Northern Ireland Assembly, 28 April 2026

297 contributions from 56 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have been notified that Colin McGrath is unwell and will therefore not be in the Chamber to open the Adjournment debate. I understand that the Member will seek to get the debate rescheduled by the Business Committee.

Members' Statements

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It gives me great pleasure to congratulate two sports teams in my constituency. First, I congratulate Crumlin Star on yet another outstanding victory. It defeated Rathfriland Rangers 3-1, with goals from Dee Fearon, Stephen Smyth and James Doyle securing the club's win on the night. I imagine that the moment is especially significant for Paul Trainor, given that, after a long and successful stint as manager, this is his final season. I also wish Joe McNeill every success as he progresses to being the first-team manager next season, as well as Paul Prigent, who will take on the role of assistant manager. I look forward to congratulating them again as they continue to bring titles back to North Belfast.

Secondly, I recognise the fantastic achievement of Greencastle Rovers in securing a brilliant victory over Clough Rangers to win the Junior Shield, with goals from Jordy O'Kane, Fra Taplin and Mark Tutin. It is the club's second Junior Shield title since 2023, and there is a chance to add more silverware to the cabinet, with the league title and the Canada Cup still within reach.

Both clubs are more than just teams: they are at the heart of their communities. We see how they bring people together and give us a sense of pride in where we come from. I offer a final congratulations to all those involved with the clubs: the players, the coaches, the families, the supporters and the youth teams that are coming through. Their hard work and commitment do not go unnoticed, and their success is a credit to North Belfast.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Another week and we have another front-page story that highlights failures at the Department for the Economy. Last week, the business community across Northern Ireland unprecedentedly united in opposition to the employment rights Bill that the Minister proposes to introduce. This week, it is an unprecedented intervention by our universities.

At a Confederation of British Industry (CBI) event on Friday hosted at Queen's University and attended by business leaders and the Minister for the Economy, the university issued an unprecedented warning that funding failures implemented by Minister Archibald will cost 2,700 student places at the institution. That warning came in the wake of last week's deeply worrying news that 250 jobs will be lost at Ulster University as a result of the same policies by the Minister.

Taken together, those developments paint a deeply concerning picture of our higher education sector and the stewardship of that Department by Sinn Féin. One week, the business community is warning about policies that threaten growth, and, the next week, our universities are talking about cuts that will threaten skills, opportunities and our future workforce. The university made it clear that, in practice, that means fewer engineers, nurses and teachers, less research capability and fewer students from Northern Ireland being able to study at home. That is not simply a challenge for higher education but a direct attack on the Northern Ireland economy.

The universities are central to innovation, to attracting investment and to equipping the next generation with the skills that our economy needs. Yet, instead of leadership, we see drift, and, instead of solutions, we hear the same old mantra from Sinn Féin: "Blame the Brits". Instead of backing growth, it is presiding over warnings from employers one week and our institutions this week. Northern Ireland deserves better than that. Our students, our universities and, ultimately, our economy deserve better than that.

The record of the Sinn Féin Ministers in charge of the Department for the Economy has been nothing short of a shambles. I hope that the people of Northern Ireland will see it for what it is: fantasy economics presided over by a party that is not fit to hold that office.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I rise to talk about ambulance response times in rural areas. Recent figures have confirmed that just one in seven category 1 calls in rural areas are responded to by the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service (NIAS) within the targeted response time of eight minutes. At first glance, eight minutes may not sound like much, but, in reality, it can be the difference between life and death. Imagine if you or someone you love goes into cardiac arrest or begins to choke or is involved in a serious incident and is bleeding heavily. Suddenly, eight minutes is not just a target on paper. It is not a statistic, nor is it a performance indicator.

Category 1 calls are the most urgent emergencies. They are described by NIAS as "immediately life-threatening". Those are moments when every minute lost can worsen outcomes and reduce the chance of survival. In urban areas, that target is missed in more than half of category 1 calls: 52% are missed. That, in itself, is unacceptable. In rural communities, there is an 85% chance that the eight-minute target will not be met for the most serious, urgent and life-threatening emergencies. We already know that people living in rural areas are often disadvantaged by poor transport infrastructure, longer travel times and wider health inequalities. That means that timely access to emergency care is absolutely essential. When only one in seven of those calls is being reached within the target, rural communities are not just being let down; they are being disregarded.

