Northern Ireland Assembly, 21 April 2026

265 contributions from 51 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have received correspondence from the Minister of Justice that she is unable to be in the Chamber today. The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs will respond to both the motion on tackling antisocial scrambler and e-scooter use and the motion on drug dealing sentencing on her behalf.

Members' Statements

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

When will the Education Minister start listening? New research from Dublin City University and St Mary's University College, Belfast, should be a wake-up call to the House. Some 91% of teachers are experiencing burnout; nearly half are considering leaving the profession; and 95% say that workload is the driving factor. In Irish-medium education, the situation is even more challenging. That is not sustainable. Teachers are running on empty.

It has been a year since a workload review was commissioned and six months since recommendations were produced, yet there is still no action. Instead, the Minister piles more surveys, more consultations, more initiatives, more paperwork and more bureaucracy onto teachers and school leaders with absolutely no support, all in the pursuit of his harmful and regressive reform agenda. He is adding more pressure to a workforce that is already at breaking point.

Our teachers go above and beyond every day. They bring work home. They wash uniforms. They dip into their own pockets to feed children. They are carrying the weight of the system on their back. Teachers do not need warm words; they need action. The Minister needs to listen and listen now. Our teachers have had enough. They deserve an Education Minister who has their back and who cares. For my part, I will continue to stand up for our teachers and school leaders until they get the support that they deserve.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

Today, we mark 100 years since the birth of Queen Elizabeth II. It is a moment to reflect on a truly extraordinary life that helped shape modern Britain and, indeed, the wider world. Born in 1926, Queen Elizabeth could not have foreseen the long path that lay ahead, yet, from a young age, she very much understood duty. During the Second World War, she served in uniform, and, at just 25 years old, she became Queen, beginning a truly remarkable reign that would span more than 70 years.

Even before she ascended to the throne, she set out the principle that truly defined her life; aged just 21, she pledged that her whole life, whether long or short, would be devoted to service. It was a promise that she faithfully and truly kept right to her last day, during her long and glorious reign.

Queen Elizabeth's lifetime witnessed immense change, from post-war recovery to the digital age and from empire to commonwealth. Through it all, she remained a constant presence, steady and composed, guided by a deep sense of duty and faith. She visited more countries than any other monarch in history and made 25 visits to Northern Ireland, demonstrating a steadfast commitment to every part of her United Kingdom even in the most challenging of times. In moments of celebration, she shared in our nation's joy; in times of hardship and sadness, including conflict and the most recent global pandemic, her words brought reassurance, calm and inspiration to many. Many will remember her simple yet powerful message that we would meet again.

Of course, her long reign was not without challenges and much change over many years, but what endured was her resilience, her willingness to adapt, her unwavering dedication to constitutional responsibility and her remarkable leadership. As we mark the centenary of her birth, we remember the late Queen with deep affection and profound gratitude for her leadership. We cherish her enduring legacy. That leadership is still missed to this day in these difficult and challenging times. Her example of duty, dedication, resilience and selfless service continues to inspire us all. One hundred years on from her birth, we can say with confidence that we will truly never see her like again. Hers was a life defined not by words alone but by her unwavering commitment and lifetime of service to others.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I, too, take a moment today to mark what would have been the 100th birthday of the late monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. She was a woman who devoted herself entirely to a life of service. She stood as a constant — steady, gracious and unwavering. She was a beacon not just for a nation but for people across the world. Through decades of change, through moments of joy and profound sorrow and through no small number of personal family difficulties, she never faltered. She faced every challenge with quiet dignity and composure, using her position always in the service of others.

That spirit of service began long before she took the throne. In October 1940, a 14-year-old Princess Elizabeth broadcast on the BBC's 'Children's Hour', speaking to the evacuated children of a nation at war. She offered sincere sympathy to those separated from their families and missing those whom they loved the most. She spoke of the courage and cheerfulness that she saw around her, of her trust in God and of her belief that peace would come and the children of that day would grow up to make the world a better place. That thread of faith, compassion and hope never left her.

Here in our community, her passing was felt deeply. She was not a distant figure; she came to us, she walked among us and she listened. Her support for the peace process in Northern Ireland was personal and heartfelt. She understood what had been sacrificed to reach that fragile peace, and she honoured it in everything that she did. And then there was Enniskillen. In 2012, she came to Fermanagh, opened the South West Acute Hospital and, away from the cameras, privately met families who had lost loved ones in the 1987 Remembrance Sunday bomb. No photographers, no headlines: just a woman of immense compassion letting those families know that they had not been forgotten. That was her character.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II gave a lifetime to service with dignity and grace. Back in 1940, she hoped that the children of that generation would make the world a better place, and perhaps what is most remarkable is that she did not simply wish for it; she lived it. She proved that one life lived with grace and purpose can truly make the world a better and happier place. She is gone, but she is not forgotten. We were truly fortunate to have known her reign.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Last year, I wrote to the UK Security Minister seeking clarity on whether the current Police Ombudsman was subject to developed vetting, whether that clearance remained active and what safeguards applied to the accessing of highly sensitive or national security-related material.

The response failed to answer those basic questions; instead, responsibility was passed elsewhere. The Minister stated that Departments determined who required clearance and, in that case, responsibility rested with Northern Ireland Departments. I then raised the matter with the First Minister, the deputy First Minister and the Justice Minister. Their responses provided no clarity either.

The position is now clear. Despite repeated questions, no authority has confirmed as a matter of fact that the Police Ombudsman holds active, developed vetting, only that it is said to be a condition of appointment. That is not good enough for a role that has access to sensitive policing information and material that may engage national security considerations. There must be clear accountability on the matter. The current situation, where responsibility is passed around but no answers are given, cannot continue. The Prime Minister's handling of the Mandelson appointment has raised significant questions on vetting and has exposed weaknesses. I trust that a full review will be carried out and that vetting must take place prior to appointments to posts requiring security clearance.

There are big questions about what goes on in this devolved Administration as well. If there is a question around Ms Anderson's clearance, how much more should there have been over Martin McGuinness, Gerry Kelly and indeed a member of the notorious Doris family from mid-Ulster?

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

During Allergy Awareness Week, I want to highlight an issue that, whilst relatively uncommon in any individual school on any given day, can have serious consequences when it arises: severe food allergy and anaphylaxis in our schools.

Anaphylaxis is not always obvious. We often think of severe breathing difficulties, but it can begin with more subtle signs: a child becoming dizzy or confused; having a persistent cough or hoarse voice; vomiting; swelling; having a rash; or simply not responding as they normally would. Those early signs matter, because, when a reaction takes hold, there is little time to act, and delay can have serious consequences. Children living with serious allergies are often capable of managing their condition. They understand the risks and the routine, but, in a severe reaction, they may not always be able to treat themselves. That is when adults around them need to step in quickly and with confidence, and that is where Northern Ireland falls short.

In England, following the tragic death of Benedict Blythe, steps have been taken to place allergy safety in schools on a statutory footing, including access to emergency pens, staff training and clear school policies. Here, we still rely on guidance. The Department's position makes it clear that there is no overarching legal duty on school staff to administer medication and that staff may choose not to volunteer. That is not a criticism of teachers; it is recognition that we are asking them to carry a significant responsibility without consistently giving them clarity, training or legal support to do so.

In our system, guidance alone is not enough. With different school sectors and boards of governors setting policies at their own local level, we inevitably end up with inconsistency. At present, it is largely treated as an individual medical issue for each child, managed through care plans in schools, but, when the risk is life-threatening and time-critical, it is no longer just an individual issue; it is a system-wide safety issue that requires a system-wide response. We have taken the same approach elsewhere: every school in Northern Ireland now has a defibrillator on site. We recognise that rare but critical incidents require preparation, consistency and confidence to act. Anaphylaxis deserves the same level of seriousness.

There is also a wider concern. Where schools do not feel properly equipped or supported to manage serious medical conditions, we risk creating situations where children are not fully accommodated. In some cases, it may lead to reluctance to admit them to that school, and that raises real concerns about equality of access to education. We should not allow that position to develop.

The lesson from Benedict's case in England is not about what went wrong but about what we can put right. It is about putting clear systems in place so that, when something happens, there is no hesitation and no uncertainty about what needs to be done in that moment.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Ár gCumhacht, Ar bPlainéad is téama do Lá an Domhain amárach. Spreagann sé gach duine lena ról féin a imirt i bhforbairt ár gcomhshaoil. Tá ról ríthábhachtach ag an Tionól i gcur chun cinn an chomhshaoil. Ní mór dúinn a chinntiú go gcomhlíontar spriocanna glan-nialasachta leis an chomhshaol a chosaint agus le dul i ngleic leis an athrú aeráide. Ní ghlacfar leis an tséanadh ná leis an easpa gníomhaíochta.

Ní thig coinneáil linn bheith ag brath ar bhreoslaí iontaise, mar is léir ó na géarchéimeanna sa pholaitíocht agus san eacnamaíocht ar fud an domhain. Má bhí gá riamh le hinfheistíocht i straitéisí fuinnimh ghlais inbhuanaithe, lena n-áirítear scileanna glasa agus tionscadail in-athnuaite uile-oileáin, amhail gaoth amach ón chósta, tá gá práinneach léi anois.

Is maith is eol dúinn uilig go bhfuil bithéagsúlacht agus folláine éiceolaíoch Loch nEachach faoi bhagairt thubaisteach. Is cúis imní iad na tuairiscí deireanacha ar an alga ghormghlas ar loch an Bhréantair i mo cheantar. Má thig tú ar rud a shíleann tú go mb’fhéidir gur alga gormghlas é, déan é a thuairisciú tríd an aip Bloomin Algae nó tríd an Ghníomhaireacht Comhshaoil. Tá cosaint, tacaíocht agus cothabháil ár n-uisce ríthábhachtach dár ngeilleagar agus dár bhfolláine.

Molaim gach duine a d'eagraigh agus a ghlac páirt in imeachtaí Lá an Domhain ar fud an oileáin le seachtain anuas.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Yesterday marked a hugely significant milestone, the 70th anniversary of the MS Society Northern Ireland and its unwavering support for people who are affected by MS. What began in England back in 1953, when founders Richard and Mary Cave responded to the glaring lack of support and treatments for people living with MS, sparked an interest in the MS community in Northern Ireland, with the first branches of the society being established here in 1956. The MS Society has grown into a remarkable national movement of care, research, awareness and community. Over the past seven decades, the MS Society has been at the heart of support for thousands of families. It has funded pioneering research right here at Queen's University Belfast, provided vital services, lobbied for better services and forged a community in which no one should face MS alone.

The MS Society Northern Ireland held an event yesterday in the Long Gallery, where I was able to meet and introduce myself to some exceptional characters, some tremendous people. One of them was Sam Young, a volunteer fundraiser with the MS Society. Sam's wife, Mae, was diagnosed with MS in 2019, which inspired him to take action. Sam has written two books, with all the proceeds going to MS research, raising thousands of pounds.

It is a particularly special privilege to recognise one person whose dedication reflects the absolute best of that community spirit. I am delighted to mention and to honour Pat Crossley, who has given 40 years of extraordinary voluntary service to the MS Society Northern Ireland and to the people of Ballymoney and beyond. Pat's journey with the Ballymoney group began four decades ago when she stepped forward to lend a hand, and, in doing so, she strengthened support in her local community, helped to maintain one of our longest-serving groups and embodied compassion in action. From organising social gatherings and exercise classes, to representing the MS Society at Downing Street and Buckingham Palace, to personal fundraising such as a parachute jump and abseiling, Pat's contribution has helped to raise funds and awareness in ways that truly uplift others. Through every decade of change, she has been a steadfast champion, not because it was easy but because caring has always been in her nature. Pat's dedication is not only to supporting people with MS but has helped to shape a community where hope, connection and support flourish. As one of Pat's MLAs, I thank her for her dedicated service. She even contacted me by email at 10.40 last night to thank me for being there yesterday.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Pat is indeed a trouper.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I pay tribute to the newest champion of Ireland, Cahir McMaster from Ballinascreen, who was crowned all-Ireland champion after his boxing match at the weekend at the National Stadium in Dublin. I am delighted to speak about his success this morning.

Cahir is one of my constituents, and I know him well. Indeed, he, his brother, Oisin, and his sister, Aoibhinn, are three characters whom I regularly bump into. They are brilliant young people who always have time to stop and say hello. They have great manners, and there is always a bit of craic with them, so I am delighted at Cahir's success. It is a testament to the kind of people that they are that the first thing that Cahir's mother, Louise, wrote in her post acknowledging Cahir's success was to pay tribute to and thank his coaches at St John's Amateur Boxing Club in Swatragh. The McMasters are great people, and I love to see great people doing well.

Cahir narrowly lost in the semi-final last year, and this year he retained an Ulster title, so his boxing trajectory has been an upward one for some time. It has been obvious that this was in the pipeline for him. He can now say that he is an all-Ireland champion, and that will never be taken from him. I am sure that this is just the beginning for Cahir. It is not the end of his success. I look forward to watching that success unfold in the years to come, and I congratulate Cahir himself, his sister, Aoibhinn, his brother, Oisin, and his mother and father, Louise and Enda. I know that the whole of Ballinascreen is proud of Cahir's success and wishes him all the very best for the future.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Yesterday, an important event took place in Enniskillen to raise awareness of ending violence against women and girls. A mural was officially unveiled in the town centre as part of Fermanagh and Omagh District Council's Murals with Meaning project. The mural, created by Hannah Constance, depicts a phoenix, which symbolises resilience, survival and strength. The artist herself said:

"Like a phoenix, we women will always rise from the ashes."

We must ensure that women are not forced to rise from the ashes in the first place. That means raising awareness, breaking silence and bringing abuse out of the shadows into the light so that every woman knows that she can speak out and get the help that she needs.

Kerrie Flood, the CEO of Fermanagh and Omagh Women's Aid, has done tremendous work in the local area. She is a force of nature, and her leadership continues to make a real difference to the lives of women and their families. Speaking about the mural, she said:

"The phoenix rises not because of violence, but because it refuses to be erased or silenced."

Those words should stay with us. Domestic abuse thrives in silence but is stopped by action, and we must call out domestic abuse at every opportunity. We have a duty not only to educate but to act. We have a strategy, and I am pleased that the second action plan on ending violence against women and girls is being launched as we speak. Plans alone will not save lives, but implementation will.

Since 2020, more than 30 women have been killed in Northern Ireland, and behind every name is a family and a future taken far too soon. In my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, we have seen too many lose their life as a result of domestic abuse. It is not an issue for one Department, one agency or one group of people. Rather, it is a societal issue. It reaches into every community, every street and every home, and we have a responsibility to recognise the signs, speak up and act. The recent murder of Amy Doherty in Londonderry is just another stark reminder of the urgency to do so. I also note the work being done on Jade's law, which seeks to better protect families affected by such devastating crimes. I support that call. It is time that we saw meaningful progress made on Jade's law in Northern Ireland.

I commend Fermanagh and Omagh District Council, Enniskillen business improvement district and the Executive Office for their funding to deliver such a powerful and visible message through that mural.

Women should not have to live in fear in our communities: not today, not tomorrow, not ever. It is time to end violence against women and girls.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I congratulate Limavady United, who, at the weekend, clinched their league title and will now play in the Sports Direct Premiership along with the likes of the current top four — the Coleraines, the Larnes, the Glentorans and the Linfields — two of which they have beaten recently. It is hard to put into words how much it means for the town: not just the players and staff but everyone connected to Limavady.

We all have to remember that the football club is not one that is built on big budgets or big headlines; it is built on people who have pride and passion for the local game and their local area. It is built on lads who train after work in all kinds of weather, coaches who give up their time, because they demand results, and supporters who turn up week in, week out, whether it is freezing or there is lashing rain, at the Showgrounds or any other venue across the Province. That is what makes the Playr-Fit Championship win so special.

I have had the opportunity to watch Limavady play on about a dozen occasions this season. I think about the season that they have had: grinding out results when it mattered, sticking together when things did not go their way and finding a little bit of quality on the big occasions. There were games that were not pretty, but the group of lads dug in, and the supporters got behind their team. There were games during which the football was brilliant, full of energy and belief, and there were a few bad days, but the group never lost sight of what it was chasing.

It has been an incredible team effort. You cannot talk about the league win without mentioning the way in which the players fight for one another and represent the Limavady badge. Those standards, including the pride that they should have in playing for the club, are set in the dressing room.

To the loyal band of supporters I say that this is your moment too. They have travelled and backed the team, believing that they could get the job done. I know that there were days this season when the support made the difference: the manager, Paul Owens, has admitted that. Sadly, in recent weeks, the club has lost loyal stalwarts Alec Trainor and Winston Moore, and, of course, we can look further back to see the club's biggest superfan, Mr David Brewster, who passed away suddenly five years ago. The party has been huge in the town, but it will be even bigger where those three are.

Winning the Playr-Fit Championship is not easy. It is a tough league, and it takes a lot of character and heart; the team has shown that. I say this to everyone connected with the club: "Enjoy this. Take it in, because history like this does not come around often". Limavady are champions, and that is fully deserved. The league table does not lie. From the House, I say, "Well done, every one of you".

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

I highlight the important role played by our uniformed youth organisations across Northern Ireland, particularly the Boys' Brigade (BB) and the Girls' Brigade (GB).

BB and GB displays are taking place across Northern Ireland as another season comes to a close. I am sure that many Members will have attended those events. Indeed, anyone who has attended a display will have seen at first hand the teamwork, friendship, discipline and respect demonstrated by the young people involved. Those qualities are the fruit of dedicated volunteer leaders' work week in, week out to support young people, providing them with much-needed structure and purpose and a sense of belonging that is grounded in a solid, faith-based context.

The BB and GB teach boys and girls to be responsible, respectful and community-minded, qualities that are becoming rarer in a culture that often prioritises individualism. It is regrettable that, all too often, government and external funders have been reluctant to support such organisations and unwilling to acknowledge the immense contribution that they make to the fabric of our society and the betterment of our people, simply because they operate with a faith-based perspective. I welcome the work being undertaken by the Communities Minister and others to rectify inequality and discrimination in that regard.

In an age of rising social isolation and social difficulties among children and young people, the opportunity for engagement and interaction in a social setting with peers, enjoying activities across sport, music and community service, continues to be vital to families and their boys and girls across the country.

