse is still to come.

The current geopolitical and economic crisis caused by the US attacks on Iran have now brought into sharp focus the unsustainability of our dependence on fossil fuels. The need for investment in sustainable green energy strategies, including green skills, and all-island renewable projects, including offshore wind, has rarely, if ever, been more urgent. The DUP chooses to pay lip service to the deepening cost-of-living crisis while, at the same time, it stands on the sidelines, warmongering about what is happening in the Middle East. The global instability caused by this latest war is exacerbating the cost-of-living pressures, and it is adding to the distress of those who are already struggling with the inability to pay for their heating and to fuel their vehicles.

This is a bizarre motion from the DUP. It is, at best, defeatist and lacks ambition, if it is not outrightly cynical. Notwithstanding the comments of the Member who spoke earlier, it juxtaposes one part of our regional economy against another, when both are absolutely essential. The climate action that the DUP has already agreed to and infrastructure development are both possible. Working families need clean air and waterways, and we must also have roads and rail, and the future growth of our regional economy and the environmental demands mean that we must make progress in both areas.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I speak on behalf of the Alliance Party to oppose the motion. Let us be honest about what the motion really is. It is not about better evidence, better value for money or better public services; it is about rolling back the climate commitments that the Assembly has already made in law and casting doubt, yet again, on the reality and urgency of the climate crisis. What we have here is Trumpian denial in one of its forms from the usual source.

As I have stressed in the Chamber on numerous occasions —

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

No. Not so early, and probably not given the time limits.

Climate change is not theoretical for the people of Northern Ireland. We already face more frequent and intense flooding, which causes damage to homes, farms and businesses. Our rivers and loughs are under pressure from rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns and ecological stress. There are heavier downpours that overwhelm the drainage and sewerage systems. Just last week, we had reports of blue-green algal blooms appearing again in Lough Neagh. Those are not abstract concerns that we can brush under the carpet; they threaten public health, food security, tourism and our quality of life. Put simply: every delay to serious climate action means greater damage and higher future costs.

The motion implies that the Climate Change Act is an obstacle to vital infrastructure such as the A5 and A4, yet the recent court judgement was clear that the problem was not the climate legislation but failures in planning and coordination across Departments. Climate law does not stop infrastructure; it demands better infrastructure that is properly assessed, consistent with emissions targets and aligned with a credible pathway to net zero. Furthermore, the motion attacks the draft climate action plan and implies that DAERA's work is an unjustifiable burden on farmers and households. In reality, the Minister has acted quickly to begin meeting our legal obligations and to place Northern Ireland on a more sustainable footing. From the green growth strategy to the environmental improvement plan, the Minister has shown how climate, biodiversity and green jobs can be integrated, rather than treated as competing priorities. The DUP motion goes further by criticising the legal requirement for a minimum spend on active travel and wrongly presents it as a barrier to road maintenance.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Does the Member agree that higher spending on active travel benefits all our communities?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Absolutely. I thank the Member for the intervention.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Thank you. I am sure that the Member, like me, has ample evidence in his constituency inbox that shows the demand for high-quality active travel. However, the way in which active travel has been put in the motion misunderstands a modern, efficient transport system that reduces congestion, cuts emissions, improves air quality and relieves pressure on the health service by helping to tackle obesity, heart disease and poor mental health. Alliance is proud to defend investment in active travel and to stand alongside groups, such as the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust, that know that increased active travel options benefit everyone.

I turn to the motion's claim about the alleged burden of net zero on ratepayers, householders and farmers.

That is a gross evasion of the facts. The Climate Change Committee reports that each pound invested in net zero generates between £2 and £4 in benefits, including decreased fuel imports, reduced energy costs and the prevention of climate damage. Additionally, the Economy Department has indicated that research shows that there are currently over 100,000 jobs in Northern Ireland's green sector, with a potential to grow another 58,000 by 2035.