I want to be clear: this is an issue for the Department of Health and the Minister. No blame should be directed at the dedicated and hard-working staff of the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service, who work under immense pressure and are not the cause of the crisis. They are the victims of pressures and inefficiencies in the wider health system. This is not just about ambulances but about delays in handing patients over to emergency departments, poor hospital flow and the lack of capacity in our communities. It is a perfect example of what happens when pressures upstream are ignored for too long. When patients cannot move through hospitals, ambulances cannot get back on the road. When ambulances cannot get back on the road, response times worsen. When response times worsen for category 1 calls, the consequences can be catastrophic. We are talking about people's lives.

When we discuss excess deaths in A&E, winter pressures, ambulance handover delays and category 1 targets, those are not separate conversations; they are part of the same patient safety crisis. Every delay has a consequence, and every missed target has a human cost. When only one in seven rural category 1 calls is being reached on time, the Department must treat that with the urgency that the risk to people's lives demands.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Yesterday, the Chair of the Justice Committee, Paul Frew, tabled an important motion to extend the Committee Stage of the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill to 27 November. I am working hand-in-hand with Paul in that regard.

One of the elements of the Sentencing Bill is the increase in the sentence from 14 years to 20 years for drink- and drug-driving and dangerous driving, which I support. It happens that, yesterday, I met Peter Dolan to talk about the awful death of his son Enda Dolan. There is no party here that has not met Peter and heard his story about Enda. We are united in supporting him. He is absolutely clear that he supports raising the sentence from 14 years to 20 years for drug- and drink-driving and dangerous driving. We all support it.

There is a fundamental problem, however. Enda's story is tragic and brutal — I will not go into it now — but the person who perpetrated that crime got seven years: 3·5 behind bars and another 3·5 on licence. The punishment for that crime was really 3·5 years. That was seen as unduly lenient and was extended to 4·5 years, meaning a nine-year sentence, which is nowhere near the 14 years that a judge can give as a maximum. We are talking about extending the sentence from 14 years to 20 years, but that makes absolutely no sense, because judges do not use the powers that they have to go to the maximum. That is why I have continued to argue for a sentencing council for Northern Ireland in line with what exists in England, Wales, Scotland and the Republic of Ireland. I make no apology for doing so. A sentencing council is a council that will hold the judiciary to account to make sure that judges use the maximum sentence. We have never seen the maximum 14-year sentence used for drug- or drink-driving — never. A sentencing council can do that, however. I have also raised the case countless times, and will again, that our judges, who do a really good job and have a difficult job to do — I am not critical of them — need personal, professional and continuous development that they have to attend. At the moment, they simply do not attend any personal and professional development. It should be compulsory.

We need to move forward and create a sentencing regime that not only has rehabilitation at its heart but has deterrence and punishment and protects the people of Northern Ireland, but, until we put things in place such as a sentencing council and training for our judiciary, we will never achieve that. If we are going to meet what Enda's father wants us to meet, we need to move on that through the Sentencing Bill.

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

On Saturday morning, in Cullyhanna in south Armagh, multiple reports from members of the public were made to the police about a man who was walking around covered in blood and armed with a machete. The alarming, frightening and dangerous scene had the potential to result not only in harm but even in fatalities. However, that was avoided when the police acted with appropriate urgency and arrived at the scene within minutes. Incredibly, with the courageous help of two community members, the police were able to seize the weapon and restrain the man.

The incident demonstrated how the police and the community can work together to keep people safe. I recognise the bravery of the responding police officers in their rapid action to protect the community as well as the fast-acting and courageously selfless bravery of the individuals who stepped in to help diffuse the dangerous situation. I trust that everyone involved in the incident will get the help and support that they need.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I acknowledge the work and dedication of the community first responders in Coalisland in my constituency. I also acknowledge the trauma that they have to face when they go into a home where, first of all, they do not know what they are going into. They have to deal with families who are in an extremely difficult situation, and their work is outstanding. I call on all communities to support their first responders and to be aware of what they do and when they can be called on.

I particularly acknowledge the first responders and the Air Ambulance in relation to an incident that happened two weeks ago today in Coalisland, when a young boy, Hugh John Campbell, who was only 16 years old, died.

Had it not been for the first responders, the family would have been left on their own to deal with what was happening in their home, where that young boy was dying. We would not be able to survive in our communities without first responders or the Air Ambulance. While they could not save Hugh John's life, their response was absolutely vital. The family knew that, no matter what, everything that could have been done was done. The people who could have saved his life, had that been possible, were there.