Some Members will have attended the recent "Lost Boys" briefing by the Centre for Social Justice. Some of the figures for underachievement among young boys that were presented at that briefing were stark. The work of the BB is one of the best antidotes available to many of the problems being experienced across society. I trust that the House will make every effort to support not only our uniformed youth organisations but all those who volunteer to make a difference for the next generations.

Opposition Business

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

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes the real and immediate pressures facing workers and businesses as a result of the United States’ illegal war with Iran; further notes that the British Government’s response has been insufficient; acknowledges that, while most taxation and fiscal powers lie with the British Government, the Northern Ireland Executive’s response has been non-existent; and calls on the Northern Ireland Executive, in conjunction with the British Government, to outline the actions they will take to alleviate pressures facing workers and businesses, including measures such as the extension of rural fuel duty relief, support for those working in domiciliary care, reduced fares for public transport and targeted support for industries that have been most affected.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Business Committee has agreed that you can have up to one and a half hours for the debate. As an amendment has been selected, a further 15 minutes will be added to the motion. The proposer has 10 minutes to propose the motion, and there will be 10 minutes to wind up the debate.

Please open the debate.

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

I have to say that it is shameful that, when we are having the first detailed, substantive and dedicated debate on the cost-of-living crisis created by the issues in the Middle East, there is such paltry participation from Executive parties. Some Executive parties have only one or two Members in the Chamber. In a month in which the public are losing trust in this institution and can see Members getting a large pay rise, there will be outrage at the pathetic attendance by Members of Executive parties at today's debate. Nevertheless, the Opposition are here to put forward the case that the people want to be made.

In exactly one week, the conflict in Iran will be two months old. We do not yet know what the conclusion of that war will be, but most serious people agree that the decision of Trump's America and Netanyahu's Israel to begin an aerial bombing campaign without a clear plan is one of the most idiotic and catastrophic military fiascos of the century. It is not just idiotic but immoral and illegal. It includes the killing of hundreds of schoolgirls in Minab and the obscene, genocidal threats of the madman Trump to wipe out an entire civilisation. Meanwhile, the Israeli Government have added to the list of their atrocities committed in Gaza more war crimes in south Lebanon.

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

Ordinary people in the North and everywhere have been left feeling helpless and powerless to respond to the insanity and immorality unfolding in the Middle East. Given the huge increase in tourism in the Gulf States and migration there for work, many families have been directly touched, because their relatives have found themselves sheltering from missiles. As we know — it is why we are having the debate — that insanity has had an impact on the costs that face everyday people, including ordinary workers getting to their jobs and families filling their oil tanks. The spike in international oil prices from between $60 and $70 a barrel to well over $100 has been seen on every forecourt in the country; indeed, on the first Monday after the strikes started, I saw the price rise between my drives to and from Stormont. One might reasonably ask why the price rises were felt from the Strait of Hormuz to Belfast forecourts, but that is a debate for another day. The price of home heating oil doubled and has remained high. It has now been £1,000 for 900 litres for more than a month. That spike happened faster and has already reached a higher peak than that created by Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine. It is not just households. Small businesses and farmers are, as we know, particularly exposed to increases in the cost of diesel and fertiliser. Community groups, churches and sports groups all will face extraordinary pressures from the price rises.

Listing those pressures is not going to do people any good. What they want to know from those whom they elect is what is being done to support them. They know that no one can predict Trump's actions or control energy markets, but, given how remote we are from the concerns of decision-makers in London — we all know that; it is repeated many times by Members in the Chamber — they had a right to expect leadership and responsibility from the Executive. However, the answer from the Northern Ireland Executive for weeks on end has been next to nothing. It has been non-existent. Computer says no. Talk to the hand, or perhaps talk to London. It has been, quite simply, a complete abdication of responsibility.

To be clear, the Executive do not have limitless financial firepower to deal with the consequences. We in the Opposition have never said otherwise. The responsibility for, for example, fuel duty obviously rests with the British Government, not the Executive, but that cannot be an excuse for the complete abdication of responsibility, which is what we have seen from the Executive.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

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

Not yet, but I will at some point.

Let me offer this as an example. Trump and Netanyahu began bombing Iran on 28 February. Prices spiked immediately, and, as I said, they fed through to forecourts and kerosene suppliers immediately. When was the first official statement from the Executive Office? It was Friday week ago, on 10 April. The First Minister and deputy First Minister's statement, which called on the UK Government to take action, said that:

“Given the scale and immediacy of this crisis, we have asked the Prime Minister to act decisively and without delay.”

They have a brass neck. It took the First Minister and the deputy First Minister more than five weeks to say a thing at the centre of devolved government. They are hardly well placed to talk about being decisive and acting without delay. To repeat, it is not wrong for the Executive to say that they want and need more help from the UK Government; in fact, it is a core part of devolved government. That is how the highly centralised UK state, which, by the way, I obviously aspire not to be a part of, is set up, whether we like it or not. However, that does not stop the Executive devoting maximum resource to planning their response. This is a point that I will come back to: if you believe that the UK Government are inept or incompetent or simply do not prioritise the people of the North — we in the SDLP agree with that — that does not exempt the Executive from doing their work; it makes it more important that they do their work. It makes it more important that they speak with one voice. It makes it more important that they take responsibility, not less. If the Labour Government and Starmer — a master of not taking responsibility, as we have found out in recent days — are not taking responsibility for the people of Northern Ireland, the people in the Assembly and the Executive had better damn well do so.

Where were the urgent summits with consumer groups, trade unions, agriculture and business representative bodies? Where are the communications with petrol wholesalers and retailers to warn against profiteering? Perhaps they happened, but I did not see them. We were not told about them. There were not reams of statements in the House about it. Where was the urgency in designing and announcing a scheme to spend the £17 million, which, I agree, is not enough, to support families with home heating oil? The priority for the main Executive parties was not taking responsibility or leading; it was ensuring that someone else got the blame for not acting.

Do not get me wrong: the UK Government needed to be pressurised, but the Executive needed to take responsibility rather than simply shifting blame. Rather than working together for the common good, as the Pledge of Office requires of them and all of us, and taking collective responsibility for helping people, the DUP was clear about where blame lay for the lack of help: it was the Shinners. Of course, Sinn Féin was equally clear that it was the Brits.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

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

Is it any wonder that so many of our people hold our devolved politics in such contempt when, at a time of real crisis in their lives, their locally devolved elected Government waste weeks in pointless rows and blame shifting, rather than working together to help them?

I will give way briefly.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

We have had the leader of the Opposition talking now for nearly seven minutes and gaslighting the public. The Communities Minister delivered last week a support package for the hardest-pressed homes — 70% of homes — in Northern Ireland.

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

It is an intervention, not a speech.

We welcome the Communities Minister's making progress. I am about to come on to that. It took more than a month. That is not gaslighting; it is holding the Executive to account.

Take some responsibility. You have executive power. You ask people to vote for you. Your two parties ask people to vote for them. Do not shirk responsibility. We are the Opposition; it is our job to hold you to account.

Of course, the leaderless, rudderless UK Government made matters worse with their slow response and contradictory utterances. It was utterly unhelpful for the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State to put out information that was unhelpful and contradictory. To be absolutely clear, there are Ministers and parties here who are determined to shift responsibility —.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

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

I will not get any more time, so I am afraid that I cannot take loads of interventions. I am normally generous.

They are determined to shift responsibility for anything and everything on to a hapless and failing UK Government. Bad decisions or no decisions do not absolve London or the Executive from blame for doing nothing. As I said, they make it even more important that there is strong local leadership.

As I said to Deborah Erskine — I should have welcomed her back to the Chamber in slightly less tense circumstances than this; I hope that she and her baby are well — it is welcome that the Executive made a commitment to match-fund the original allocation of the scheme that was announced last week. It begs the question of why it was not announced weeks ago. That is what this is all about. Why was it not announced weeks ago? If the Executive can find £19 million to match-fund the home heating oil scheme, why could they not find a smaller amount to help the charities failed by the local growth fund? Again, that is connected to the irresponsibility of the UK Government.

More broadly, it illustrates a key point, one that we keep returning to about our politics: if Ministers act with shared purpose and take responsibility, they can get things done. I do not criticise the Executive for making that announcement; I do not say that they have limitless power or limitless finances. I say, "Take responsibility". People sent us here — they sent the two big parties in particular — to lead in government. Take responsibility, collectively. Do not simply profit from having Punch and Judy fights with each other and shifting blame, meaning that the public are gaslit — I use a word that was used before. The lack of responsibility-taking is absolutely shameful.

It does not have to be like this. At a time when the public are struggling, it behoves all of us to take responsibility locally, even if the UK Government are not delivering — especially if the UK Government are not delivering. We need to show people not only that these institutions can work but that politics can work. There are dark actors on this island and in this society who are trying to turn people away from democratic politics. Those of us who believe in democracy, power-sharing and the institutions need to prove that they can work. I say this to the public: they can work; do not lose hope. It behoves all of us to take responsibility —

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up.

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

— rather than shift blame.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out all after "lie with the British Government," and insert: "and the Executive have now agreed an enhanced support package for homes relying on heating oil, the delayed response from the Minister for Communities and Minister for the Economy has increased the pressure facing local households and businesses; and calls on the Northern Ireland Executive, in conjunction with the British Government, to outline the actions they will take to alleviate pressures facing workers and businesses, including measures such as a temporary reduction in fuel duty, increased windfall taxes on energy giants, support for those working in domiciliary care, reduced fares for public transport and targeted support for other industries that have been most affected."

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

You will have 10 minutes to propose the amendment and five minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes. Please open the debate on the amendment.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. There is no doubt that households, businesses, farmers, hauliers, domiciliary care workers and many others in our society are working themselves to the bone and are under enormous pressure as a direct consequence of Donald Trump's illegal war in Iran — a war that was foolishly cheerled by many Members. I agree with the leader of the Opposition that the response from the top of the Executive at the outbreak of that crisis was confused, slow and beset by bickering, point-scoring, blame shifting and obfuscation. There was a complete absence of the leadership that workers, families and businesses needed and demanded.

We had the bizarre spectacle of the Communities Minister, whilst in Washington DC clinking glasses with Donald Trump and his cronies, blaming the Sinn Féin Economy Minister for not delivering the scheme on home heating oil and then later back-pedalling and accepting that it was the responsibility of his Department. The response has been confused and slow and has done little to bestow any confidence in the public about the DUP and Sinn Féin's ability to deliver in times of crisis.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for giving way. At the outset, you referred to "bickering", and then you went on to talk about the DUP and Sinn Féin, while correctly articulating that the Communities Minister made an inaccurate claim about a Sinn Féin Minister and had to backtrack. Do you accept that that framing and that narrative are unhelpful when we acknowledge where the problems lie and that it would be better if we worked together rather than tried to point-score?

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

I watched quite a lot of Members from both parties pointing fingers across the Chamber last week in the absence of any clarity on a scheme, so I stand over my assertion. We still have no clarity on how £81 million in annually managed expenditure (AME) money will be distributed to support people with their energy bills. The response from the Department for Communities and the Department for the Economy has been far too slow.

The amendment seeks to acknowledge that, since the SDLP motion was laid, important progress has been made. I recognise the statement that was issued belatedly by the First Minister and deputy First Minister last week and the progress that was made belatedly by the Communities Minister in designing a scheme and bringing it to the Executive to seek agreement. It is significant and welcome that, even in the absence of action from the UK Government and even with the financial constraints that the Executive face, agreement was found on a scheme that will support 340,000 households that earn less than £30,000 and rely on home heating oil.

It is important to stress that the Executive do not have unlimited financial or fiscal power and that the UK Government should and could step up to deliver a cut in fuel duty, make changes to VAT, support people with their energy bills and extend the windfall taxes on big oil and gas companies, which are gouging and profiting off the backs of our struggling constituents. It is not only big oil and gas companies that are having a time of it at the moment. The Treasury is experiencing a windfall from increased tax revenues, and that cannot be forgotten. Whilst the UK Government and Keir Starmer are weak and distracted by their disgraceful handling of the Peter Mandelson affair, our constituents are being left to suffer and are struggling.

We also cannot divorce this conversation from the conversation about fair funding for public services in Northern Ireland. I am sick, sore and tired of my constituents, who pay their National Insurance and tax and who, according to the Nevin Economic Research Institute (NERI), pay a greater proportion of tax than people in other parts of the UK for the quality of services that they get, being told that their representatives are simply going to London with a begging bowl when we know that Scotland and Wales receive considerably more funding, way above their level of need, than we do in this part of the UK. That inequality was acknowledged by the Tory Government and needs to be rectified by the Labour Government. It would be a sad indictment if Hilary Benn, Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer presided over underfunding of our public services that even the Tories conceded was unacceptable and should not continue.

That is where I must diverge from the leader of the Opposition, because I think that it is right that parties take responsibility. In 2024, the leader of the Opposition's party stood on a manifesto that told the people of Northern Ireland that SDLP MPs are best placed to deliver change because they will have the strongest relationship with a new Labour Government. That party also said to voters in its manifesto, "Just imagine what we could do with a Labour Government who understand this place and listen to our MPs". Well, how the leader of the Opposition's tune has changed, and I would welcome his party speaking with one united voice, along with every other party in the Chamber, for the kind of intervention from the Labour Government that the people whom we represent deserve.

This is not just about —

[Interruption.]

This is not just about —

[Interruption.]

The Members should cease their chuntering so that I can continue. This is not just about today's crisis; it is about how we make progress to insulate families from future shocks. It is about looking beyond our own narrow borders towards the EU to look at how, in a customs union and with closer alignment with the single market, the UK will have a stronger economy that will strengthen the UK Government's hands to support people through this crisis. It is about rejecting the culture war nonsense that we have heard in the Chamber. Members have risen to their feet and said, "Oh, the rising energy bills are nothing to do with Trump's illegal war. It is because of that woke renewable nonsense", but we all know that the only way to cut bills, protect our environment and meet our climate commitments is by accelerating our transition to renewable energy so that our constituents are no longer susceptible to the roller coaster of fossil fuel prices and are no longer at the behest of global dictators when it comes to setting the price of their energy bills.

Therefore, I ask Members to acknowledge that the initial response to this crisis fell far short of what is required and that greater leadership was required sooner to instil confidence among the public in Stormont and the Executive's ability to deliver, but they should also acknowledge that, in the absence of any action from the UK Government and in very difficult circumstances, parties have stepped up and put in place a vital support scheme for people. That is to be welcomed. I hope that all parties can coalesce around the amendment, which, as I say, recognises the shortcomings but is not shy in recognising where progress has been made.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Before I get into my remarks, it is important that I remind Members why we are here today discussing this issue. We are here because of the actions of Donald Trump and his cronies. They have launched an unprovoked and illegal war in Iran. That illegal war is the sole cause of the energy crisis that is having a devastating impact on workers, families and businesses, including farm businesses, in the North and beyond. As long as the war continues, oil and gas will remain unaffordable, and I fear that they will remain unaffordable long after the war has finished.

We can all agree that people here are suffering, and we need to ensure that they receive the support that they need. The price of oil has more than doubled since the start of the war, with thousands of families unable to heat their home or put food on the table. Businesses are also suffering. We have seen the frustration of the many farmers and transport hauliers who have engaged in protests across the island. Simply put, large parts of our economy rely on oil and gas as an energy source, and the price of oil has now plunged the economy into crisis. That is a timely reminder of the risks associated with an over-reliance on a volatile commodity such as oil, the supply and distribution of which we have absolutely no control over. The crisis should serve as a call to action to decarbonise our economy and use renewable energy sources.

It is important that we recognise the actions that the Executive have taken to support people during the crisis, which is something that the SDLP motion fails to do. Just last week, the Executive announced a support package worth £36 million, which will be targeted at those who are most in need, including people with disabilities and lower-income working families.

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

Will the Member take an intervention?

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Yes. Go ahead.

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

As we have said, we would like to see the support package be improved, but we welcome the fact that there has been an intervention. Our point is that the support package should have come more quickly. Owing to the way in which business deadlines work in the House, we could not have included that, because we had to submit the motion a fortnight ago. We are trying to change how the business deadlines work. I just wanted to provide clarification, however.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am glad that I allowed the Member an intervention, as it gave him a second opportunity to welcome the support package. It is a help to working families whose primary source of energy is home heating oil. With the announcement of that vital support package — I welcome the fact that the Minister for Communities has recognised that it is his Department that needs to deliver on it — we now need to make the application process as straightforward and seamless as possible so that the money is got out into the pockets of those who need it most.

We also need to acknowledge that the response of the British Government to the crisis has been hopelessly inadequate. So far, the British Government have provided the Executive with only £17 million of extra funding. That will not even touch the sides of what will be needed here. They have refused all calls to date to deliver real, substantial financial support, including cutting tax and fuel duty, which would have a massive impact. Instead, the British Government have prioritised building weapons of war over supporting the people who are most in need. Instead of standing up to the warmongers in the White House, they have put their military bases at the disposal of those who are causing the crisis that we are currently facing.

We, a chairde

[Translation: friends]

, need to see a radically different approach from the British Government: one that moves away from austerity and from complicity in an illegal war towards supporting vulnerable households. I welcome the fact that the Executive are united in calling for that and that a letter that the First Minister and the deputy First Minister signed has been sent to the British Government. People here do not have the luxury of waiting any longer. They need support, and they need it now.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Families are struggling to make ends meet. Businesses are fighting to stay afloat. Farmers, hauliers and those in construction are being squeezed from every direction. Around two thirds of our homes rely on home heating oil. When prices spike, as they have done dramatically, our constituents feel that immediately and severely. Those who work in essential sectors such as agriculture, haulage and construction are also being crippled by soaring costs and rising prices. Those are not optional industries. Rather, they are the backbone of our economy.

Although the motion criticises the Government's response, it is important to acknowledge fully how domestic policy choices are making matters worse. Excessive taxation on fuel, the cumulative cost of net zero policies and a clear lack of a cost-benefit analysis are all adding to the burden on working people. We must ensure that we do things in a balanced, affordable and realistic way.

Imposing additional costs on families and businesses without transparency or justification is not the right approach. We have seen how those rigid climate targets are impacting on major projects, including the A5, the A4 southern bypass and the A1. Many of those proposals, which have not been quantified, are being advanced under the current climate action plan. Families and businesses are being asked therefore to shoulder additional burdens without having clarity on what those costs will mean or what the return will be.