Across the EU and beyond, Governments are investing in clean technologies, renewable energy, green skills and nature restoration because they see clear evidence that those investments create resilient jobs, attract investment and future-proof their economies. If we row back now, Northern Ireland will not save money. We will simply fall further behind. Businesses, including farms, are already innovating by using precision agriculture, restoring peatlands, investing in renewables and cutting waste and emissions. Our job is to support and accelerate that innovation, not undermine it with mixed messages from the Assembly.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I cannot, at this point; I really am going to run out of time.

A net zero Northern Ireland is a vision for a better, healthier, more prosperous Northern Ireland. The transition will be challenging. It will require upfront investment, new skills, better planning and support for those most exposed to change, but the status quo is not an option. The cost of inaction will dwarf the cost of acting now.

Of course, reaching net zero is not the responsibility of the AERA Minister alone; it requires commitment from every Department and, crucially, political will from the Assembly. That means putting a firm stop to the stop-start government that has led to wider delays in climate policy coming forward. While we debate, people outside the Chamber are getting on with it. Businesses are cutting emissions; farmers are adopting more nature-friendly practices; and community groups and young people are campaigning for cleaner air, active travel and restored habitats. The public want greener options and innovative solutions. We must listen to them and act accordingly. Recent research carried out by the RSPB in February clearly indicates public opinion. Some 86% of respondents believe that the Executive should do more, not less, to restore nature and fight climate change. That 86% figure directly contradicts the stance expressed by the DUP in the motion. Therefore it will not surprise the House to hear that we will vote against the motion.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

There is no doubt that the motion contains elements that are worthy of discussion. It raises legitimate concerns about infrastructure delivery, particularly the A5; pressures on ratepayers; and the real frustration that communities feel when long-promised projects are delayed. It also, entirely reasonably, asks that policies be properly costed and poses a question about where their impacts are understood and whether Departments are working efficiently. Those points in the motion deserve proper debate in the Chamber, but, unfortunately, due to the nature of the motion, each of us has only a few minutes in which to speak. However, the motion falls fundamentally short in its framing, unfortunately. At its core, it presents a false choice. It suggests that we must choose between environmental ambition and economic progress and between climate responsibility and delivering for our citizens. That is not only misleading but counterproductive

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Not at this point.

The reality is this: our environment and our economy are not in competition. They are inextricably linked. The agri-food sector — one of the cornerstones of our economy — depends entirely on a stable climate, healthy soils and sustainable water systems. Our ability to attract investment depends increasingly on credibility in the transition to net zero. Our energy security, food security and long-term prosperity hinge on getting the right balance.

The Ulster Unionist Party is clear that we do not accept that it is a binary choice. We say that we must do both and must do better, but we have to be honest about where the failures lie. If we miss the targets by 2027 — I suggest that we will — it will not be because of our farmers, builders or businesses; it will be because we were not here. It will be because of the failure of leadership and coordination at the heart of government and, particularly, because of the lack of interdepartmental working. We have had five years out of the past 10 years without ministerial leadership; five years without strategic direction; and five years without setting a clear and collective ambition for Northern Ireland, its environment and its economy.

That vacuum has consequences. We see it in the lack of preparedness in Departments. We see it in the failure to support renewable energy, whether it is onshore or offshore, and, in particular, in anaerobic digestion. My party will propose a motion to the House next week on that subject, and I hope that Members will get behind it, because it tackles the problems that we face: food security, energy security and our environmental credentials in this country. That is being solution-focused. We see it in the absence of meaningful progress on afforestation — we will miss that target — in the stagnation of waste management reform and in the slow pace of change in transport, especially when it comes to electric vehicles and active travel.

I will let the Member come in.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member. I will assess that motion when it comes, and, if I feel that it is in the best interests of the Northern Ireland public, I will certainly support it. In that vein, the Member has outlined many aspects of today's motion that he agrees with and some that he does not: will the Ulster Unionists support today's motion?

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

We need to be clear about this.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.