I also acknowledge the support that was given to the family by the school community of St Joseph's College; the local football club, Coalisland Fianna; Brocagh camogie club; and all those clubs and people across our community. I thank the Tyrone county board for allowing the money that was collected at the gate of the Jim Devlin cup last week to be given to the Air Ambulance. That shows how a community can come together to support that family and the organisations that supported them. I encourage everybody who knows what community first responders do in their areas, as we as MLAs do, to ensure that our communities are aware of them, know what they do and know how to contact them, so that they are able to respond in times of crisis. Families really rely on them. As I said, that family was reassured that, whilst Hugh John's life could not be saved, everything that could have been done was done.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The A5 is "an absolute priority" for Sinn Féin, and the First Minister has said:

"we will leave no stone unturned in making sure that the A5 is built."

That was her line on Saturday. On 1 July 2025, the First Minister said in the Chamber:

"All options are on the table ... I stand by that. All options must be on the table, including appeal, amendments to the legislation and, potentially, new legislation. Let us look at all the options." — [Official Report (Hansard), 1 July 2025, p60, col 2].

Well, there is a massive stone sitting unturned on the A5. We are not talking about stones that are poured onto landowners' land for preparation works; it is the rock of net zero climate change targets that Sinn Féin, the Alliance Party and the SDLP are so beholden to that they cannot take the speck out of their eye and realise that that stone is holding back infrastructure projects. I can only conclude that those fine words are nothing but sound bites.

Friday was another day, with another speech and another sound bite from the Infrastructure Minister. There is still no plan to deliver. As Liz Kimmins, Michelle O'Neill and Mary Lou McDonald took to the stage at Sinn Féin's party conference in Belfast, they all had the chance to outline real action on our crumbling roads and what they will do to solve the problem with our major roads project; instead, we got deflection, excuses and a great reel of blame. Blame the Brits: check. Repeat the line that the A5 must be built: check. Make a vague promise about regional balance for rural roads: check. Of course, there was no explanation of how major road projects will actually go ahead, especially when climate change targets are not being fixed to allow progress. Addressing regional balance is a lovely little line that might sound reassuring, but it is so disconnected from reality. I have not forgotten that £6·6 million for the A4 Enniskillen bypass was handed back to the Minister's colleague, Finance Minister John O'Dowd. Some £8 million has been spent on that project to date, not to mention the more than £150 million that has been spent on the A5 without a single bit of tarmac laid.

It is a privilege for me to be elected to this place, and it is incumbent on me to stand up and shout for Fermanagh and South Tyrone. I will not tire of doing so, but it is time for those who have the power to do so to overturn the stones —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— that are holding up major road projects. It is hard to escape —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— the conclusion that Sinn Féin —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Claire Sugden.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— is not doing delivery.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I wish to highlight ongoing concerns around antisocial behaviour in Coleraine, Limavady and, indeed, the wider Causeway area. It is having an impact on people's sense of safety in their communities, particularly for women and girls. In recent months, I have been contacted by residents dealing with persistent disruption, including late-night parties, suspected drug use and, in some cases, violence. Those are not sporadic incidents; they are happening repeatedly over long periods and are having a real impact on people's ability to feel safe and to feel settled in their own homes.

For many women and girls, that impact can feel different. Antisocial behaviour is not always just experienced as disruption; it is intimidation and threats. Recent reports in Coleraine and Limavady of women being followed, alongside other incidents, have understandably heightened that concern. For many women, situations such as that are not viewed in isolation. They are part of a wider reality where everyday activities such as walking home, passing through a public space or being out after dark require a heightened sense of awareness. That is the reality of being a woman.

There is also a growing frustration about how those situations are being addressed. People feel that, despite reporting issues, there are delays or limits to what can be done. That creates a sense that the system is not working as it should and that concerns are not being resolved. That context matters because, if we are serious about ending violence against women and girls, we cannot separate that ambition from the environments that people move through every day. The areas where antisocial behaviour persists are often the areas where people feel least safe. They are areas with poor lighting, neglected or overlooked spaces and a lack of visible presence or deterrent. Those are not minor issues; they shape behaviour, confidence and how people experience their communities.

There are practical steps that we can take. We can improve our street lighting; we can make more effective use of CCTV; we can have better maintenance of public services so that areas feel visible and cared for; and we can have a more consistent presence in areas where concerns are raised repeatedly. There is also a need for a more coordinated approach across the agencies and for earlier intervention where problems are persistent and are clearly impacting on residents.