It has been the DUP that has consistently called for practical and immediate measures. We need to see a reduction in fuel duty to ease the pressure at the pumps. We need VAT on home heating oil to be removed, at least temporarily, while the markets remain volatile. We need a serious and transparent assessment of the net zero policies. It is interesting to see that those in the Chamber who have called for that support have short memories, because, just last week, the SDLP, Sinn Féin, Alliance and, regrettably, the UUP all lined up to press ahead with a blank cheque instead of rightly carrying out cost checks on net zero targets.

Many fiscal levers to ensure that homes — all homes — see support remain at Westminster. The SDLP, however, has got it wrong again. The support from the Executive is not "non-existent". Our Communities Minister has stepped up to support those homes that are most pressed. The Communities Minister took on that work to get support out the door. He has done that consistently, even when he was Economy Minister in 2022. Some people did not have their listening ears on in the Chamber yesterday during questions to the Minister for Communities, so, I repeat: the reason that it took a month was because the Minister wanted to get a plan together that supported not only those who are on benefits but working people and to test the options that were available to him and the Executive. While others talk a good talk, the DUP steps up and delivers.

Let us not pretend, however, that regional interventions alone will solve the problem of scale. At Westminster, our DUP MPs have been clear that, when global prices rise, we need to see government policy that makes the decisions to sort out the excessive taxation. People do not want warm words or political point-scoring. Hitting out at the DUP here, when it is the DUP that is delivering in the Executive and speaking out on the issue at Westminster, is nothing more than opportunistic party political point-scoring.

The DUP will continue to stand up for a fair and balanced approach to safeguarding household finances, supporting our key industries and ensuring that our working people are not left to carry the burden alone. We will continue our call at Westminster for action to support each household in Northern Ireland. It is time to cut the fuel duty and —

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— remove VAT from home heating oil.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call Deborah Erskine. No, I do not.

[Laughter.]

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will go again.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call Diana Armstrong.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. We represent the same constituency, but we are slightly different in some ways. However, that is what people like, and that is what people elect us for. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and thank you, Deborah, for giving way.

There is no doubt that workers, families and business owners right across Northern Ireland face real and immediate concerns and pressures as a result of the rising living costs. While we have seen some easing in the home heating oil prices, those costs remain at over £900 for 900 litres, far above pre-March levels, and any downward movement is simply not happening quickly enough. That reality is putting severe pressure on household budgets and on the viability of many small and medium-sized businesses.

There is no question that the ongoing instability in the Middle East is exacerbating an already fragile situation. Global events do not occur in isolation, as we saw following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. International conflict quickly translates into higher prices at home. Disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has again exposed how vulnerable our fuel supply chains are, with many people now restricting journeys to absolute essentials because of escalating costs. However, the debate must remain focused on the practical impacts for our constituents. We do not believe that it is helpful for the Assembly to seek to adjudicate on the legality of international conflicts. What is beyond dispute is that global instability has direct consequences for households, and it is those consequences that demand our attention today.

The Ulster Unionist Party is focused on outcomes rather than political point-scoring. The reality is that the primary levers of taxation and fiscal policy lie with the UK Government, and it is right that Westminster is called upon to act decisively. Measures such as temporary fuel relief, duty reductions, windfall taxes, energy drives and targeted cost-of-living support are clearly matters for the Chancellor. That said, where devolved powers exist, they must be exercised responsibly and without delay. The Executive simply cannot pass the blame elsewhere. We have heard blame being apportioned widely here this morning in the Chamber. The delayed response from the Minister for Communities and the Minister for the Economy has unquestionably added to the pressures facing local households and businesses, particularly in relation to support for those who are reliant on heating oil.

The UUP acknowledges that the home heating oil scheme is welcome, but the delay in its implementation is surely indicative of the pace at which decisions are made in this place. We support the call for rural fuel duty relief as a time-limited measure to ease immediate pressures, especially for farmers who are facing spiralling fuel and fertiliser costs. Failure to act risks reduced agricultural output, higher food prices and long-term threats to food security.

At a time of severe financial constraint, Ministers should work collectively to identify savings, establish emergency support where necessary and focus on those who are under the greatest strain, including workers in domiciliary care who continue to do essential work while facing significantly higher travel costs.

Finally, I welcome the UK Government's action, including the extension of the British industrial competitiveness scheme to Northern Ireland and targeted payments for lower-income households. Those demonstrate that coordinated action between Westminster and Stormont can deliver real relief.

I will finish with the position of the Ulster Unionist Party on the motion and the amendment. Although we agree with 90% of the motion, we cannot support a finger-pointing exercise in this place and one that underpins the illegality of a war that we are not involved in.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Workers, families and businesses are under real pressure —. Actually, I will start by saying that I hope that the Member for South Belfast knows what he was trying to say because I have no idea what he was trying to say. In one part of the speech, he said that the Executive have everything that they need to deliver, but they need the British Government, but why are they writing to the British Government, why are they asking the British Government, the British Government need to give it to them. I am completely confused. I have never heard so many contradictions in one speech in all my life, and, coming from you, in this place, that is saying something.

People are feeling the pressure every day in their homes, their workplaces and their communities, but we need to be honest in the debate about where the responsibility actually lies. The reality is that the key financial and taxation powers needed to respond to the crisis sit with the British Government. That is the truth. You always talk about honesty and transparency, so let us have a bit of it.

When we talk about the crisis, we need to talk about real people. Domiciliary care workers, who are mentioned in the motion, are a clear example. Those workers are going from home to home in large, rural areas, such as the area that I represent of Mid Ulster, looking after some of our most vulnerable people. They want to do the job. They care about the people whom they look after, and they care about their families. However, they have their own families, and they have bills to pay, and the price of fuel means that it costs money for them to go to work. They were already struggling, and they are nowhere near close to being properly compensated for their mileage. That is not sustainable, and it is not fair. The same applies to other healthcare workers, childcare workers and people who have already given so much and are now being hit hardest by the rising costs. They cannot just absorb the increases; they are already stretched to their very limit.

The Executive have stepped in where they can. The support package will help many low-income households, but we need to be straight about it: that is not funding that we can easily spare. They did not pull it out of their sleeve, Matthew. It had to come from somewhere. It had to come from Departments that also have rising costs — just to be clear about that. It comes at a time when public services are already under pressure because of ongoing underfunding from the British Government. We are making decisions to target that support towards those who need it most, but it will not reach everyone. There are many workers and families just above that threshold who are struggling just as much, but they will get no support. That is why further action from the British Government is essential. While people here are struggling to heat their homes, to get to work and to make ends meet, the British Government have made their priorities clear.

I have to take issue with the point that the war is nothing to do with us and that we should not comment on it. The British Government are choosing to build up their war machine and to support others to make war above investing in people, communities and public services here. They have chosen to focus their resources on unjust wars while workers, families and essential services are left under pressure. They are quite happy to take our taxes — our hard-working people's money — to do that, but will not allow us to have any say in the decision on how that is spent.

The British Government are more than happy to take our hard-earned taxes while offering no support to people, at a time when illegal wars are creating a cost-of-living crisis for people here. They have the power to implement fuel duty relief and they have the money to put in place a meaningful support package. As was mentioned, some of that money comes from the increased revenue that they are getting because of the rising cost of fuel.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Will the Member give way?

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

The point you raise is a good one, considering that recent figures have shown that energy companies are making $30 million an hour. So far, they have made $23 billion from what they call a "war windfall", which is a disgusting statement in itself, yet the British Government still refuse to tax those profits. That is where the focus needs to be, and that is where the levers are to do it.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely agree with the Member and thank her for that information.

Businesses, farmers, families and workers across our society are being impacted on, but the British Government are making a clear political choice not to prioritise people. The answer that we hear from some in the Chamber and many in the media is that we should raise revenue to alleviate the pressures on families here by increasing rates and student fees and introducing water charges. The answer to serious financial pressure on families and workers here is to come up with amazing and wonderful ideas to increase their financial burden. Nobody in their right mind would support that, and we certainly will not be supporting revenue-raising measures that put more pressure on people who are already at breaking point across our constituencies and communities. We will continue to do what we can, but how many times do we need to find ourselves in this position, dealing with the consequences of decisions that are taken elsewhere without having the power to respond properly?

A Member

Will the Member give way?

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Sorry, I cannot.

That is the situation that we are in again. If we had the powers, we could act differently. We could respond more quickly and we could target support towards the people who need it. We could make decisions based on what is best for the people here. That is why the conversation about the future of Ireland matters.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is important that we are having a conversation about an issue that is affecting all our constituents and every community across the North. As others have outlined, however, it is regrettable that the motion takes the approach that it does, mixing up the problem with the solution. Like others, I was confused by the statements that were made by the Member for South Belfast at the beginning of the debate. It is regrettable that the desire to be party political has eclipsed the objective to help the people whom we all represent.

This conversation goes to the very heart of why I got involved in politics and why I am a political activist. This is a crisis not of our making, and whilst we may wish that things were different — it is my life's work to make things different for us all here — we do not have the powers in this place to effect the change that we would like to. War is a political choice, and helping people is a political choice. We talk often about the Big C, but colonialism and capitalism are the two cancers that discriminate. They discriminate against working people and the people who suffer deprivation most in society. We have America and Israel illegally invading Iran and killing innocent people across the world, and we have working people here in Ireland suffering directly as a result.

It is a pity that our message to the British Government, who, at this time, are planning to increase their defence spending and increase the millions and billions of funds that they put into their war machine, instead of being a clear and united voice coming from every party in the Chamber and every representative of the people of the North of Ireland saying that they need to act decisively, now, to undo some of the damage that they have done through the wars in which they have been complicit, is a completely mixed message from a party that, not so long ago, was in the Executive. Whilst the Member correctly articulated that it is the UK Government, as he calls them, who have the power to change things here and are at fault for the funding situation that we find ourselves in, he used the same old line: "Sinn Féin wants to blame the Brits".

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

I thank the Member for giving way. Is it legitimate that we are the official Opposition? Is it legitimate that there is an accountability mechanism on the Executive? That is a simple question. I know that it is different in Dublin and in London, and we obviously agree on a constitutional outcome. Is it legitimate that there is an official Opposition holding the Executive to account?

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely think that it is legitimate, and I welcome your presence here. My problem is that you are completely mixing the message. You have absolutely every right to call us out on things that we do not do right. Nobody in any Executive party would suggest that everything that is done here in the North is perfect. It is a five-party coalition of people who are diametrically opposed in ideology. There will be issues that we do not agree on, and that is right and proper. That is a normality of political systems across the world. My frustration is that we agree on an awful lot. I made that point earlier to the deputy leader of the Alliance Party. We are aligned on a lot of these issues. We share a position. We disagree with the genocide in Gaza. We disagree with the murder and killing of innocents. We disagree with the fact that the Minister for Communities was over clinking glasses with the very people who have caused this crisis and was then throwing shots at one of our Ministers, who was trying to deliver a package at the same time.

Instead of having tit-for-tat and a narrative of "Oh, they can't agree" — we do not agree on lots of things — we should all be trying to work together to serve the people whom we all represent. I wish that, instead of being party political, bickering and trying to point fingers and blame, we could all come out of here with one, united message, which is that the British Government have the funds to help the people whom we all represent. They have the power to temporarily cut fuel duty. They have the power to support people on the ground: the domiciliary care workers, the upland farmers, the people on our roads and the people who deliver our food, who are the people whom we are all here to serve. I would like to see us all doing that, united, instead of getting into the weeds and being unable to resist the opportunity to take a potshot where it is completely unnecessary. We would all come out of here an awful lot better if we spoke with one, united voice and called collectively on the British Government to act now. They have the power to do so, and we should demand that they do.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Opposition day can always bring out the best in the Executive. Indeed, we have already seen the Executive parties knocking lumps out of one another. What the motion also does is expose the SDLP. One could be forgiven for forgetting that the SDLP at Westminster sits on the Back Benches with the Labour Government. The Labour Government can take action today to do something about the cost of living. The SDLP motion begins with a false premise and builds an entire argument on it. To suggest that the pressures facing families and businesses are the result only of the conflict in the Middle East, however one wishes to define it, is simply wrong.

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

Will the Member give way?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I am happy to.

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

He has just said that it is not the result of the conflict. You can go on the Consumer Council website and track when prices of kerosene — home heating oil — spiked. You can look at countless websites that show what happened to the price of Brent crude. Does he not accept that oil prices spiked because of the bombing of Iran?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

You have an extra minute, Mr Gaston.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I accept that it has led to an increase in the price and in the cost of living, but the cost-of-living crisis did not begin only a month ago. Fuel prices have risen since the conflict began, but that does not change the underlying reality that over 50% of the price of every tank of fuel is not driven up by Donald Trump; it is the result of the tax system, which is out of touch with reality and urgently needs to be revised. Fuel duty and VAT together make up the majority of what people pay at the pump. Crucially, VAT is charged as a percentage, so, every time the price of fuel goes up, the tax also rises. Families and businesses pay more, and, without lifting a finger, the Treasury takes more.

Motorists, farmers and even homeowners have been taken for granted for far too long. They have carried a grossly unfair share of the national tax burden, and, as the protests of last week showed, growing numbers of people throughout Northern Ireland have had enough.

The crisis in the Middle East and the resultant rise in fuel prices has not only increased costs for ordinary people; it has automatically increased VAT receipts for the Government. It is one of the few taxes that rise precisely when people are under the greatest pressure, and yet there is no automatic relief in return. The motion would be far better if, instead of having a pop at Donald Trump, it called for His Majesty's Government to do something concrete about the issue. After all, the SDLP sits on the government Benches.

One obvious step would be a reduction in VAT on fuel, giving back to motorists at least some of what the Treasury is now taking in. The reality is that reducing fares on public transport is of little use to people living outside urban areas. I have a member of staff who lives fewer than 30 miles away from this Building. If he wants to come into the office for 9.00 am, he has to leave home before 7.00 am if he is to depend on public transport to get to work. The reality for many is that the car is not one option among many; it is the only practical option. If the Assembly is serious about helping workers and businesses, it will stop blaming events overseas that we can do absolutely nothing about and start demanding that the Government, who take more when prices rise, finally give something back.

We saw the protests last week. I believe that they will grow. They not just been about what has happened in the Middle East. Look at the carbon taxes inflicted by this place. We say, "Oh, we can't do anything about it", but we can. The decisions that we take in this Building, chasing crazy net zero policies, all add to the cost and the burden and increase the cost of living.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Does he agree that he would be better focusing on the likes of Donald Trump and events overseas? It is a war, and it is increasingly evident that it is about making money. Maybe the Member would be better to focus on that, rather than on things that are trying to be implemented in order to protect life, save lives and protect our futures.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I will take no lectures on war from Sinn Féin, given its past, whom it associates itself with and whom it still glorifies to this day.

Nobody in this Building can do anything about what Donald Trump thinks or what he is doing in Iran, but we can do something when it comes to the policies that we support in this place. We can also lobby the British Government to take immediate action to reduce the cost-of-living burden that is affecting everybody in Northern Ireland.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Everywhere we look, it is clear that most people are struggling to make ends meet. While there is no doubt that Trump's war on Iran has played a major part in driving up prices — let us not forget that the war has also led to destruction and to the killing of thousands of Iranians — most of the deep cost-of-living problems predate the war. The war has just exacerbated them. Take the fact that people have been forced to be on a waiting list for years to get a hip replacement or some other medical procedure. That is a cost-of-living problem that has direct financial and health impacts on people. We heard yesterday that 6,000 people had died in the past 10 years while waiting in emergency departments. That is because they are in the wrong place, are not getting treatment or are not being seen to by our healthcare system. Again, there has been no action from the Executive on that.

The cost of food has increased exponentially. People can do without many things in life, such as computers or phones, but they cannot do without the essentials. They cannot do without food. People are paying through the nose when they go to supermarkets. DAERA's food strategy framework action plan from last year found that nine out of 10 consumers were worried about the price of food. The result of that is pretty clear. People will buy less healthy foods and will instead buy more processed foods. In any supermarket, the more processed foods are cheaper. I am not judging people, but the reality is that that is what people will be forced to do in order to feed their family.

What will be the result of people buying more processed foods? More people will be forced to go to the dentist, if they can even get access to a dentist, given the crisis in dental care as well. To get treatment, they will be forced to fork out hundreds, if not thousands, of extra pounds to a dentist. More and more people will be eating sugary foods and processed foods, and they will be unable to access to a dentist. They will have rotten teeth or get oral cancer. That is just one small example of how the cost-of-living crisis will have a direct impact on the health of people in my constituency and across the North.

Parents already skip meals. At least 41% of them have reported cutting back on or skipping meals in order to feed their children. Of course, any parent would do that. That will go in only one direction. Given the increase in the cost of food, the number of parents skipping meals will rocket. The Executive are not talking about that. They are still ruling out capping the price of food. Although the deputy leader of the Alliance Party referred to it in passing, the motion makes no mention of the profit bonanza that private companies are experiencing whilst people are being ripped off. Take Tesco, for example. It has taken a hit because of the war on Iran and has adjusted its forecast, but it is still projected to make £3 billion in profit in the coming year. If you ask me and most people, that is completely insulting and disgusting.

The top 20 energy companies up until August 2024 made £557 billion in profit. That was almost two years ago, so the figure will obviously have increased now. Energy companies are increasing their prices, forcing people to look at their meter and turn down their thermostat a bit, because they cannot afford to pay their energy bills. What is the result of that? People are cold and are having health problems, yet energy companies are making a huge fortune on the back of everybody but especially on the back of poor and vulnerable people. There needs to be a windfall tax on energy companies, but I have heard nothing about that from the Executive parties. If they agree to do that, brilliant, but I have not heard the Executive articulate at all that they will do that, so I do not know whether they are for it or not.

I agree with some of what the Sinn Féin Members said. There was, however, also a lot of defensiveness from them. I suppose that it is their job to defend their Executive, but, deep down, they know that people consider the Executive to be completely failing them on multiple fronts, especially on the cost-of-living crisis. They have failed to protect people. They have failed to act for people. We know that the British Government have failed people, but Sinn Féin and the other Executive parties have done their bidding by implementing their ridiculous Budgets, which have resulted in people's services being cut in real terms in real time.

People may ask what can the Executive do. They could implement rent controls, but all Executive parties have voted against those consistently. They could stop giving hundreds of millions of pounds to private landlords. They could scrap industrial derating for big companies. If people in the South —.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up.