Of course, it is important to recognise that some individuals involved in antisocial behaviour may be dealing with their own complex issues, including mental health challenges or addiction, and support must be part of that response. However, that cannot come at the expense of those who are living with ongoing disruption and feeling unsafe in their homes. It is about balance and about ensuring that communities are protected, concerns are taken seriously and people feel confident that action will be taken when issues are raised.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

I express my serious concerns about the Department of Justice's proposed changes to firearms licensing fees and the banded system. Like many across Northern Ireland, I participate in shooting, and I am familiar with the responsible role that shooting sports and lawful firearms ownership play in our society. Those activities are not confined to one background or one community; they are genuinely cross-community, bringing people together through sport, farming, conservation and rural life. They also support jobs through agriculture, gun shops, ranges, events and the wider rural economy. For many people in rural Northern Ireland, firearms are not a luxury or a hobby of convenience but an integral part of daily life used for pest control, livestock protection, land management and animal welfare. Any policy that affects firearms licensing must start from that reality. The proposals currently out for consultation have caused real concern among constituents, many of whom have contacted me directly.

The most significant issue raised with me is the proposal for substantial fee increases of up to 153% at a time when the firearms licensing system is not delivering an acceptable level of service. Applicants are experiencing lengthy and unpredictable delays, often running well beyond a year, and confidence in the system remains low. It is, therefore, neither fair nor reasonable to ask law-abiding certificate holders to pay considerably more for a service that, many feel, is not living up to the standards expected. Any move towards full cost recovery will be strongly resisted by the shooting representative organisations, especially as there remains a lack of efficiency, transparency and accountability.

There are also concerns about the proposed changes to the banded system, and many constituents believe that those changes add unnecessary complexity, mixing different types of firearms in ways that do not reflect how they are used in practice. Complexity increases the risk of administrative error, adds cost and places further strain on an already overstretched system without any clear benefit to public safety.

We must also consider the wider economic and social impact of the proposals. Shooting sports contribute significantly to rural economies and provide structured, responsible recreation for thousands of people. Policies that make lawful participation harder or more expensive risk undermining that contribution. Rural families are the backbone of our economy and should not be targeted unfairly with additional taxes and costs.

Law-abiding firearms users deserve fairness, transparency and, of course, a system that works. I urge the Minister to listen carefully to the genuine concerns being raised and go back to the drawing board with the consultation.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I welcome the announcement of the £50 million defence growth deal from the UK Government. It will benefit defence tech start-ups and small businesses in Northern Ireland. At a time when our economy needs confidence, jobs and long-term stability, any credible inward investment that strengthens our industrial base and creates employment must be welcomed and supported across the House. The nature of the investment and the quality jobs that it will create and sustain demonstrate the benefits of being part of the UK and of contributing to the wider defence industry across our nation. Northern Ireland has already been at the forefront of producing weapons that have been deployed in the fight against aggressors. It is vital that we build on that momentum and ensure that opportunities such as this translate into real jobs, new skills and prosperity for our people.

It was predictable that the Sinn Féin Economy Minister, who cost us the 300 Cantor Fitzgerald jobs, and the First Minister of no alternative would choose to boycott the event announcing the investment. Sinn Féin was happy to glorify acts of terrorism at Easter, something that was shamefully promoted on the Executive Twitter feed, but was not prepared to be seen when our UK defence industry brings quality jobs to Northern Ireland. No one is fooled by Sinn Féin/IRA's talk of peace and opposition to war. When Mrs O'Neill talks about choosing investing in people over weapons of war, countless families across Northern Ireland look at the empty chair at their dinner tables. The innocent victims of republican terrorism know only too well that Sinn Féin wallows in the blood of countless innocent victims every time it justifies and defends the Provisional murder campaign.

The truth of the investment is that it promotes the benefits of the Union by creating highly skilled jobs and strengthening our UK national security, neither of which Sinn Féin wants as it places its ideology over the importance of delivering for people in Northern Ireland.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I rise to speak again about women's health in Northern Ireland, an issue that affects more than half the population, yet it continues to be overlooked in policy and service delivery. The Assembly is not short of awareness. Motions have been passed, Members across parties have repeatedly raised the issue of women's health and commitments have been acknowledged, yet despite all that, women are still waiting and still being let down. Northern Ireland remains the only part of the UK without a dedicated women's health strategy. That is not a technical delay; it is a failure to turn words into action.