I call David Honeyford to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. You have up to five minutes.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Energy is the basis of our economy. It underlies absolutely everything, and literally everything is built on it. The cost of everything is affected by it. I talk a lot about energy in this place, including in the Committee, and I enjoy doing so. The cost-of-living crisis is hurting people, and energy spikes have been referenced. Timothy mentioned that the crisis did not happen just as a result of this war: no, it happened the last time that there was a war as well, when Russia invaded Ukraine. In one year, the UK Government spent £60 billion subsidising energy costs for ordinary people. That is £60 billion that the taxpayer now has to pay back, so we need to look at this in the round. Inflation has risen dramatically in that time. That drives up food costs, and it drives up everything that people buy. Inflation also drives up interest rates, which puts mortgages higher and pushes rents higher. It leaves everybody with less money in their pocket to enjoy on themselves.

In the debate, there has been quite a bit of agreement across the House on the need to do something to help. One group that has not been mentioned is our local businesses and the jobs that they provide. We need to make sure that businesses, especially manufacturing and advanced manufacturing businesses, are not priced out as their margins disappear. Care workers who drive to work are absorbing the costs, and that was never in their contracts. They were already hurting from that before the spike in fuel costs made it worse. Those are people in our constituencies who are struggling every day of the week, and they are the people whom we need to champion.

Last week, as has been referenced a few times, we had a debate on the costs of net zero. That is a complete distraction from Trump's war, which has spiked oil prices. The answer to that was to double down on oil and gas and to, basically, give us more of the same and deliver more of that. A report from the University of Oxford showed that, if we were to drill for oil in the North Sea, there would be a benefit to the consumer of, off the top of my head, £14 or £16. That is £16, and a transition to renewables would bring a benefit of £500 a household in the UK. We have to stop the dependency on oil and gas, because the only people who are laughing on their way to the bank are the oil companies.

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

Will the Member give way?

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Absolutely.

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

I touched on this in my remarks, and the Member talks a lot about this. Fair play to him for that. We have been criticised for talking about the Executive's responsibilities as well as the UK Government's. Will he agree that the Executive need to make much more progress on energy? For example, we do not have an energy support scheme for such things as heat pumps.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Thank you for the intervention. I absolutely agree. I have called so many times for a master plan for energy. We need a plan so that policy is not from little bits from here, there and everywhere but is driven and plan-led rather than it being left to developers to come up with each individual part of it. It needs to be driven from the Department to transition us to renewables. It needs to be done on an all-island basis. We need a plan here, but we cannot provide an energy solution just in Northern Ireland. We have to work with the South to deliver that. I absolutely agree.

Gerry talked about the profits, and I want to talk exactly on that. There has to be a windfall tax. Last week, BP reported that it made an additional $340 million profit for every one dollar that a barrel of oil went up in price. Just think of the value of that. A barrel was around $60 two months ago. It has been steadily over $100. It has been $120 at a point in time.

That is the value of the profit, and that is one energy company.

People talk about Norway as the example for digging. Norway has a wealth fund of about $1·9 trillion that it uses to support its people. Norway has 95% renewable energy, with bills that are half of what our people pay. "Dig, baby dig", which we hear constantly, is a perverse argument. There is no benefit to people other than price spikes.

We have called repeatedly for a windfall tax. Sorcha has called repeatedly for exactly that at Westminster. If a company is making money, and you sell the assets off to a private company, if you dig more, the company makes more. At $340 million for every dollar, that money needs to be taken from the rich and the companies that are profiteering and given to ordinary people here to allow them to get on with their daily lives. We need to reduce the costs for people and help people. The focus of the Chamber must absolutely be on ordinary people and making sure that we do our best for them.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call on Sinéad McLaughlin to make a winding-up speech to conclude the debate on the motion. You have up to 10 minutes.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and thank you to everyone across the House who contributed to the debate. It is clear from your contributions that the impact of the cost-of-living crisis is felt in every constituency. That is no surprise, given that we have talked for years about the cost-of-living crisis. It did not happen a couple of months ago; it has been going on and on and on for quite some time, and we have heard all about it across the airwaves.

As everyone who spoke said, it has been characterised by difficult, dire and, in some cases, harrowing circumstances for far too many people. Households, families and businesses feel those impacts, which have been relentless over the years. They have been constantly crushed by the burden of high bills, and there is absolutely no let up and no clear end in sight. Across all our constituencies, we hear the same stories. People are rationing their heating oil because they simply cannot afford to fill the tank. Parents are skipping dinners so that their children can eat. Small businesses are watching their energy bills soar, wondering how they can possibly keep their doors open.

In that context, the impact of the war in Iran has felt like another hammer blow to families, businesses etc that just cannot seem to afford to deal with it anymore. Since that illegal war began, the cost of oil, as Members outlined, has soared. Household budgets have been squeezed from every angle, and the price spikes in energy and essentials have threatened to push more and more families to food banks. The simple maths is that, for far too many families, while the cost of their outgoings is spiralling out of control, what is coming in every month is simply not matching up.

All the evidence suggests that the UK is likely to be hit particularly hard, with the biggest hit to growth amongst the advanced economies and the joint highest inflation in the G7 this year. Of course, here, at home, we know that Northern Ireland will be hit hardest of all for a number of reasons. Our heavy dependence on home heating oil leaves us much too exposed, our energy infrastructure leaves households extremely vulnerable to global price shocks and our lower average incomes leave people here with less financial resilience to begin with, with nearly half of adults having less than £1,500 in savings. Gerry Carroll spoke about processed food, and one in five households experienced food insecurity in 2024.

While households across the region have, no doubt, been spared some of the impacts, the places hardest hit are the poorest communities, places such as my city of Derry, where poverty rates are double those of other areas, where communities are fragile and employment options are more limited. The pain is not distributed evenly; it falls hardest on those who are closest to the edge, not least people in rural areas, those in domiciliary care, the elderly and the more vulnerable when faced with those challenges. The impact of the Iran conflict means that the people whom we represent are simply running out of options, and they need support.

Of course the UK Government need to act with greater urgency. Two things can be right at the same time. The UK Government have a great deal of responsibility here, but so do the Executive. I agree with Linda Dillon, Deirdre Hargey and others across the House that the profiteering on the backs of the poor is disgusting and that of course we should consider a windfall tax to meet the needs of those who are most in need.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

No one in my party agrees with that profiteering, and nobody is absolving Britain of any responsibility. I can assure you, Eóin Tennyson, that, wherever they sit, our MPs, Colum Eastwood and Claire Hanna, will continue to press the case with Westminster and to work with parties across the Chamber. People deserve more than the politics of blame, and they need a better response than, "Blame it on the Brits". Emma, I have the greatest respect for you. I love your drive and your passion, but simply pointing the finger at London again and again is just not good enough. It has been a tired and tested method in this place. It might have been politically convenient in the past, but people see through it now; in fact, people are starting to realise exactly what it means to shift all the blame onto central government.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member give way?

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

If I have time towards the end, Emma.

It is a deliberate move and a calculated step that risks gaslighting the public in an attempt to absolve the Executive of their responsibility.

As I said, two things can be right at the same time. In reality, the Executive also need to step up. The heating oil package of £100 for some households — I would probably argue with the figure of 70% of all households — is welcome. However, let us be honest: it does not come close to meeting the scale of need, and it only scratches the surface of what people are crying out for. Executive parties are failing to rise to the moment. Families are looking to the Executive — their Executive — for support and leadership, but the response has been found badly wanting.

I agree with David Honeyford that we have made little or no progress on energy — it is shocking — and we have made little or no progress on an anti-poverty strategy and on retrofitting our social housing. Those are things that the Executive should stand up and do. They are the practical things that Diana Armstrong talked about. It is about practical things. Responding at a time of crisis is a leadership action, but if, in day-to-day government, you cannot respond by delivering for the people who elected you to do so, you are also failing. Seeking election to the Assembly and entering government here are about taking responsibility, not shirking it. We therefore need to ask what more we can do.

Deborah Erskine, you must not have had your wee listening ears on today either, because our motion includes specific proposals on a range of areas that could make a difference to hard-pressed families, including measures such as the extension of rural fuel duty relief and steps to address the particular challenges faced in the more rural regions, such as the need to reduce public transport fares and to provide targeted support for the most affected industries. All those issues would be easier if the Executive agreed a multi-year Budget, which would allow us to plan strategically and collaboratively and to work together to support the things that matter to the people whom we all represent. Diana Armstrong made a really good point about practicality and solution-based working. That is what the motion is about. It is about solutions.

Our having to submit the motion two weeks ago, before there was a package here, did not allow us to acknowledge that fact. That has to be said, because it is another dysfunction of this place. It does not respect the position of the Opposition to make points as the urgency arises.

Finding solutions would be helped if more fiscal powers were devolved to the region. We have been calling for more fiscal powers for the region, but the Executive have so far failed to achieve that. In fact, I do not hear the Finance Minister talking about what financial powers he would like to be devolved to give him more responsibility. That is also a failure of government.

The challenges that families face should serve as a wake-up call, highlighting the need to tackle the more pervasive inequalities across society and to build a fairer economy that deals with the crisis at its roots. Ultimately, politics comes down to choices. The choices that the Executive face might be called difficult, but they are nothing compared with the hard choices that families in our constituencies experience every day — choices between heating and eating and choices about bills and other basics. Right now, too many of the people whom we represent feel that those choices are not being made by the Executive who are ducking them. Those choices are being ducked, and they cannot keep on finger-pointing while the rest of the fingers are pointing back at them. It feels like, while the British Government may have been uninterested, which they have been, the response from the Executive here has been nothing short of complacent. Honest to God, it is shocking to see how laid back our Executive have been during the current crisis. That is not good enough for the families and businesses in our communities. It needs to change, urgently and without further delay.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 45; Noes 27

AYES

Dr Archibald, Ms K Armstrong, Mr Baker, Ms Bradshaw, Miss Brogan, Mr Carroll, Mr Dickson, Mrs Dillon, Miss Dolan, Mr Donnelly, Mr Durkan, Ms Egan, Ms Ennis, Ms Finnegan, Ms Flynn, Mr Gildernew, Mrs Guy, Miss Hargey, Mr Honeyford, Mr Kearney, Mr Kelly, Ms Kimmins, Mr McAleer, Miss McAllister, Mr McGlone, Mr McGrath, Mr McGuigan, Ms McLaughlin, Mr McMurray, Mr McNulty, Mr McReynolds, Mrs Mason, Mr Mathison, Mr Muir, Ms Mulholland, Ms Murphy, Ms Ní Chuilín, Ms Nicholl, Mr O'Dowd, Mr O'Toole, Ms Reilly, Mr Sheehan, Ms Sheerin, Ms Sugden, Mr Tennyson

Tellers for the Ayes: Mr Donnelly, Mr McMurray

NOES

Mr Allen, Ms D Armstrong, Mr Beattie, Mr Bradley, Mr Brett, Ms Brownlee, Mr K Buchanan, Mr T Buchanan, Mr Butler, Mrs Cameron, Mr Chambers, Mr Clarke, Mr Dunne, Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe, Mr Frew, Mr Gaston, Mr Givan, Mr Harvey, Mr Kingston, Mr Lyons, Miss McIlveen, Mr Martin, Mr Nesbitt, Mr Robinson, Mr Stewart, Mr Wilson

Tellers for the Noes: Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe

Ms Ennis acted as a proxy for Miss Brogan.

Question accordingly agreed to.

Main Question, as amended, put.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I have been advised by the party Whips that, in accordance with Standing Order 27(1A)(b), there is agreement that we can dispense with the three-minute rule and move straight to the Division.

The Assembly divided:

Ayes 44; Noes 27

AYES

Dr Archibald, Ms K Armstrong, Mr Baker, Ms Bradshaw, Miss Brogan, Mr Carroll, Mr Dickson, Mrs Dillon, Miss Dolan, Mr Donnelly, Mr Durkan, Ms Egan, Ms Ennis, Ms Finnegan, Ms Flynn, Mr Gildernew, Mrs Guy, Miss Hargey, Mr Honeyford, Mr Kelly, Ms Kimmins, Mr McAleer, Miss McAllister, Mr McGlone, Mr McGrath, Mr McGuigan, Ms McLaughlin, Mr McMurray, Mr McNulty, Mr McReynolds, Mrs Mason, Mr Mathison, Mr Muir, Ms Mulholland, Ms Murphy, Ms Ní Chuilín, Ms Nicholl, Mr O'Dowd, Mr O'Toole, Ms Reilly, Mr Sheehan, Ms Sheerin, Ms Sugden, Mr Tennyson

Tellers for the Ayes: Mr McMurray, Mr O'Toole

NOES

Mr Allen, Ms D Armstrong, Mr Beattie, Mr Bradley, Mr Brett, Ms Brownlee, Mr K Buchanan, Mr T Buchanan, Mr Butler, Mrs Cameron, Mr Chambers, Mr Clarke, Mr Dunne, Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe, Mr Frew, Mr Gaston, Mr Givan, Mr Harvey, Mr Kingston, Mr Lyons, Miss McIlveen, Mr Martin, Mr Nesbitt, Mr Robinson, Mr Stewart, Mr Wilson

Tellers for the Noes: Mrs Erskine, Ms Forsythe

Ms Ennis acted as a proxy for Miss Brogan.

Main Question, as amended, accordingly agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes the real and immediate pressures facing workers and businesses as a result of the United States’ illegal war with Iran; further notes that the British Government’s response has been insufficient; acknowledges that, while most taxation and fiscal powers lie with the British Government and the Executive have now agreed an enhanced support package for homes relying on heating oil, the delayed response from the Minister for Communities and Minister for the Economy has increased the pressure facing local households and businesses; and calls on the Northern Ireland Executive, in conjunction with the British Government, to outline the actions they will take to alleviate pressures facing workers and businesses, including measures such as a temporary reduction in fuel duty, increased windfall taxes on energy giants, support for those working in domiciliary care, reduced fares for public transport and targeted support for other industries that have been most affected.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, please take your ease before we move on to the next item in the Order Paper.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses serious concern at the growing impact of scramblers and e-scooters in communities across Northern Ireland, which has caused significant distress, antisocial behaviour, serious injury and, in some cases, loss of life; notes that other jurisdictions have introduced measures to tackle inappropriate use; acknowledges that, when used responsibly and in appropriate settings, such vehicles can have recreational and community benefits; welcomes the success of community and school-based pilot initiatives delivered in partnership with the PSNI, the Department of Justice, schools and community organisations, which have significantly reduced illegal scrambler use; supports legislative changes to strengthen police powers to seize vehicles being used in a dangerous or antisocial manner; and calls on the Minister of Justice to urgently expand successful pilot programmes across Northern Ireland.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech. As an amendment has been selected and is published on the Marshalled List, the Business Committee has agreed that 15 minutes will be added to the total time for the debate. The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Andrew Muir, will respond to the debate on behalf of the Minister of Justice.

Mark, please open the debate on the motion.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.]

It is clear to anyone as they walk or drive around our cities and towns that the situation with scramblers, motorbikes and e-scooters has escalated beyond a public nuisance to a risk to life. Almost every week, I am contacted by constituents who have been terrified by near misses. They tell me of e-scooters weaving through pedestrians at speed on narrow footpaths. I am sure that many in the Chamber will reference the heart-stopping moment that a child on an e-scooter darts into traffic from behind or between parked cars. There is another dimension that we cannot ignore: the particular impact on blind and partially sighted people and those with limited mobility, who no longer feel safe when they are out walking. Motorists and pedestrians alike take their lives in their hands, as do those who use such vehicles.

The situation is perennial. It is starkest in the aftermath of Christmas during the darker evenings. With Christmas comes an annual explosion of e-scooters onto our streets, and we see children, often in dark clothing and without helmets or protective wear, taking chances on vehicles that they just about know how to operate. Parental responsibility has to be a part of any serious conversation on the issue. Parents and guardians should understand and be educated on what their children are using, where they are using it and the risks involved. Too often, the vehicles are treated like toys, when, in reality, they can cause serious injury or worse, and we have, sadly, seen lives lost on this island.

We see some reluctance here from Ministers to properly address or take responsibility for the issue. While that ping-pong, dither and delay goes on, the North falls further behind other jurisdictions on much-needed protections. I want to be clear that, when used responsibly and in the right setting, the vehicles offer a great, greener alternative to modern traffic, but the reality on our streets at the moment is far from that ideal.

In my constituency, we see it play out daily. I think particularly of the field in Linear Park in the Galliagh area where antisocial scrambler use has caused headaches and heartache for residents for years. What should be a safe, green space for families, joggers and dog walkers has too often been transformed into a high-speed track for scramblers. Residents bemoan noise late into the evening, reckless driving across shared spaces, muck bombing, damage to property and the intimidation that often comes with that. I have met the PSNI locally on the issue, and it is trying its best, but it is fighting an uphill battle against a tide of unregulated, high-powered vehicles. While enforcement powers exist, officers with whom I have engaged explain that it is nearly impossible and often extremely dangerous to make pursuit on foot and even more dangerous in a car, especially in built-up residential areas.

I acknowledge the amendment from the Ulster Unionist Party on expanding the use of drone teams and its view that that could help to monitor suspects from above and reduce the need for dangerous pursuits through housing estates, as well as easing pressure on an overstretched police service, and I look forward to hearing more about that proposal from the UUP.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It is the DUP, Mark. It is a DUP amendment.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Then we are opposed to it.

[Laughter.]

There is also a strong case for national standardisation. We clearly need safety standards, robust quality checks and mandatory registration at the point of sale. If every e-scooter sold met recognised standards and was linked to an owner, enforcement would be easier, accountability would improve, and unsafe products could be kept off the market. That is why legislative change matters. At the moment, we see the market being flooded with cheap vehicles purchased from sites such as AliExpress or SHEIN. Those products often bypass the safety protocols and regulations that we would expect and demand. That cannot continue. We need to crack down on manufacturers and online marketplaces. If the vehicles are being sold here or used here, they must meet clear safety requirements.