We see the consequences clearly in health inequality. Women in the most deprived communities can expect to live over five years less than those in the least deprived areas, with a 14-year gap in healthy life expectancy. Nowhere is that failure more visible than in gynaecology care, with over 37,000 women waiting for assessment or treatment at the point of diagnosis.

Those women live with chronic pain, and their symptoms are too often dismissed. I met a girl the other day in my constituency, and she told me that she would never have believed that she would have to live the life that she has had to. She has been waiting seven years for a gynae intervention. What people are going through is shocking.

Meanwhile, progress is being made elsewhere in the UK. 'The Renewed Women's Health Strategy for England' aims to tackle medical misogyny. The Secretary of State for Health, Wes Streeting, has acknowledged that the National Health Service is failing women. That relaunched strategy contains measures to improve standards of care, including by ensuring that women are offered appropriate pain relief for invasive procedures. That progress has to be welcomed, but it also underlines the fact that Northern Ireland is falling even further behind. A comprehensive women's health strategy for here is long overdue. Nothing else is acceptable. We cannot continue to wait. The Minister must act with urgency, not only for women today but for future generations of women who risk growing up in a society that continues to treat them as second-class citizens when it comes to healthcare. Women in Northern Ireland deserve better. They deserve action now.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We will now move on to the ministerial statement on the response to —.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am glad to hear that DUP Members spent their weekend watching the Sinn Féin ard-fheis. It was well worth the viewing. It was an excellent weekend enjoyed by all who were there and by all who viewed it, so the fact that they watched it is really good.

I would be grateful, however, if the Speaker could review the statements of Deborah Erskine and Phillip Brett, and also possibly that of Timothy Gaston, and get back to me. Standing Order 24A(6)(d) sets out what Members' statements must not be used for. Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

OK. The —

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

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I will be brief. I want to raise an issue that has come up before. It relates to questions for oral answer to the Executive Office yesterday. Ministers are asked a direct question. They may not answer it, but then, later on, a Member, usually from their own party, will ask them the same or a very similar question, to which they provide a fuller answer. I would like to hear formally from the Speaker's Office whether doing that is in violation of any Standing Order. I am happy to wait for advice.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That is an issue that is similar to one that you have raised before. The previous response was that we are not responsible for how Ministers answer questions. I do, however, encourage Members to continue to interrogate Ministers so that they get appropriate answers to questions.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Mr Speaker, owing to illness, I was not in my place yesterday when you called me during Question Time. I apologise to you and the House.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you very much, Mr Chambers.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On 3 March, I submitted a question for priority written answer to the Department of Finance about the Sinn Féin-linked bookshop, the Green Cross. It was due to be answered on 19 March and was about when that bookshop had last paid rates. I have not received an answer to that question, despite having followed up on it on a number of occasions. If the Minister of Finance is refusing to answer a question about a Sinn Féin-linked bookshop, can you advise me how I can go about obtaining an answer that I, as an elected representative, am entitled to receive?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have spoken before about answers to questions for written answer and about ministerial responses in the Assembly. The Assembly is here to hold Ministers to account. When Ministers do not allow themselves to be held to account by not responding at the appropriate time, that is a slur on Members of the House and therefore a slur on the people of Northern Ireland, who elected them in the first instance.

I do not have any particular authority to enforce that, unfortunately. If I did, I would. We all know, however, that questions for priority written answer are to be answered within a couple of days. Your question should therefore have been answered by this stage. I suspect that there are probably other Ministers in the same position and that we just do not know about them. I continue to encourage Ministers to take their responsibilities, the Pledge of Office and their accountability to the Assembly most seriously and to respond to Members when they ask questions, because it is important for the functioning of the Assembly that, in their role, they cooperate as much as possible. I know that they are busy people and that they have to work extremely hard to cover all the ground, but that does not excuse them. I did the Minister of Health job, and I got more questions than nearly all the other Ministers put together; we still sought to get all the questions answered and to respond to Members. It is incumbent on Ministers to do their job and ensure that they respond.

You will not want any further points of order after that long lecture.

Ministerial Statements

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I hope that everyone in the Chamber agrees that teaching is a profession that has the utmost importance in our society. Every day, teachers and school leaders shape the lives, aspirations and futures of our children and young people. Our education system depends on their professionalism, skill and commitment.

For too long, workload has been a persistent issue for the profession. Previous efforts to address the issue have not achieved the change necessary, and continuing on the same path would inevitably lead to a further deterioration in well-being and morale and in the attractiveness of teaching and school leadership as a career. More sustained, system-wide action is required. That is why I am taking forward TransformED, my wider programme of reform to modernise the education system, to strengthen teaching as a profession and to raise standards for all learners. Through TransformED, we are deliberately creating the conditions in which teachers can thrive by increasing investment in professional learning, improving coherence across the system, reducing unnecessary bureaucracy and ensuring that support is focused on what matters most: excellent teaching and learning.

Addressing workload is at the centre of my TransformED agenda. The curriculum, assessment and qualifications reforms have been designed to remove avoidable pressures, to simplify processes and to give time back to teachers to focus on high-quality teaching and learning. I therefore appointed an independent panel to undertake a comprehensive review of teacher and school leader workload. The panel's report provides a robust, evidence-informed assessment of the pressures facing the profession and sets out 27 recommendations for change across the education system. Today, I set out my Department's formal response to that review.

Addressing workload is not optional; it is essential if we are to value the profession, retain talented teachers, support effective leadership and ensure the long-term stability of our education system.

Before I go into detail on the actions that I propose, it is important to contextualise my commitment to the teaching profession and to address some of the recent claims about the teaching workforce. Since my appointment as Education Minister, I have championed the teaching profession and fought to ensure that it is properly recognised. Significant progress has been made in improving teacher pay, reflecting both the importance of the profession and the level of responsibility that teachers carry every day. Since February 2024, the starting salary for teachers has increased by 36·4% to £32,916, while average teacher pay has risen by almost £10,000. Those changes place teacher remuneration on a more competitive and sustainable footing and clearly signal my commitment to recognising teachers' professional status.

When it comes to recent claims that large numbers of teachers are leaving the profession, while I take workload and well-being extremely seriously, it is important to distinguish between anecdotal reports and the available evidence on workforce trends. Claims that large numbers of teachers have left the profession due to burnout are not borne out by payroll data. The employment data for teachers continues to show that there is a broadly stable teaching workforce, which suggests that, while pressures undoubtedly exist, they are not translating into the widespread departure of teachers.

That said, there is absolutely no room for complacency, and I am steadfast in my belief that action must be taken to address teacher and school leader workload and to ensure that the profession remains a desirable career choice. The action plan that I will publish today represents a decisive shift from piecemeal initiatives to a coordinated, system-level approach. It brings together actions to address each of the 27 recommendations, either fully or in part and with clear ownership, governance and timescales.

A consistent and powerful message from the independent review panel was that excessive administration has eroded professional trust and drawn teachers and school leaders away from what matters most, which is teaching, learning and supporting pupils. In response, we will take action to identify and reduce unnecessary administrative tasks and excessive workload, in schools and at system level. The Teachers' Negotiating Committee (TNC) will establish a subgroup to monitor system-wide administrative requirements, evaluate progress made on reducing bureaucracy and identify further actions required to reduce the administrative burden on schools. In addition, a Baker day in the 2026-27 academic year will be designated specifically to allow schools to engage in a structured discussion to identify and reduce excessive workload at a local level.

Excessive tracking and planning requirements were among the workload concerns that were highlighted during the independent review process. We will take steps to ensure that tracking and planning are purposeful and proportionate and that they are focused on learning support and professional dialogue rather than on compliance or excessive data capture. The Department will issue clear guidance that no more than three formal, school-wide tracking points should take place in a school year. That will provide a clear and consistent benchmark across the system and is intended to curb the growth of repetitive, low-value tracking practices. On planning for learning, the action plan reinforces the principle that planning should support teachers to deliver high-quality teaching and learning and facilitate meaningful professional dialogue at school level. Clear guidance will be issued to schools to ensure that planning processes are proportionate, focused on impact and that they do not place an unnecessary administrative burden on teachers or school leaders.

It is clear that the role of principals has become substantially more complex over the past decade. Balancing educational leadership with their significant operational responsibilities for safeguarding, workforce and accountability is challenging. If we are to secure a high-performing and sustainable school system, we must ensure that school leadership remains a viable, attractive and properly supported role. That is why the action plan responds decisively on that issue. We have committed to the phased introduction of a cadre of administrative support for schools to test what works best in the Northern Ireland school system. The administrative support roles will be designed to absorb non-educational tasks such as complaints-handling, compliance, procurement and data management, freeing leaders to focus on teaching, learning and improvement. In parallel, a review of the workload agreement will examine the working patterns of school leaders, and schools will be advised to appoint a designated governor as a workload and well-being champion to strengthen governance awareness and support. We will also develop an improved and more robust complaints-handing framework for schools, which will be designed to support early resolution, provide greater consistency across the system and ensure that vexatious or unreasonable complaints are managed proportionately. By strengthening system-level support and clarifying processes, we seek to protect leadership capacity and reduce unnecessary workload.