I appreciate that today's motion calls on the Justice Minister to strengthen police powers to seize vehicles and to expand pilot programmes across the North. There is a clear responsibility there. However, I acknowledge that there must be a collaborative effort with the Minister for Infrastructure. I have been raising the issue for well over five years, and, in that time, the response from DFI has been to monitor developments elsewhere. The Irish Government introduced e-scooter legislation two years ago. In England, pilot rental schemes have provided a framework for safe, licensed use on public roads. Meanwhile, the North, as usual, sits in something of a legislative vacuum. In February, Minister Kimmins advised me, via an answer to a question for written answer, that the issue of e-scooter use and enforcement had been raised by officials at the PSNI-led silver command meeting and that:

"The Department is exploring measures to raise awareness around the dangers associated with e-scooters."

Where are those measures? The public have yet to see any evidence of them.

I referred earlier to tragic fatalities that have occurred, and I fear and feel that it is a matter of when, not if, a similar tragedy occurs here if we do not act swiftly.

We must also recognise the need for safer, designated recreational spaces for young people. If we want to reduce irresponsible use on streets and footpaths, we must provide proper alternatives. Local councils have a key role to play in identifying suitable sites, investing in facilities and working with communities to create spaces that are safe and supervised. We have seen some successful projects, and my party colleague in west Belfast, Councillor Paul Doherty, has been to the fore on the issue.

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

I thank the Member for giving way. On Good Friday, I was contacted by a constituent who was really concerned about the safety of youths in Newry who were scootering in and out of traffic on their e-scooters. Does he agree that the Minister for Infrastructure and the Minister of Justice need to step up and ensure that proper regulation, standards and safety laws are in place to protect people on e-scooters and pedestrians as well as drivers? Does he agree that, as per Paul Doherty's suggestion in west Belfast, there should be defined areas in which e-scooters and scramblers can be used safely?

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I agree entirely with the Member and thank him for his intervention.

Of course, there is the other issue that I mentioned: parental responsibility. We need to educate not just young people, who generally, but not exclusively, are the ones who use such apparatus for nuisance purposes or end up causing a nuisance, but parents as well. We need a public awareness campaign for parents and children alike so that they understand that those vehicles are illegal for road use and are potentially lethal. The buck cannot stop there, however: we need legislative teeth that strengthen police powers to seize vehicles that are being used to terrorise communities. Lastly, as both of us have said, we need to expand the successful pilot programmes that have worked and shown positive results in schools and community hubs.

The time for monitoring is over. We need clear regulation, robust safety standards, cohesion from Ministers on the issue and the political will to reclaim our footpaths and parks in order to ensure the safety of all who use them.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out all after "illegal scrambler use;" and insert: "calls on the Minister of Justice to provide additional resources for drone teams and drone-equipped officers and to introduce legislative changes to emulate clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill, as currently amended, to strengthen police powers to seize vehicles and retain or dispose of these vehicles being used in a dangerous or antisocial manner; further calls on the Minister to introduce mandatory registration at the point of sale; and calls on the Minister to urgently expand successful pilot programmes across Northern Ireland."

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you, Brian. You will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other contributors will have five minutes. Please open the debate on the amendment.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. On behalf of the DUP, I rise to propose our amendment, which takes nothing away from the SDLP motion but adds some important action points that we hope all parties will support.

The misuse of small motorised vehicles in public spaces is a growing danger for everyone, including those who ride them. For over 25 years, communities such as mine in North Belfast have suffered from the inappropriate use of petrol scramblers and quad bikes on public roads, footpaths and grassed areas, where they cause immense damage and a danger to the public. Such vehicles are not permitted in parks, nor are they to be used on public roads unless they abide by the same regulations as any other motorised vehicle; that is, be registered with a number plate, have their road tax paid, be the subject of an insurance policy, and be approved as roadworthy, including working lights and indicators. Without those, they should only be used on private land, with the permission of the landowner.

In recent years, the invention and inappropriate use of electric scooters and scramblers has taken things to another level and greatly increased the danger that is posed. I expect that all Members have seen young people using those vehicles on roads and footpaths irresponsibly, including without lights on dark nights, posing a risk to themselves and to pedestrians and motorists. It is clear that legislation needs to keep up with that growing danger and that it is not currently doing so in Northern Ireland. Recently, I submitted an Assembly question for written answer to the Justice Minister, asking for her assessment of the adequacy of existing legislation in that regard. My colleagues Phillip Brett and David Brooks have submitted similar questions for written answer to the Minister, pointing in particular to clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill, as currently amended, in England and Wales.

In her reply, the Minister of Justice stated that her Department:

"will consider the need to make equivalent changes to the vehicle seizure regime in Northern Ireland, in consultation with the Police Service for Northern Ireland and the Department for Infrastructure."

We now need to see action on that undertaking.

I have raised the matter many times with senior police officers. They have told me that they avoid engaging in high-speed chases with the drivers of such vehicles, owing to the danger involved to all, but they do seek to identify ownership and to seize vehicles that are being used inappropriately. Our amendment therefore highlights the benefit to the PSNI of providing it with resources for drone-equipped officers to gather evidence and identify ownership.

Our amendment also calls for the introduction of legislation that emulates clause 8 of the Crime and Policing Bill, as currently amended, in England and Wales. The clause removes the requirement for officers to issue a warning before seizing a vehicle that is being driven antisocially and illegally. Currently, when owners make a legal challenge to have seized vehicles returned, it often succeeds, resulting in more antisocial behaviour, owing to the inadequacy of current police powers in Northern Ireland. We should also all be concerned about the cost to the PSNI of storing seized vehicles that have not yet been destroyed. The Minister is aware of proposals to reduce the disposal time frames for seized vehicles. The question remains of whether she plans to explore similar legislation for Northern Ireland. We should move to allow the destruction of confiscated vehicles or to deprive the user of them permanently. Small fines are proven to be ineffective if users have such vehicles for involvement in crime, as some do.

Education initiatives, including the motorcycle action project (MAP) in west Belfast, have been undertaken across communities in Northern Ireland to inform the public about the use of scramblers and e-scooters. That successful work should continue and be encouraged. Many Members have no doubt attended road safety roadshows that are run in partnership with local policing and community safety partnerships (PCSPs) to make young people aware of road dangers. The use of scramblers and e-scooters should be incorporated into those already successful events.

We also cannot overlook the role of parental responsibility in ensuring that such vehicles, when purchased for their children, are used legally. There may be a lack of awareness among parents of the law surrounding e-scooters in particular: a lack of awareness about where they can be used, about who can use them and about how they should not be used in public spaces such as roads, footpaths and parks. Mandatory registration of the vehicles at the point of sale, as we propose, would also make it clear to owners and parents that they are not toys and, when misused, can have serious consequences. I commend our amendment to the House.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will speak to the motion as our party's justice spokesperson and, I have to confess at the outset, as a rural representative for Mid Ulster. When I was first presented with the motion, I had to ask what exactly e-scooters and scramblers are and what the difference between the two is, because, thankfully, we are not blighted with them in rural south Derry. I am grateful for that. I see Patsy, my Mid Ulster colleague, nodding.

I am familiar with Grace's law in the Twenty-six Counties, which came about following the tragic death of Grace Lynch as a result of scrambler misuse. As I did my research leading up to the debate and read up on the detail and on the harm, it quickly dawned on me that this is a significant problem, although perhaps not so much, as Mr Durkan outlined, in our area yet. It is, however, a significant problem in urban centres across the North.

Other Members mentioned that legislation is in place. Scrambler use on public roads and outside private land settings is already illegal, and there is work to be done on enforcement and on educating people. Legislation is a very important and necessary part of the puzzle when it comes to a lot of these things, but it has to be implemented properly. Oftentimes, through ignorance, we have heard references to parental responsibility and parents' awareness of what the law is and what the dangers are. We talk all the time in the Chamber about the different risks and challenges facing our young people today that might not have been problems when I was growing up many years ago. Parents are under pressure to buy those items for their kids at times and maybe do not understand the implications of them. Without judgement or scaremongering in any way, we need to have a conversation, and there needs to be an education piece, to ensure that the seriousness of those vehicles, the impact that they can have and the very serious and dangerous risk to life that they pose is all understood properly.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Does the Member agree that there is a wider issue about the safety of those vehicles? There is a particular risk of fire, depending on where they are purchased from. People need to have an understanding of their responsibilities in that regard.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member has an extra minute.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you. I doubt that I will need it.

I thank the Minister for his intervention. He is 100% right. As has been outlined, people have to ensure the veracity of the dealer from which they buy those products and ensure that they are safe for use. As others have said, there are lots of examples of different sports and pursuits that people enjoy. When they do so safely and responsibly, there is not a problem; it is when they do not do so that we face difficulties.

We support the motion. We want to work with others to ensure the safety of young people, which has to be the priority for us all.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm today. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The next Member to be called in the debate after Question Time will be Peter McReynolds.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.57 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Economy

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

1. Mr Brett asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on the renewable electricity price guarantee scheme. (AQO 3438/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The renewable electricity price guarantee (REPG) scheme policy intent was agreed by the Executive on 26 March 2026. My Department aims to introduce the required primary legislation for the REPG to the Assembly before the 2026 summer recess. The drafting process for the primary Bill is ongoing with the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC), and once the primary Bill is in place, subordinate legislation will be introduced to set out the detailed arrangements.

The REPG is a critical enabler for our net zero ambitions, and positions our region as a competitive, attractive destination for renewables investment. Delivering additional renewable electricity generation to meet the 80% target is, however, complex, demanding a careful balance between security of supply, affordability and legislative compliance. It therefore requires joined-up working across government and with our delivery partners to unlock the progress needed.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

First, I welcome the Minister back to the House and congratulate her on receiving Executive support for this important policy intent. It will have an important impact on our electricity generation.

On another support mechanism — the £81 million that will be made available by the UK Government — the Community Foundation Northern Ireland has met you and your officials to look at a voluntary opt-out for those of us who do not need the £30 support for our bills, which could be better used to support those more in need. The foundation wrote to you last week, seeking your support for such a scheme. Will you commit today to supporting that process to ensure that that £30 electricity support can go to those most in need rather than to all of us in the House, who do not need it?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. I have not yet seen the correspondence from the Community Foundation, but I certainly will consider what it has set out. The Member and others will be aware that we would not have designed a scheme with such a policy intent or method for being taken forward. There has been ongoing engagement with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and Treasury to agree what has been put in place. We are on track to have that ready to deliver in July.

I am open to looking at what potential exists. I am not clear that there will be any, given the constraints around how Treasury manages annually managed expenditure and the rules around that. Certainly, I am willing to look at what the Community Foundation has set out to see what can be done in respect of the constraints that we have.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, how will the renewable electricity price guarantee scheme ensure that local communities benefit from renewable energy projects?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Our aim is to create a model that delivers real and credible benefits to local communities. That means that we need to get the detail right with suppliers, the Utility Regulator, developers and communities. Once the primary Bill is in place to give the appropriate powers, we will consult on the terms and conditions and set out exactly how discounts, rebates or payments will work and who will qualify. Those terms and conditions will then be given legal effect through the subordinate regulations that I mentioned in my first answer. The important point is that the direction of travel is clear: benefits for communities living near supported projects will be a central and visible feature of the scheme.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

2. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister for the Economy to outline any assessment that has been made of the impact of the recent sharp increases in fuel costs on businesses and key sectors across Northern Ireland. (AQO 3439/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Rapid price increases in fuel costs are putting many households and businesses under unmanageable pressure. The situation requires urgent and meaningful intervention from the British Government, which, I am afraid, has been lacking to date.

My assessment of the situation is being informed daily through direct engagement with Executive colleagues, industry stakeholders and other sources of real-time intelligence. In addition, I asked my officials to undertake scenario planning in response to the evolving situation. They considered the potential impacts on our economy across three scenarios: the war ending relatively quickly, within a month or two; its continuing for six months through to the autumn; or its continuing for a year or longer.

Impacts were considered in relation to energy supply and prices and the wider economic effects on trade flows, supply chains, potential shortages and higher costs of certain commodities and general inflationary pressures. Information was drawn from analysis provided by the British and Irish Governments and key business representative organisations such as the CBI, the NI Chamber of Commerce and Logistics UK. I shared a summary of the results of that exercise with my Executive colleagues last week.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she detail what representation she has made to the UK Government on behalf of local businesses facing those rising costs? Will she continue to press for support that reflects Northern Ireland's reliance on road transport and logistics specifically?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. Since the outset of the crisis, I have been engaged with my counterparts in the British Government and in the Irish Government. I have had a number of meetings with my counterparts in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero in London in relation to support for consumers and understanding the general issues around security of supply and to make the case for support for households and businesses. In particular, there are sectors that are more impacted on than others. The Executive as a whole have also been making representations, including the First Minister and deputy First Minister directly to the Prime Minister. Obviously, the support that was made available for those who rely on home heating oil was welcome, but it was nowhere near enough. The Executive have tried to mitigate that to some degree with the limited ability that we have. I have also made the direct plea that we need to see the duties and taxes on fuel cut, and that obviously would have an impact on the sectors that the Member referred to.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Minister, in light of the current global insecurity, the horizon scanning that you have said has been undertaken by your officials and the consultations that have been carried out, can you outline specifically what supports are being developed to assist high-intensity energy manufacturing businesses?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. As he will be aware, the British Government published a consultation just last week on regulatory changes and delivery requirements to implement the British industrial competitiveness scheme. That scheme is designed to support industries in Britain only, reflecting the devolved nature of energy policy. On 16 April, the Secretary of State indicated that the British Government will provide equivalent funding for a scheme comparable to the British industrial competitiveness scheme, subject to business case approval and getting agreement around a comparable scheme. It is similar, I suppose, in some respects, to the discount in respect of the NI renewables obligation levy. We are continuing to work to understand exactly what can be done in that space. It does seem to represent a positive opportunity for businesses here in the North, and I raised with my counterparts the fact that businesses here were effectively being excluded because some of the levies that are being removed in Britain for businesses do not apply here. It is useful that we are now in a position to try to develop a scheme that will provide some sort of equivalent support, because businesses here have to be competitive. There was certainly a concern from energy-intensive businesses here that they were being disadvantaged by not being able to access the same level of support.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Minister, you have talked about the assessment, but assessments are one thing, and businesses need action. Mr Kearney talked about high-intensity users, and transport and manufacturing are two sectors that have been mentioned. You have just talked about the UK Government bringing that support through for manufacturing and said that we will see it next year. It is a year ahead of schedule. What work is being done now, what will that look like in practice for our businesses and when are they likely to see that?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. As he will recognise, it was only announced last week that that would be extended in some form to here. We did not have prior notice that that was going to be the case, which, in some respects, is not surprising. It is not helpful, either, when trying to ensure that support schemes that are potentially being put in place can actually be rolled out and delivered here as quickly as possible. I have raised that in every engagement that I have had with the British Government since the start of this. If they are going to bring forward schemes, they need to engage with officials in my Department and in other Departments to ensure that what is being announced can be rolled out, while listening to the needs of business, communities and households here and ensuring that we have the ability to deliver the schemes through the various mechanisms in our Departments.

That is something that I will continue to hammer home, and we will keep the Committee updated on that as it progresses. We were already engaged with energy intensive industry and businesses prior to that announcement, and we will continue to work with them to understand what could be effective in providing support.

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

3. Mr O'Toole asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on the ‘good jobs’ employment rights Bill. (AQO 3440/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The drafting of the 'good jobs' Bill will be completed next week and the Bill will be sent to the Executive for approval. That leaves plenty of time for the Bill to be scrutinised and passed within the mandate.

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

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate that update. It is welcome that you now think that the completion of the drafting of the Bill is finally within sight. Workers here have been left behind with outdated employment rights legislation for far too long, so the Bill is overdue, but it is overdue because your colleague started the consultation nearly two years ago. Do you regret the delay in publishing the legislation, and are you worried that you are risking the legislation, which is urgent and needed for workers, because of the delay in introducing it to the Assembly?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. I do not regret that we have engaged extensively with businesses, workers and representatives of sectors to try to get the detail of the legislation correct. That is what I set out when I made the announcements on the way forward last year, which is that we would continue to engage constructively, and I believe that we have done that. There are complex and multiple elements to the Bill, and it is important to get the detail right. Challenging legal questions have come up in the drafting. Again, it is important to get those right to ensure that the Bill is legally robust. We are now in a place where it is very near completion.

As for the time for scrutiny, while it is not directly comparable, the Member could look to Westminster where the Employment Rights Bill was scrutinised by the Committee in seven weeks, so there is no reason why this legislation cannot be progressed in this mandate and the necessary and important scrutiny of it undertaken in plenty of time.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, how will the 'good jobs' Bill strengthen rights for women?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. A number of important elements in the Bill support women specifically, as well as all workers, in particular in supporting a better work/life balance. There will be the right to request flexible working from day 1 of employment rather than at 26 weeks, which is the case currently. There are other important measures regarding carer's leave and neonatal care leave and pay to help parents whose newborns require extended medical attention so that they are able to focus on their child's needs. There will be revisions to paternity leave to afford families greater flexibility and extended redundancy protections for pregnant employees and those returning from family leave.

Other elements of the Bill will apply to other workers; for example, the right to move from a zero-hours contract to a banded-hours contract. We know that there are more women than men in low-paid, insecure work. Those improvements will, therefore, be particularly impactful for women. There are also enhanced trade union rights. Altogether, the provisions are designed to present a more inclusive, supportive and adaptable workplace culture where workers of all stripes are better able to balance their professional and personal responsibilities.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Minister, last week, we saw an unprecedented intervention from the business community in Northern Ireland on your employment rights Bill. In light of that, when did you last meet the business community to discuss its objections to the Bill?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. I am not sure about that being unprecedented; I previously had a letter from business organisations on the 'good jobs' Bill, and I have consistently and constructively engaged with them specifically on the legislation in the past year and before that.

Important points have been taken on board from some of the concerns that they raised, which will become apparent as the Bill is published. We will continue to engage on some of the concerns that they set out, such the timing of the introduction of certain measures, on which I have committed to a phased implementation of the measures in the Bill. We will set out the timetable for that in order to ensure that people are aware of it and that we support the measures as they are introduced.

I have ongoing engagement with the business sector through different forums, including my engagement forum. I will continue to meet the organisations specifically in relation to the Bill as it progresses through its stages.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

I hope that the Minister is feeling better. She will know that one of the biggest issues with the 'good jobs' Bill is that the consultation was viewed by many as an options paper. At this late stage, how does that sit with the scrutiny of the Bill, given that, for example, Committee scrutiny of the Justice Bill took 18 months? I want us to fix the Bill so that it works for everyone in the Assembly, but I am really concerned about the time frame to do that properly. What reassurance can she give that everyone will have their voice heard and be able to have input?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. The consultation was run as required, and I set out my way forward nearly a year ago. Since then, there has been considerable engagement with everybody involved to understand the detail, to take on board the points that were raised in the consultation and to try to reflect them in the drafting of the Bill.