The review indicated that workload pressures are often compounded by the lack of clarity on working time expectations. We accept the panel's conclusions that, while an average working week of 35 to 40 hours may be reasonable, it would be unreasonable for teachers to habitually work an average of 40 or more hours per week across the school year. Boards of governors will therefore be reminded of their duty of care to avoid excessive workload cultures, and the TNC will develop protocols for identifying and addressing sustained excessive workload. In addition, guidance will be issued to provide greater flexibility for teachers, allowing work to be completed at a time and place of their choice if their principal has agreed that their presence is not required in the school. We will also develop and issue clear protocols and guidance to support consultation and agreement on collective activities within directed time budgets. That approach will help to strengthen professional dialogue, build mutual understanding and ensure that directed time is used fairly and proportionately while giving principals and boards of governors greater clarity and confidence in managing arrangements in line with their duty of care.

Workload reduction must sit alongside professional empowerment. Through TransformED, every teacher will have guaranteed access to high-quality, meaningful professional learning throughout their career. By strengthening induction, early career support, mentoring and leadership development, we aim to ensure that teachers are supported and that professional learning contributes to confidence, well-being and retention so that teaching remains a fulfilling and respected career.

Managing complex pupil behaviour will be a priority within teacher professional learning funding in the 2026-27 academic year, with additional training, guidance and system-level support to ensure that schools are not left to manage these challenges alone. A key theme emerging from the independent review was the importance of restoring professional trust and ensuring that teachers are able to exercise their judgement without undue pressure. Exposure to challenging behaviour and online abuse is a significant contributor to teachers' stress and detrimental to their well-being. The Education Authority (EA) is in the final stages of agreeing a preventing violence at work framework. An awareness campaign will be taken forward to highlight the importance of respecting the professional judgement of teachers and engaging with them in an appropriate and proportionate manner. Teachers are highly trained professionals, and strong outcomes for children are best achieved where relationships between schools, parents and communities are built on mutual respect and trust.

It is clear that action is required to address the demands placed on teachers and school leaders in relation to special educational needs support. Through the SEN reform agenda, we are moving towards a more child-centred, needs-based system that is focused on providing early intervention and reducing reliance on rigid processes. Crucially, the development of an integrated workforce planning framework will examine the demands placed on teachers and school leaders in relation to SEN, with actions to address identified pressures.

The workload review rightly identified generative AI (GenAI) as a significant opportunity to reduce teacher and school leader workload. We are committed to ensuring that the role of AI is fully embedded in the planned refresh of education technology and approached in a coordinated, strategic and professionally guided manner. The Department will invest over £10 million to support the roll-out of system-aware generative AI tools, alongside high-quality professional development and training, over the next two years. Through that initiative, teachers and school leaders will be supported through a structured programme of professional learning designed to build confidence, understanding and practical capability in the use of GenAI. The focus will be on safe, ethical and effective application, with staff encouraged to develop skills progressively and apply GenAI to everyday professional activities in ways that directly support teaching, leadership and workload reduction. International research demonstrates that GenAI can provide support and achieve significant time savings in activities such as lesson and resource planning, drafting feedback, summarising pupil work, managing documentation and supporting administrative tasks. The potential of GenAI has already been tested in a Northern Ireland context through two proof-of-concept studies led by C2k in partnership with Microsoft and Google. Findings from participating schools have been extremely encouraging and include significant time savings and improvements in well-being for teachers and school leaders, along with improvements in pupil attainment.

Finally, the Department welcomes the panel’s endorsement of the redesigned school inspection framework. The new framework is explicitly focused on rebuilding trust across the education system, reducing the workload associated with inspection and establishing a more supportive, proportionate and empowering approach to accountability. It also places a strong emphasis on a school’s capacity to develop and sustain a community of learning, encompassing internal and external relationships. Collegial practice is central to that approach, and the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) will recognise and reflect on that in its reports.

The action plan is ambitious, but it is also realistic and deliverable. A workload implementation group has been established to maintain momentum and accountability, and it will work closely with the Teachers' Negotiating Committee. Regular progress reporting will ensure transparency. I am clear, however, that delivery will depend on collaboration, shared ownership and sustained industrial stability. The action plan represents a significant commitment to the profession, and it is in everyone’s interest that it be given the space to succeed.