As I indicated to Mr O'Toole, I do not believe that there is a timing problem with having the legislation considered by the Committee; there is plenty of time. As I have repeatedly said, I want to introduce the legislation and get it to the Committee in advance of the summer recess so that there is time to ensure that the scrutiny takes place and for everybody to look at the detail and have their say on it. The Committee will come to its position.

I agree with the Member that it is really important that we pass the Bill. There are lots of important things in it, some of which are simply about catching up where we have fallen behind, so that needs to happen.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

A job of work will be required to challenge the narrative put out by business organisations about the Bill. I hope that that limited but important Bill is not watered down as a result of pressure from them, and I welcome assurances to that effect.

Minister, will you make it clear whether provision for the demands made by Unite the union — I declare that I am a Unite member — on the extreme weather conditions policy will be included in your Bill? If not, would you be open to supporting amendments to that effect?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. I cannot give assurances on his first point, because, once the Bill is introduced, it is up to the Assembly, and Members will table amendments. I am completely behind the measures that I will bring forward, as is my party, but others will take their own view. It is really important that those of us who advocate better workers' rights continue to make the case for why what is being introduced is important and will make a difference to the lives of workers.

I have engaged with the unions on the issue in the second point. I am sensitive to the issues around it. It boils down to workers' safety, essentially, which is really important. It is not included in the Bill, because it was not consulted on as part of the Bill. We continue to work with the unions, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and others on the particular asks, so I am open to looking at what is suggested, but I would not want to rush those measures, because it is about getting the balance right and ensuring that workers are protected.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

4. Mr Kingston asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on measures to provide assistance to people during the current increase in energy costs. (AQO 3441/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The British Chancellor has made it clear that any further support will be targeted at households that need it most. At present, as the Member knows, only £17 million has been earmarked for support here following the significant rise in heating oil costs. That is insufficient. However, work has been undertaken by the Minister for Communities, and the Executive agreed last week to provide additional support. That will be rolled out over the next short number of months. More work needs to be done to ensure that that support gets out.

I speak regularly with my counterparts in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, Minister Shanks and Minister Martin McCluskey and have emphasised that further support is needed. Separate to that and before the current energy crisis, my officials, along with officials from the Department of Finance, secured a commitment from Treasury to cover 75% of the NIRO cost to consumers. That is consistent with the support announced for British electricity consumers in the autumn Budget. It amounts to a discount of around £30 on domestic electricity bills per household each year for three years, which totals around £81 million.

The British Government will extend the Energy Prices Act 2022 through a statutory instrument (SI) in the Westminster Parliament, which is the fastest route available to us to pass on the savings to households here. The SI was laid on Monday 16 March and is expected to complete its passage before the summer recess. In the past number of weeks, my officials agreed in principle with electricity suppliers, NIE, the Consumer Council and the Utility Regulator how the discount will be delivered. We will now seek approval for the business case for that funding from Treasury, and it is expected that electricity consumers will see savings from 1 July this year and then from 1 April in 2027 and 2028.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Since I submitted my question, the £100 of support for home heating oil for lower-income households — up to 340,000 households — across Northern Ireland has been announced. That was led by the Minister for Communities and supported by the Executive, and it includes funding from Treasury. That support is very much to be welcomed.

Businesses are also suffering from the spike in energy costs. What specific schemes is the Minister, as the Minister for the Economy, considering to support businesses that are suffering?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. He will recognise that, when it comes to providing financial support, the Executive do not have the firepower to put in place support schemes to the degree that is required. We have been making the case to the British Government for them to step in in a way similar to what they did during the energy cost crisis following the start of the war in Ukraine. In recent weeks, I have met my counterparts and made the case to them directly. I am told that everything is being kept under review.

Separately, I have made the case that we need to see urgent cuts to fuel duty and tax. The power to do that rests solely with the British Government. That would have a meaningful, although not huge, impact on the cost base of businesses. That is an important measure that should be taken forward.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you for the update, Minister. How can already hard-pressed households and families be protected from price gouging as a result of increasing energy costs?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. Over recent weeks, since the current crisis began, I have met representatives of the heating oil and natural gas sectors, National Energy Action (NEA) and business organisations more widely so that I might understand at first hand what the cost pressures are and what impact they are having on lower-income and vulnerable households and businesses. The home heating oil retail market operates under the rules of competition legislation. Trading Standards Service (TSS) works with the heating oil industry to ensure that everyone operates within competition and consumer protection law. As the Member will know, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) recently launched a market study on the retail supply of home heating oil, which includes the market here. That study will examine whether the market is working well for consumers, and, if it finds that it does not, it is expected that it will identify opportunities to improve outcomes for consumers.

As the Member will also know, the Consumer Council conducts its home heating oil price checker and fuel price checker surveys across the North, benchmarking energy supplier prices in order to support consumers to make informed decisions. That measure was introduced in the past number of years to improve transparency about costs and to make people aware of where things sit and of what the comparators are.

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

Minister, making families wait until the summertime for a mere £100 towards their heating costs, which is the Executive's belated and sole response to the energy crisis, does not cut it. I know that your party's perennial get-out-of-jail-free card is to blame the British Government, so is it fair to say that your party wants all the power and all the control but none of the responsibility?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I do not agree with the Member on that at all. I think that most people out there recognise where the levers sit in relation to the measures that can be taken and recognise that the real levers that will be effective in providing meaningful support to people are with the British Government. I made the point to Mr Honeyford that I have continually impressed upon British Ministers the need to engage with Executive Ministers on the types of supports that they are bringing forward so that those can be put in place as expeditiously as they are in Britain. That does not happen in the way that it should, but I will continue to bang that door and try to ensure that we are in a position to provide support. So far, there has not been enough support forthcoming. We continue to raise with the British Government the fact that that needs to change and that we need to see meaningful intervention, such as that that we saw following the start of the war in Ukraine. That follows the conversation about the Budget for the whole Executive. Again, we are involved in negotiations on that with the British Government, because it is very clear that what is on the table does not provide us with the ability to provide public services in the way that people expect and deserve us to.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

5. Mr Donnelly asked the Minister for the Economy to outline how her Department will support the deployment of more low-carbon heating technologies in the residential sector. (AQO 3442/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

My Department published the Government response to the consultation on support for low-carbon heating in residential buildings on 26 January. The responses to the consultation are being used to inform policy decisions on the design of and rules and guidance for such support. In tandem with the consultation process, officials have been working on a design plan for a new domestic energy efficiency and low-carbon heat support scheme that will replace the NI sustainable energy programme (NISEP). The design plan is nearing completion, and the intention is to publish it in the coming months. The plan includes details on eligibility, funding options and quality assurance and outlines how the scheme will be managed and operated. Through the course of this year, work will focus on developing the required business case, procurement documentation and support scheme regulations. It is anticipated that a new support scheme will be launched in the latter part of 2027.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thanks to the Minister for that answer. The Department's consultation on low-carbon heating support closed in January 2025, which was over 15 months ago. The response that the Minister referred to was published in January this year, and it commits not to a scheme but to further consultation. Can she explain why it will take until at least 2027 to legislate for that? Does she accept that, for families who are still relying on heating oil, the pace of progress is not good enough?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. I reflect the fact that it is important that we get support schemes right. Working through the detail and ensuring that what is put in place both works and is value for money are really important. That is something that this place has certainly learned over recent years.

I accept that there are people who would like to be in a position to transition from fossil fuels more quickly, and we need to do as much as we can to help them do that. The support scheme is one element that will help people, particularly those in lower-income households, to do that. We also need to provide information, advice and guidance to support people to transition from fossil fuels. Again, that is something that we are working on through the Department. We support lower-income households in particular. We have provided additional money to the sustainable energy programme that is provided through the Utility Regulator, and we have topped that up over the past number of years. To date, that funding has helped 2,500 low-income households across the region, and we are topping it up again this year.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Will the Minister provide an update on the closure of the RHI scheme?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Briefly, Minister.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member. As he will know, the RHI (Closure of Non-Domestic Scheme) Bill passed its Further Consideration Stage just yesterday. The Department has completed consultation on the policy proposals for the closure regulations, and a report on the outcome of the consultation has been published. We are finalising the draft regulations, with the aim of commencing formal Assembly processes for the regulations immediately following the enactment of the Bill.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move now to topical questions.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

T1. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister for the Economy to explain the reported potential loss of up to 450 jobs at Ulster University, including 221 in Belfast, 114 in Coleraine, 108 at Magee and seven in Jordanstown, given the fact that her Department's recent financial needs assessment stated that the university is not facing an imminent financial crisis; whether she agrees that there is a major crisis in higher education; and what she is doing to urgently rescue the sector. (AQT 2261/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. Clearly, I am aware of the announcement that was made by Ulster University last week. It will be a worrying time for staff, and my thoughts are with them and their families as they face that uncertainty. That is why I am working to secure a budget settlement that can deliver a prosperous economy with a sustainable further and higher education sector. I have been clear that the financial position facing my Department is extremely challenging, as it is for all Departments. The Executive have also been clear about that. We have been warning repeatedly that our finances are unsustainable. We need to ensure that we have a proper, sustainable funding model for the Executive that will allow us to invest in our public services. From my perspective, last week's announcement by Ulster University is a real-world consequence of the Executive not being funded to their level of need. We need to be able to provide sustainable funding.

Despite the challenging budgetary position that my Department has faced over the past two years and into the next financial year, I have worked to prioritise skills through our further and higher education institutions. I have argued and been successful in lobbying for additional in-year funding to support our further and higher education institutions, and I have engaged in good faith with both universities to try to enable them to have the best possible budgetary settlement. I will continue to work with my Executive colleagues to try to deliver on that.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

With the greatest respect, Minister, the sector is collapsing. I have engaged with Ulster University, and I have spoken to Queen's University and, this morning, the unions. There is genuine shock at the recent announcement. I am particularly concerned about the 108 jobs that are at risk at Magee. How can you stand over the Executive's commitment, and your commitment, to expand Magee at the same time as the workforce is being collapsed? What action are you taking to protect jobs, protect the capacity and deliver for the north-west?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Again, I thank the Member for her question. It is fair to reflect on the fact that the further and higher education sector in the North is no different from that in Britain. The common factor is the lack of investment coming from the British Government. That is why, with a united voice, the Executive, and all parties in the House, need to continue to demand better for the people whom we represent.

The expansion of Magee is an Executive priority; it is a Programme for Government and New Decade, New Approach commitment. Since the Executive were restored in 2024, my Department has prioritised investment of £35 million. We have seen the impact of that through the 22% increase in student numbers. The Magee task force is working alongside other partners to help us deliver on the 10,000 student target. Significant progress has been made there, but we need to ensure that our further and higher education institutions have a more sustainable funding settlement. I am working hard to deliver on that.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

T2. Mr Sheehan asked the Minister for the Economy whether her Department has plans to launch an Irish language policy. (AQT 2262/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. My Department will shortly consult on a new Irish language policy. This marks a significant step forward in our commitment to support and promote the Irish language across the region. We are aiming for a full roll-out of the Irish language policy from September and will ensure that there is a comprehensive and inclusive approach. This initiative reflects my commitment to cultural diversity and enrichment of language heritage in our communities.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin.

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

Can the Minister please tell us what areas the policy will cover?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. The forthcoming Irish language policy will cover a wide range of areas, reflecting the Department's commitment to cultural and linguistic diversity. The key areas include support for Irish language education; resources and training for staff; increased visibility of the language in departmental communications; and collaboration with community groups to encourage broader engagement. The policy will also address opportunities to integrate Irish language initiatives into economic development, tourism and workplace environments, ensuring that the language remains accessible and relevant across multiple sectors. It is important that we have a comprehensive approach, and, through that, the Department aims to nurture an inclusive environment in which the language can flourish and be beneficial to our communities in future generations.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

T3. Mr Kelly asked the Minister for the Economy for an update on the work of the North City Business Centre (NCBC). (AQT 2263/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

The North City Business Centre is a registered charity, as the Member will be well aware, that was established to provide advice, support and accommodation for small businesses in north Belfast. It seeks to address enterprise creation and development, support skills for employment and act as a catalyst for economic regeneration.

In collaboration with NCBC, I recently completed a substantial investment project which has brought the total footprint of NCBC to almost 200,000 square feet through three new sites. Following redevelopment, the new sites will attract many new and growing businesses and create new local jobs in that highly disadvantaged area. The project has been made possible with £3·75 million from the local growth fund. North Belfast has enormous potential, and this acquisition ensures that local people and businesses will be at the centre of future growth, so I look forward to seeing those buildings becoming vibrant assets that support opportunity, innovation and community well-being.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht an fhreagra sin.

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

First, I welcome the fact that that land has been found and handed over. Has the North City Business Centre got any early plans for how it will maximise the use of the new land for the benefit of the local community?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. I understand that the new properties will be used collectively to enhance economic opportunities in the area and provide space for entrepreneurs and businesses to help them develop, network and grow, through both office accommodation and meeting rooms. I understand that there is already very strong interest in the available space. The Northgate site will also be used to provide community facilities, and a steering group of local community representatives has been established to further develop and shape the proposals for community use. As the Member will know, significant refurbishment will be required before the majority of the space can be operational. However, consideration is being given to community uses of the buildings in advance of the refurbishment works.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

T4. Ms Brownlee asked the Minister for the Economy, after noting that each year tens of thousands of people take part in Twelfth, with many lining the streets across our towns and cities, and further noting that, only a few weeks ago on Easter Monday, 26,000 people were recorded by official footfall counters as being in Ballymoney town centre for the Apprentice Boys of Derry parade, to outline what her Department is doing to support such cultural tourism events, given their scale and clear economic benefit. (AQT 2264/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. The main lever for engaging with communities around promoting cultural events and events across the board is through Tourism NI, so I encourage anyone who is engaged in organising events to do that. There will be opportunities to access support via Tourism NI. The organisers of the events that the Member referred to very often engage with and are supported by their local councils. Again, I encourage continued engagement in that regard to ensure that there is economic benefit from any events that take place. It is important that events are inclusive of all communities.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her response. This week, I will meet with Tourism NI to discuss the promotion of the Royal Landing festival, which takes place in my constituency of East Antrim. Can the Minister explain why events such the Royal Landing festival, the sham fight at Scarva and the Twelfth are not included on Tourism NI's website and why information on them is not provided on its tourism calendar? Will the Minister attempt to rectify that, get those events on the calendar as soon as possible and get them promoted throughout Northern Ireland and beyond?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. I encourage her to raise that issue when she meets with Tourism NI. We are working through the implementation of the tourism vision and action plan. Supporting community tourism and cultural tourism is part of that. I certainly encourage her to take up any opportunities that she has to engage in that regard, particularly with Tourism NI on its own marketing material.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

T5. Mr Tennyson asked the Minister for the Economy, after noting that, in recent weeks, she has come under scrutiny for ignoring official advice to not go on a visit to the US that was organised by a company that is linked to her former party colleague Máirtín Ó Muilleoir, who was subsequently appointed by her to the board of Invest NI, to assure the House that cronyism has played no role in her decision-making in recent months. (AQT 2265/22-27)

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. The Member will be aware that all public appointments go through a rigorous process that is set out by the Commissioner for Public Appointments for NI. That has been the case for any appointments that I have made since I have been in post, both in my current Department and in my previous Department. A robust process is followed that involves application and interviews. The party colleague to whom you referred came through that process, as did the others who were appointed. My view is that he is not only an experienced businessperson and former elected representative but a passionate advocate for all that is good about this place and our businesses, communities and potential. I believe that he will be an asset to the board. I also believe that questions are being asked about his appointment only because he is a prominent republican. To me, that stinks of sectarianism. There are no no-go positions for republicans any more. That is just a fact.

In relation to the conference to which you referred, I followed the advice from Invest NI. I do not know what advice others are reading, but it said that I should decline it as a stand-alone event. I went as part of a wider programme — a well-worthwhile programme — on prioritising investment in the north-west. If I had not attended, my colleagues in the north-west would rightly ask why I had not taken the opportunity to represent them.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

I find it remarkable, Minister, that, when questions are asked about perceived conflicts of interest, you reach for the sectarianism card. I find that quite remarkable.

What potential conflicts were identified and what steps did you take to manage them? Did you consider recusing yourself from the process? Did you ask the selection panel for a merit-ordered list?

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for his question. It was a ministerial appointment, so I would not recuse myself from that. During my time in the Department of Finance and the Department for the Economy, I have made many appointments. I can assure the Member that the political allegiances or background of any candidate play no part in it. I engage in my role with elected representatives, former elected representatives and former party staffers across a range of agencies and lobby organisations. I have appointed people to different boards, and their political allegiance has played no part in that whatsoever. I appointed a former UUP MLA to the Fiscal Council. Nobody raised any questions about that. The issue here is that a process was followed and followed properly. I stand over it entirely.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

T6. Ms K Armstrong asked the Minister for the Economy, after noting that, following a meeting, Unite raised concerns about the safety of workers who are forced to head out to work during storms due to a lack of legislation that protects them from working in dangerous weather conditions, what she can do to update health and safety legislation in that regard. (AQT 2266/22-27)

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Briefly, Minister.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for her question. Mr Carroll asked a similar one earlier. I have also engaged with the unions around the issue. We are undertaking a programme of work, alongside the Health and Safety Executive and the unions, to address the issues that they have highlighted, look at what is required, be it legislative change or better guidance, and ensure that we provide the right protections for workers, because I very much recognise the issue. There can be terrible consequences if things are not done in the way that they are supposed to be done. It is important that we ensure that the appropriate protections are in place.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister.

Opposition Business

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

As a member of the Infrastructure Committee and the Northern Ireland Policing Board, I welcome the opportunity to speak on such an important and current topic, and I am grateful to the SDLP for tabling the motion. Antisocial behaviour involving e-scooters and scramblers is becoming more and more of an issue with each passing day. Today, we will all speak broadly on various scenarios that we have seen in our areas, where many of those vehicles have been used by children and young people.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

First, I will address the issue of e-scooters, which the motion mentions. Over the past five years, the PSNI has continued to see a rise in incidents relating to e-scooters. Over 200 injuries have been reported, some of which required the Ambulance Service to be called. We need to be clear that e-scooters are not toys. We have seen the consequences of misuse across the UK and Ireland already, with e-scooters having caused serious injuries to riders and pedestrians and, sometimes, fatalities. Just last year, a fourteen-year-old boy got on the back of a friend's e-scooter on the way home from school. He was not wearing a helmet and was holding on to his friend. They were in a collision that, sadly, cost him his life when his unprotected head hit the ground. That causes me grave concern as a new parent and as someone who recently witnessed children coming out of Strandtown Primary School in east Belfast, just half a mile down the road from here, on an e-scooter: two individuals, without helmets, with one of them giving a lift to his friend. They made their way along a footpath beside the busy crossroads at North Road. Many who use those vehicles are children, and we want to see not the potential criminalisation of children but education and targeted interventions, which pilots have shown to be successful.

I turn to scramblers. In 2016, we saw the death of Valerie Armstrong in Colin Glen Forest Park, following a collision caused by a scrambler. Scramblers are not toys; they are heavy, motorised bikes that travel at high speeds. Just this morning, I received a call from a resident of Orangefield Avenue who is interested in today's debate. He was concerned about dangerous scrambler use and recognised on the call that police are doing everything that they can, yet it is still happening, and they are unable to intervene more strongly.

Innovative approaches are being applied, and I commend the PSNI and its west Belfast neighbourhood teams, which have worked collaboratively with the local community, youth services and schools to address the growing use of scramblers. That is how we will address the issues. They have shown that education can have a significant impact, with a 29% reduction in incidents involving scramblers in just one year.

We now need further clarity on those vehicles. Currently, the Department for Infrastructure lacks e-scooter or scrambler-specific legislation or guidance, which makes enforcing the rules on using such vehicles vague and impractical. It is a serious road safety issue, and I call on the Minister for Infrastructure to look into potential measures to address it. There are many challenges with e-scooters and scramblers, but, as in other countries, there are many opportunities, if we can get it right. E-scooter and scramblers are here, and now we, as legislators, must catch up and approach the issue on the basis of sound evidence and good policy.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank those who tabled the motion and those who tabled the amendment, because it is a relevant debate on a prevalent issue. I will put that in a little bit of context.

A number of weeks ago, I was in Lisburn Square in Lisburn, which is a beautiful, pedestrianised precinct. It is a great shopping area, which partners Bow Street Mall: the finest that Lagan Valley has to offer. In that area during the daytime, there were a number of young people on large bikes. They were not on e-scooters or scramblers, but they were doing exactly the thing that we are talking about today. They were not riding or using them in the manner that most young people and bike users do. They were using them in a way that was deliberately provocative and dangerous not just to other users but, sadly, to themselves.

I tried to intervene. I thought that I would be Billy Big Robbie, if you like, but, unfortunately, I found that they were not in a receptive mood. I could not engage them in conversation at all. I then had a conversation with a local shop owner. Regretfully, that shop owner, who has spoken to the PSNI, the local chamber of commerce and industry and the local council on the issue, has had to make adjustments to their opening times. They have had to close their premises because of the actions of a small number of people who ride around the area on e-scooters and bikes, which puts people off shopping there. That is only one impact, but that impact on our high street is something that we have not discussed today. People are put off shopping. The elderly are probably put off shopping, because of the decline in their reaction time and their difficulty with spatial awareness. They are scared. That is the reality.

I will also speak for another sector of our community that does not have its voice heard nearly enough, and that is the disabled sector. This has more to do with the active pedestrian versus the cyclist, and I do not want to get into that today, except to say that we should all look at some of the testimony that the RNIB has provided for the debate. The RNIB is telling us that 77% of blind and partially sighted survey respondents said that the behaviour of e-scooter riders makes them feel unsafe, that 61% of them said that they cannot make the journeys that they want or need to make and that 70% of them avoid paths that are shared with cyclists or those on e-scooters.

I am not here to demonise people who use any of those vehicles appropriately, because all of us probably had a BMX at one stage and rode around our streets. Thinking back to that time, however, we all knew what manners were. We also knew about safety. I said that I do not want to demonise young people, and I do not, but there are two approaches that we need to take. The first is contained in the motion and the amendment and concerns the legal context. It is about how we are going to support the PSNI in its endeavours to deal with repossession through the four Es process. I will, however, talk about the approach that is much more important, and that is the preventative approach. That is where the real energy needs to be directed. There is something that we can do even now, individually or collectively, and that is raise awareness and promote education at every level of society.

After I had my experience in Lisburn Square a number of weeks ago, I wrote to the local PSNI superintendent, the local council and Lisburn chamber to try to arrange a collective meeting, which is still to happen. Other voices that need to be at that meeting are those of parents and young people, because, when we talk about making a cultural and societal change, all voices should be equal.

We also need to better understand what facilities we have for young people. I mentioned that we all had BMXs at one time, and one of the best interventions made in Lisburn was to create a BMX track at Bells Lane park, which is still there and is still used. Yes, we need to look at the justice part, at the enforcement part and at the laws on the purchase and use of scramblers and e-scooters, but we also need to provide our young people with diversions. I can fully understand why those vehicles look, sound and are experienced as fun, but let us not forget about our local shopping centres, our disabled community and our elderly.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to this important motion. It was interesting to hear my colleague Emma Sheerin provide feedback that the issue does not necessarily affect all our constituencies. I have not really taken any time to step away from West Belfast to think about how the issue might impact on different parts of the North and the island. I am relieved and pleased to hear that not all our communities are blighted. It is a very difficult and frustrating issue to try to deal with, so I am glad that not everyone has to.

That said, it is having an impact on communities. As a West Belfast representative, I acknowledge, as has been mentioned, the devastating loss of life that we witnessed, not so long ago, in 2016. That poor young mother of three kids lost her life as a result of the issue that we are talking about today. Since that happened, I cannot help but think about those kids, that girl's husband and her family, who will forever live with the pain of what happened on that day. That is the reality that we are dealing with.

When Mark Durkan opened the debate, he talked about the essence of the motion, which is what we can do better to deal with the matter. It genuinely comes down to the fact that there is potential for loss of life. That is how serious it is. Mark mentioned the near misses, and we see those happening regularly in our constituencies, on our roads and streets. That mother lost her life and her children no longer have their mummy with them, and that breaks my heart every time that I think about it. Every time that I see a scrambler in West Belfast, which is pretty regularly, it takes me back — it is probably the same for anyone who sees them — to what happened to that girl. That is why we must do all that we can by way of regulation, education with parents, enforcement of legislation and supporting the PSNI to have the resources to be able to enforce the law. The PSNI has spoken about its capacity to chase scramblers up and down the roads and the dangers that go with that. When you live in an area where that is a pretty regular occurrence, you understand why it is very difficult to manage.

When I am driving to work or taking my son to school, or when people in my constituency and in constituencies like mine are going about their daily business, it is so frustrating to see one of those scramblers flying at speed right up to the tail of your car. It is so dangerous when they drive in between lanes or alongside you. They are swerving between lanes and pulling out in front of your car. Most of our roads in West Belfast are main thoroughfares, but we have some country roads as well. Regardless of where those incidents take place, they are so dangerous. They pose a danger not just for drivers but for pedestrians who are going about their business, walking on the footpath or crossing the road. There are so many opportunities for causing injuries or — please God, no one wants to see it — further loss of life.

I am grateful that we are having this discussion today. I do not want to take away from one element or another, but legislation will be very important to bring us to a better place. I am thinking about the young girl in the South who lost her life and what her poor family is going through. The South is slightly behind us, in that we have legislation that makes scramblers on public roads illegal, but we need to do much more, and education will be so important.

I want to make a special appeal to parents. None of us does things perfectly, but as a parent, I ask you to be aware of the dangers to your child when they ride on a scrambler or an e-scooter, as well as to the local community. No one wants to be in a situation where they are dealing with a loss of life that is caused by a scrambler or an e-scooter, whether that be the person using those vehicles or the people who may come to harm on our streets. If there is any support that we can give to the police and parents as a result of the motion, or if we can strengthen legislation and regulations, let us do it so that no one else loses their life.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I support the DUP amendment. We need to understand that the motion and the amendment refer to a small minority of reckless drivers and not the majority of people who own scramblers or e-scooters. Constituents are, however, fed up seeing those vehicles being driven at speed, with no regard for pedestrians, no regard for the law and no regard for public safety. Older people are frightened, parents are worried, and people with sight or mobility impairments are being put in danger in places where they should feel safe. Let us be honest, in some areas, this goes beyond antisocial behaviour. Those vehicles are widely believed to be used for intimidation, coercion and criminality. If that is the reality in our communities, government must stop lagging behind events and start to act.

I live in a rural area, so I virtually never see e-scooters unless I come into the town, but they are a problem. In the rural constituency that I represent, the problem is mostly the irresponsible use of scramblers.

The PSNI is being asked to deal with the problem while operating under serious constraints. Officers know that direct pursuit can create a major risk to life. Offenders know it too and exploit that weakness. They believe that they can act with impunity, because the chances of being caught are too low and the consequences are too weak. That must end. In my day, the problem was the Honda step-through moped: the Honda 50 and the Honda 90. In today's society, it is e-scooters and scramblers.

The police need more than sympathy; they need powers, resources and technology. That means additional support for drone teams and drone-equipped officers and stronger seizure powers. Let us be clear: small fines are no deterrent. When the vehicles are being used to endanger the public or intimidate communities, they should be seized, retained and, where appropriate, destroyed. Offenders should be permanently deprived of them.

Enough passing from one Department to another, enough delay and enough excuses. If the law is too weak, strengthen it. If the police need more powers, give them. If offenders exploit loopholes, close them. Our communities deserve protection, not platitudes. The Minister must act in collaboration with the Minister for Infrastructure to legislate to curb the irresponsible use of scramblers, e-scooters and similar vehicles. I support the amendment.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I will start by paying tribute to the lives that have been lost not just in Northern Ireland but in the Republic. We saw the recent introduction of Grace's law in the Republic, although some of it already applied here. In the past month, that has brought even greater attention to the issue here.

I will also speak about the current law on e-scooters. In the previous two mandates, pressure was applied, and there were calls for new legislation on e-scooters before they had picked up the pace to get where we are now. We have not seen that progress yet, so I hope that the Department of Justice and the Department for Infrastructure, which have shown a willingness to work together, will do so.

I also want to highlight what we can do about the manufacturing of e-scooters. They are targeted towards an older population, but let us face it: it is families who are buying them for teenagers and children.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Yes.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Does the Member acknowledge that the marketing of the vehicles, particularly online, is concerning and that security and safety issues are not fully considered by some of the retailers?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Member has an extra minute.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Thank you. I agree with the Minister. The e-scooters are targeted at the younger generation, who want to use them, although they are a different form of travel. We see people use them responsibly, for example to get to work, but, for the most part, that is not what we see daily.

I am told that some e-scooters can go up to 60 mph. The ones that we generally see can go up to 40 mph. We want to see more 20 mph zones for cars in our neighbourhoods, yet we have scooters that can go up to 40 mph, and there are kids on them without helmets. It is absolute madness. We also see them not just in green spaces but on our roads. In North Belfast, we often see many young people trying to get to the Belfast hills on the main roads. They cut across all the traffic, again not wearing helmets. I often think that it will come to one of their friends losing their life for some of them to think that it is not cool any more, because the scooters are seen as that. It would be really unpopular, but, if we had greater powers — from the responses that the Minister has given to questions for written answer, it appears that that is supported — we could all tell the police which shops to go to or where people hang out with e-scooters, and they could go and see a bunch of them, because e-scooters are becoming more and more popular in certain areas.

I will move on to talk about North Belfast in particular and the whole Belfast hills area, which leads on to west Belfast, where scramblers are being used in non-rural settings more and more. There should be targeted campaigning towards using them on proper land that is built for that purpose. They are totally destroying green spaces. I remember having meetings with the Belfast Hills Partnership and the National Trust about the use of bikes — not e-bikes — by mountain bikers on Cave Hill and in the Belfast hills and trying to remove them from there. They had to jump through hoops to be able to use those spaces safely, yet people are able to wreak havoc on e-scooters and scramblers. I know that the police want to be able to do something more about the issue. Colleagues in the Chamber from North Belfast often hear about the police seizing boom boxes and drink up on Cave Hill, but e-scooters and scramblers are more dangerous.

Hopefully, if all of us work together, we can progress this. It seems that it is something that we all agree on in the Chamber. We know that it is a problem that should be fixed. There is an education piece not just for young people but for parents, because they are buying them. It is not actually the young people who are buying them. Hopefully, by all working together, we can progress this. The neighbourhood policing teams need the help and resources. The policing infrastructure can enhance those teams, which will enable them to do that.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

There are occasions on which the Assembly spends time talking about things that may not be as important as this issue, which, in many cases, is a life-and-death scenario. It is a life-and-death scenario for the young people in my constituency who use e-scooters on public roads, footways and open spaces. It is a matter of life and death for other people using the road and for pedestrians trying to go about their business.

Footage that I released yesterday speaks to the epidemic in North Belfast: 35 young people drove along Shore Road and onto Antrim Road through Duncairn Gardens, circling drivers, pedestrians and the police. People contact me every day about the issue on my constituency email and Facebook Messenger. They are afraid that, when they use the road, they will hit one of the young people using those scooters, or, when they are trying to enjoy open spaces, they are intimidated by those users.

We need to send a clear message: it is illegal to use an e-scooter on public roads. It is a simple message. Children of 11, 12 and younger do not have the resources to spend hundreds of pounds on the scooters; they are being bought for them by their parents. I have a simple message for people who are purchasing those scooters for their children: you need to wise up. You should not be buying your children things that could cause harm to them or others.

I am particularly concerned about the issue. In East Belfast, my colleague David Brooks has done a lot of important work on this. To date, I have been disappointed by the response that has been given by the Minister of Justice when this has been raised. When I asked her whether she would encourage the Police Service of Northern Ireland to have a targeted campaign of education and enforcement on the issue, her response was that the Police Service of Northern Ireland is an autonomous organisation. The Minister of Justice can pick up the phone to the Chief Constable on a range of issues. For the Minister of Justice to wash her hands of this issue is a dereliction of duty.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Happily.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I appreciate what the Member is trying to get at, but I sit on the Policing Board with three of your colleagues, and I do not believe that the issue has ever been brought up there. Have you tried to go down that route? We would be more than happy to work with you and your colleagues on the Policing Board to hold the police to account on whether they will initiate that kind of campaign.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Phillip, you have an extra minute.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Thank you.

We will hear remarks from another member of the Policing Board here today, but I have no doubt that Cheryl Brownlee and other members have raised the issue. They will speak to the record about that. It is not difficult for the Minister of Justice to pick up the phone to the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Outsourcing this to the Policing Board — the more people who raise it, the better.

The Member said that the Justice Minister has a willingness to look at legislation. A willingness does not deliver solutions. A willingness does not stop people using the scooters, nor does it empower the police to seize and destroy. That is why our amendment is so important.

I am not often one to look to the Republic of Ireland for best practice, but the work that has been initiated in the Republic of Ireland since January has been really great to see. They have seized and destroyed hundreds of e-scooters and issued fixed penalty fines not just to those who have purchased them but to those who have sold them to young people or their families for use on the public road. That is why our amendment calls for immediate action on mandatory registration at time of purchase and powers for seizure and destruction, with a clear message given to the Police Service of Northern Ireland that they need to put extra resources into doing that.

It will take us a while to get legislation, so let us send a clear message to young people and parents today: you are risking lives, and it is only a matter of time before someone else is killed. You are inflicting anti-community behaviour on areas in which you live. You are destroying open spaces. Ultimately, if you are convicted for using one of those e-scooters and, God forbid, injuring someone, you will ruin your life chances moving forward.

It is important that we send a strong message. I will continue to engage with the Minister of Justice, and I encourage her to introduce legislation, either primary or through regulation, to ensure that the police have the power to tackle the matter properly. I fear that someone will be killed on the streets of our capital city very soon.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

If you speak to people about e-scooters and scramblers, you will get a pretty strong response, as has been said, from constituents and people across the North. I echo the tributes paid to Valerie Armstrong by my colleague from West Belfast. It is hard to believe that it is 10 years since she was killed in Colin Glen Forest Park, where I previously worked. That shows that those vehicles can be dangerous. They were fatal for Valerie, so I want to remember her, as others have done, and pay tribute to her family.

In a general sense, I appeal to people — not just young people — not to engage in the ripping up of parks and public green spaces, particularly when using scramblers and any other vehicles. I would hazard a guess and say that it is not only young people who are doing that.

Like the Member for North Belfast, I met the Belfast Hills Partnership some months ago — I think that it was in the summer — on the issue. While we do not necessarily agree on the solutions to the crisis, there is unanimity on the fact that people using scramblers and such vehicles to go on to green spaces and cut or chop them up and obviously destroy habitats is an issue. We should appeal to people to not engage in that: stop doing that; it is disruptive behaviour. However, we should also be cognisant of the fact that industrial dumping and pollution ruins green spaces and ecosystems as well because of the harmful items placed in waters primarily by industrial farming.

This may be the more difficult part to grapple with: why are so many people — according to the statistics, it is primarily young people but not just them — attracted by those vehicles? I am generally not interested in cars or fast vehicles — I started to drive only two years ago — but I imagine that, for young people, it is the thrill of travelling fast. They often live alienated lives over which they have no control or say, and a vehicle going at 50 mph or whatever the Member said, dangerous as that is, can feel liberating or like a good thing to people, obviously with huge risks to them. In some cases, people can literally feel heard: some of those machines can be quite loud. People have also raised that with me in the constituency. We will have to try to understand why young people engage in the practice and encourage them to do it safely and not in a way that puts themselves and others at risk.

I missed the start of the debate, but there was a clear demand for managed sites — it has been referenced already — so that people can use the vehicles in a safe and controlled way. I appreciate that the AERA Minister is standing in, but we need to hear from the Justice Minister or even the AERA Minister about any work that is being progressed around safe sites.

Generally, I warn against a policing-led response to this. The response from young people to that will be that that is needed like a hole in the head. We need to have a youth-led response that actually talks to young people and engages with them. As a youth worker in a pervious job, I know that people respond to that better than when a stick used against them. It is much easier to take the approach of blaming young people and parents, but it is more appropriate and more difficult in this political climate to find the funding to invest in young people more generally, including in youth centres, which are being cut back, and in summer schemes, which are not being protected, to give young people a bit of hope and to listen to them about their needs, their wishes and what they are interested in.

In conclusion, it is worth saying that young people are already subject to stop-and-search on a huge level by the police. They are subject to spit hoods as well, and I do not think that we should be adding to that carte blanche. Obviously, if someone has committed serious injury or a serious crime, that speaks for itself, but, in a general sense, adopting that approach is quite mistaken. Of course, those vehicles are not risk-free, as I have outlined, but the elephant in the room in the debate, when we talk about risk to life and risk to people, is cars. How many people every single year do cars knock down and kill? Most of us in the Building use one, so I think that we need to focus on that as well —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Time is up, Gerry.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

— and not demonise our young people.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I call the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Andrew Muir, to respond on behalf of the Minister of Justice. Minister, you will have up to 15 minutes.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to respond to today's important motion on behalf of the Minister of Justice, who, unfortunately, is unwell. I am sure that Members will join me in wishing her a speedy recovery.

Like the Members who have spoken today, the Minister is deeply concerned about the increasing use of scramblers and e-scooters in public places. Dangerous driving of vehicles such as those not only poses a significant risk to safety but has the potential to cause significant distress, as noted in the motion. At the lowest level, improper and illegal use of those vehicles in public spaces can be a nuisance to other members of the public, not to mention the noise that they create. Incidents such as the gathering of approximately 20 motorbikes in Falls Park earlier this month can also be accompanied by antisocial behaviour, which can cause further disruption to the public and even damage public facilities. In more serious cases, illegal use of those vehicles in public spaces can lead to significant injury and even death. The Minister of Justice has asked me to take this opportunity to acknowledge and extend her sincere condolences to the families of those killed on our roads through the dangerous use of scramblers and e-scooters, and I share that. Every one of those deaths is a tragedy, and, in conjunction with my Executive colleagues, the Justice Minister believes that it is essential that we consider very carefully how we work together to have the greatest impact on saving lives.

The Justice Minister commends the Police Service of Northern Ireland for the dedication that it has shown in tackling the problem, using the existing enforcement powers available to it and other diversionary approaches such as the motorcycle awareness project.

The motorcycle awareness project was developed following the establishment of a cross-government working group in 2016, convened by the Department for Infrastructure, which holds policy responsibility for road safety. The working group was convened following the death in July 2016 of Valerie Armstrong, who was tragically killed when she was struck by a scrambler being ridden illegally while she was walking her dogs in Colin Glen Forest Park. Sadly, that heartbreaking incident was followed by a number of others like it in 2016 and beyond. Previous interventions to address the illegal use of scramblers have often focused on awareness raising and enforcement, with limited success when it came to tackling the root causes of the issue. Instead, the motorcycle awareness project sought to harness young people's passion rather than suppressing it as the means for diversion from offending and antisocial behaviour.

As recognised in today's motion, the motorcycle awareness project was a resounding success. Feedback from participants highlighted improved behaviour at home and changed attitudes to their riding and even to the police. There was also evidence of a ripple effect in the community as students informed peers of the dangers of that activity. Through feedback and evaluation, students also reported improved mental health, employment opportunities and personal development benefits. Students have subsequently contributed to off-road motor sport, including by working at Arenacross and local motorcycling events. As the motion correctly identifies, and as the success of the motorcycle awareness project demonstrated:

"when used responsibly and in appropriate settings, such vehicles can have recreational and community benefits".

Its success could not have been achieved without cross-sectoral support, however. If such initiatives are to be expanded urgently, as is proposed in the motion, the Minister of Justice believes that it is important that the justice system receive support from other Departments, such as the Department for Infrastructure and the Department for Communities, as well as adequate funding from the Executive to support delivery.

Under the current legislative framework for such vehicles, police constables have powers to seize vehicles, including scramblers and e-scooters, that are used:

"in a manner which ... is causing, or is likely to cause, alarm, distress or annoyance".

Those powers are in articles 65 and 66 of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2008. Similar powers are provided to constables to seize vehicles driven without insurance under the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981.

The motion refers to developments in other jurisdictions. Proposals in the Crime and Policing Bill, which I understand is now in its final legislative stages in Parliament, remove the requirement for officers to issue a warning before seizing a vehicle. The Home Office recently consulted on proposals to increase statutory charges and to reduce the disposal time frames for seized vehicles.

The Justice Minister wishes to highlight the recent increased regulation of e-scooters that the Irish Government introduced in 2024 under the Road Traffic and Roads Act 2023 and the recent introduction of Grace's law, which has significantly increased regulation of the use of scramblers in that jurisdiction.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I appreciate the Minister's taking an intervention. It was timely that I got an email to my office today about scramblers in an area of my constituency that I do not want to identify. The issue was highlighted to me, however, and the police are doing what they can. I do not know whether the Minister has any thoughts on this, and I appreciate that he is standing in for his colleague, but what responsibility does a landowner have in circumstances in which bikes and quads are being used on their land? I will quote from the email, which states that scramblers are being ridden:

"day and night, causing havoc to the residents."

What responsibility does the landowner have to secure the area of land that they own if young people are using quads and e-bikes on it?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I am aware of statutory bodies' responsibilities, but when it comes to private landowners' responsibilities, I will need to speak to you in a bit more detail about the specifics. I know of a location in the Strangford constituency where scramblers are used on a private landowner's land, but that is done in an organised fashion. That shows understanding of the importance of the sport, but it is also done to keep people safe and to protect the wider environment. It therefore can be done, but if scramblers are being used on a private landowner's land, there will be civil powers to address that. I am happy to discuss the matter with you. Alternatively, you may wish to write to the Justice Minister to seek clarity on the specifics of the incident to which you referred, because I am not aware of it.

The DUP amendment to the motion:

"calls on the Minister of Justice to introduce mandatory registration at the point of sale".

Members will be aware that vehicle registration is primarily administered by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) UK-wide, and the UK Government do not appear to have any definitive plans to introduce registration at the point of sale. Other jurisdictions, however, such as the Republic of Ireland and Germany, have started to move away from a reliance on the traditional enforcement model, which focuses on police intervention, towards the introduction of a stronger regulatory framework. The Justice Minister is aware that police forces in England, Wales and Scotland have used drones as a tactical tool to tackle the illegal and antisocial use of scramblers, e-scooters and e-bikes. The amendment calls for that to happen here.

In Northern Ireland, the use of drones to tackle antisocial use of vehicles is an operational matter for the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and it is a matter of public record that the PSNI has operated drones since 2013 to help detect, prevent and investigate crime. The deployment of such resources is an operational matter for the Chief Constable to consider, so it would not be appropriate for the Justice Minister to comment further or to direct the use of drones for particular types of crime. As my colleague Nuala McAllister said, there is an opportunity to raise that issue for further scrutiny through the Policing Board.

Developments in other jurisdictions demonstrate not just the need to ensure that adequate enforcement powers are available to the police but the key role that robust regulation of such vehicles through road safety legislation plays. That is why it is vital that any government response to the issue comprehensively considers the need for change in both areas of the law and why the Justice Minister has committed to working with the Minister for Infrastructure to ensure that any necessary amendments to the law in Northern Ireland are identified.

It is important to note that any such amendments would require both primary and secondary legislation to be enacted and would cut across the responsibilities of the Department of Justice and the Department for Infrastructure. Given the limited time left in the mandate, and the current legislative agenda, the Justice Minister sincerely does not believe that any such changes are possible before the next Assembly mandate.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for taking an intervention. Minister, I appreciate that the matter is not normally in your portfolio, but, having listened to what you just said, may I confirm that there are powers under articles 65 and 66 of the Criminal Justice Order and that the police have had drone powers since 2013? Whilst there will be no changes in this mandate, we perhaps need to look at how the police use the seizure powers that they have and their use of drones.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her intervention. Yes, powers are in place, and it is important that they are used.

There is a wider societal issue, which has been raised throughout the debate, about the need for people, particularly parents, to understand the risks associated with e-scooters, given their availability for purchase online at relatively low cost, which are to do with not just road safety but, as has been highlighted by the relevant statutory bodies, the risk of fire in houses.

A wider collective approach is required to the use of existing legislation and the consideration of any new legislation in the next mandate.

The Justice Minister believes that it is important to await the outcome of the recent Home Office consultation to ensure that any amendments are comprehensive. It is important that the House understands that, if we are to bring something forward, it needs to do the job. As I said, the Justice Minister remains committed to working collectively with the Department for Infrastructure to introduce any necessary amendments as soon as possible.

In conclusion, I hope that the Assembly recognises that the issue cannot be adequately addressed by the police and the justice system alone. Enforcement powers must be complemented by accompanying regulations that properly restrict the illegal use of the vehicles on our roads and in public spaces. It is also vital that recreational initiatives, such as the motorcycle awareness project, are developed to ensure that there are adequate opportunities for the vehicles to be used safely in the community. I know of one location where that occurs.

Taking account of recent developments, and in response to today's debate, the Justice Minister plans to write to the Minister for Infrastructure, the Minister for Communities and the Chief Constable to propose a joint meeting to discuss the development of a cross-government approach to the issue. I trust that the Assembly recognises the Minister's commitment to responding to the issue and will support the proposed way forward. We support the motion and the amendment.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I call Cheryl Brownlee to make a winding-up speech on the amendment. Cheryl, you have five minutes.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Only last week, I received video footage of a young child and his father walking from their home to the car. As the child stepped on to the footpath, a scrambler came past at speed. Only the quick reactions of the father in pulling him back prevented what could have been a devastating incident in my constituency.

Sadly, we have lost lives because of such incidents. Today's debate is really important, because we have come together to discuss something that really matters to people on the ground. It is not even about potential loss of life, because there has been loss of life. It is about what we are doing to ensure that we make real, tangible changes that will genuinely make a difference.

As a public representative, I am extremely frustrated, as, I am sure, are all of us in the Chamber. Parents are in distress. Communities are getting angry. Whilst we can all sit here and, as I certainly do, encourage reporting to the PSNI, we know rightly that it does not have enough powers to deal effectively with this growing problem.

I do not think that any of us wants to stand here in another few months, there having been another death that could have been prevented. Between 2021 and 2025, there have been 176 road traffic collisions involving e-scooters, in which 51 people were seriously injured. This is our opportunity to discuss that and to act here today.

We know that, at present, there are clear limitations on what the PSNI can do. Officers are often unable to pursue due to risk to life, particularly on footpaths and greenways. Offenders know and exploit that, and, in some cases, they actively seek the chase as though they get from it some sort of weird enjoyment. They are confident that, even if they are caught, the consequences will be minimal. That is where technology such as drones could be utilised to better address the issue through the use of aerial monitoring to track and pursue offenders properly.

In the first three months of 2026, 22 vehicles were seized. That is good news, but, often, the reality is that a small fine is paid, and then they are back out on the streets, and the hands of the police are again tied. That is little deterrent. The situation has to change. Police need the powers to properly seize, retain and, where necessary, dispose of the vehicles.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

Will the Member take an intervention?

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

For you, anything.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I am very thankful to the Member for taking an intervention. Having cited the use of drone technology, does the Member agree that that is a better and safer way to catch the young folk who do this, rather than the sort of police chase that she described? Does she agree that that is a better and safer way not just for the police but for the people who exploit the e-scooters?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

You have an extra minute, Cheryl.

Cheryl Brownlee (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you.

I absolutely agree. We have that technology. The PSNI has it. It is about how the technology is utilised not only in this instance but in other areas where we should look to technology to make things safer and ensure that we get the response right, keep people safe at the time and get it across the line. We definitely need to look at using that technology much more.

We know that what we are discussing is not some hypothetical but is happening on our streets across Northern Ireland, although it may be happening in some areas more than others. We have all seen the footage of scramblers and e-scooters being driven recklessly through residential areas, which puts pedestrians, drivers and, indeed, those riders at risk. It makes me feel awful when an older person or somebody with a disability is terrified to go out of their home because of that. When somebody is scared to leave their property because of e-scooters or scramblers, we have to come down hard on it and ensure that we do as much as possible. As we know, such behaviour is not harmless. It is dangerous, illegal and deeply destructive to all communities, and people deserve to feel safe in the communities in which they live.

Our amendment is about closing the gap between the scale of the problem and the powers that are available to deal with it. If we are serious about tackling antisocial behaviour, we need to be prepared to match enforcement with legislation, innovation, resourcing and, of course, education. Education is critical. I am a big believer in diversionary programmes: I have seen them in my constituency and know that they work well. It is about working together. No single method will solve the problem. It is about how we utilise all of them together to make the biggest impact.

My colleague David Brooks, whom my colleague Phillip Brett mentioned, could not be here today, but he is at the forefront of the issue in his constituency of East Belfast, which has been particularly affected by the issue. The amendment that we have tabled was shaped by that engagement with local communities and front-line teams, grounded in practical experience, and it was tabled in a genuine effort to find solutions. Communities have waited long enough. The amendment provides practical but proportionate steps to restore safety and confidence in our communities. Let us send a really strong message. I urge Members to support our amendment.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I call Matthew O'Toole to conclude and wind up the debate on the motion. Matthew, you have 10 minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. This has been a useful and thoughtful debate. Opposition days are often a mix of political division, with us holding the Executive to account, as we did robustly earlier today, but also seeking a degree of consensus and progress on issues. It is clear that the widespread use of e-scooters and scramblers is a huge issue in Belfast particularly and urban areas more generally.

I should say to Emma Sheerin that, although people sometimes do not believe it, I grew up in the countryside until I was a teenager, and there are scramblers —

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Not in south Derry.

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

Not in south Derry, but, out the back of my house, a neighbour of mine — I will not name him, because he would not appreciate it — was a big scrambler person. The less said about that the better.

It is true that there are lots of young people who enjoy scrambler use. Some of them get into motor sport later in life. It can be a positive recreation. It is important, however, not to trivialise the consequences of the misuse of such vehicles. While we can acknowledge that many young people enjoy using such vehicles and can do so in a healthy way — Robbie Butler, who is not here any more, mentioned, for example, the use of open space in Lisburn in his constituency in order to give young people the space to use them — it is a plague in lots of communities. You can, on the one hand, acknowledge that people can use the vehicles for positive recreation and, on the other hand, say that there is huge and widespread misuse of them that is plaguing ordinary people, in particular the elderly, the vulnerable, people who are sight-disabled, those with pets and those moving about the city.

Members referred to the tragic circumstances of Valerie Armstrong, who died in Colin Glen a decade ago. She was a young mother with young children. There is no trivialising the loss of that life or, indeed, that of Grace Lynch, whose name has gone to the creation of Grace's law in the South.

It is true, as multiple Members mentioned, including the AERA Minister, that some but not all of Grace's law is already on the statute book in the North. Part of the purpose of today is to get consensus on moving forward the operational response. We and others make no apology for talking about operational matters, as it were, on the Floor of the Assembly. Obviously, the Policing Board is the practical means by which people ask questions of the police directly, but there is nothing wrong with MLAs talking in the Chamber about operational matters that affect their constituents, particularly when they relate to public safety. That does not mean that we are second-guessing the decisions of individual police officers.

We will support the DUP amendment, which makes interesting points, including on the increased use of regulation and drones. It has been a useful debate. I will run through a few of the comments that stood out to me.

I touched on Emma's points about her experience in south Derry. I acknowledge that there are particular constituencies where this has been a huge challenge, particularly in West Belfast. My colleague Councillor Paul Doherty has done a huge amount of work in advocating a more robust response and a twin-track — no pun intended — approach of engaging with young people and the community groups and youth groups that can reach those young people. It is important to say that, in many cases, the escalation of the misuse of scrambler bikes and e-scooters is about young kids, often but not exclusively young men, who do it for innocent reasons to begin with. It is a fun activity with their mates. However, it escalates quickly, and they often are not aware of or it is not made clear to them the consequences if things go wrong and, indeed, even if it is at a lower level, the inconvenience and the effect they are having on neighbours in their community.

Phillip Brett mentioned the issues in North Belfast. It is clearly an issue in North Belfast too, including around the Belfast hills that overlook the city. In responding to the debate, the Minister mentioned the relevant articles of the Criminal Justice (NI) Order 2008 — actually, they were first mentioned by Nuala McAllister and then touched on by the Minister — to show that there are powers that exist at the minute. It is not that there is no legal underpinning for the police to take action, whether that is enforcement around the young people who are driving such vehicles or seizing or destroying them. Those powers exist, but clearly they are not being used as effectively and as comprehensively as we would wish. We are open — that is why it is mentioned in our motion — to looking at other potential legislative interventions to tackle this scourge.

It was also said that there may not be enough time left in the mandate. It is worth going back to the point — Members from the Minister's party have made it many times — that it is one of the frustrations that, less than a year from the dissolution of the Assembly, we end up saying to ourselves again that we do not have time. It will be five years on from the previous election. If there are legislative interventions that could and should have been made to make communities safer and reduce potential loss of life through e-scooter and scrambler misuse but were not, it will be a poor judgement on the Executive and Assembly.

The use of drones is an interesting suggestion. Drones are used in a policing context in Northern Ireland. Obviously, you would want to be assured — members of the Policing Board would be able to ask questions — that their use was proportionate and was only to target specific problem areas rather than in a widespread or catch-all way.

The amendment also refers about mandatory registration at the point of sale, which means looking at regulatory as well as legislative changes. We should look at every available effective opportunity, within reason, to tackle the scourge. At the beginning of the debate, we said that many young people are engaging in the activity as a hobby or a bit of craic, and the proposals are not to demonise them. I take slight issue with Mr Carroll for saying that it is demonising young people: all Members who spoke about this as a problem were clear that young people who ride scramblers are not being demonised. It is important to say that. It is also important to say that you can engage with young people. That will be a critical part of the effort. There are clearly circumstances in which the activity escalates and the policing response is not only legitimate but probably essential. We should not dismiss that.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for giving way. I said that there was a role when a crime was being committed. That is not being disputed. It was a general comment.

Does the Member have any concerns about an increased roll-out of drones in police surveillance? It would affect young people and people from nationalist and, presumably, migrant backgrounds, who are already being stopped and searched quite heavily. Does he have any concern about the overuse of police powers in those communities, as suggested in the amendment?