The action plan sends a clear message: the well-being, expertise and professional judgement of teachers and school leaders is vital. By tackling workload systemically, investing in leadership and professional learning and reforming the structures that generate an unnecessary burden, we are taking decisive steps to ensure that teaching remains a valued, sustainable and attractive profession.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Minister, thank you for your statement. I welcome your acknowledgement that previous interventions have failed to deliver meaningful change, which is a good admission given that your party has led the Department for over a decade.

What immediate, measurable actions will be implemented in the next 12 months to reduce the teacher workload in practice? How will those be independently monitored and reported? What direct impact do you expect it to have on classroom standards, special educational needs provision and, most importantly, the outcomes for our pupils, given the growing concerns from families that repeated reform announcements have not translated into real improvements in children's education?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The statement outlined a response to all the issues that the Member asked me about in his supplementary question, so I commend the statement to him. We need to understand all the issues that face the profession and then to come up with a plan to address them. I have been doing that since I came into office. We have taken forward a series of reforms under TransformED. If we do not make changes, we retain the status quo, and that is what is placing all the unnecessary workload and burden on our teaching profession. We had not invested in the professional development of teachers for many years. I have been doing that. We have had significant investment through the teacher professional learning (TPL) programme that teachers and school leaders have very much welcomed.

For the response to be successful, collaboration and shared ownership are required, and that goes beyond me as the Minister of Education. I will lead the Department; I will come up with solutions and plans and will seek to implement them, but all of us, collectively, not just in the Chamber, need to work through the processes. It has to be shared and owned at the school level, and that will be the success of the reforms that we are taking forward. Where there is a willingness to implement the schemes, I am confident that they will make a real, tangible difference to the workload and pressures faced by our teachers and school leaders. I encourage Members to get behind the reforms and support the endeavours.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I have to admit that, when I printed it off in my office, I thought that it was going to be a longer document; it feels very light, given how chronic the issue of teacher workload has been over many years and how intractable finding a resolution has proved to be. Is there enough here to say to the teaching profession that there is going to be a real change? I have heard about subgroups, protocols, guidance and TNC engagement, but what are the concrete actions? We know that an action plan is coming, but teachers will be looking at this and wondering what will change for them in the classroom.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The response is comprehensive; it outlines the actions, there is a clear timetable and there are commitments. It responds to the 27 recommendations. When the trade unions came to me during the negotiation of a previous settlement for terms and conditions, workload had emerged as an issue through their consultation process. However, the ability to precisely define the issues proved difficult even for those who represent the teaching profession. That is why we jointly agreed to establish the review panel, which was chaired by a former permanent secretary, had representation from the trade union movement and had a former school leader as a panel member. The panel carried out the engagement and came forward with the 27 recommendations, and I am formally responding to them.

The document does not sit in isolation, however; it is very much connected to all the transformation programmes that we are taking forward. It should be read alongside all the other reforms that I have taken forward, which are comprehensive, whether it is on special educational needs or the proposals in the new framework. It is a very detailed report, and it should be read alongside all the work that we are doing on assessment, qualifications and the curriculum; all of which is being designed to assist with teacher workload. The review does not sit in isolation; it is very much part of the entirety of the transformation work that we are taking forward, and teachers will see clear benefits.

The Member asked what is in it for the teaching profession. I met the trade unions yesterday. They have been engaged in the process, and we went through the process for engagement. I was very much encouraged by the response from the leadership teams of those trade unions to the commitments. The action plan continues to build on the momentum and direction of travel, and that is something that they welcomed. Of course, there are still issues on which they will seek to get further progress. The establishment of some of the subgroups within the action plan and framework will be the vehicle through which those issues will continue to be addressed. That is very much continuing the momentum that we have built upon. There is more to do, but I welcome the engagement that I had with the school representatives through the trade unions, yesterday.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The World Health Organization recognises burnout as an occupation-related phenomenon caused by prolonged and unmanaged workplace stress. Teachers in the North are dealing with the heaviest workloads in these islands, with higher stress, more unpaid hours and weaker systemic support. Does the Minister agree that after a decade of his party holding the Education Department, that is a poor reflection of how the Department is being run?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Mr Speaker, there was not one question — not one — about the report; there was just the cheap, party-political attack that Sinn Féin has become accustomed to making when it comes to education. It is not interested in substance or content, but simply makes a cheap swipe.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I will expand on some of the earlier questions. Will the Minister set out how he expects the implementation of TransformED to help address the workload pressures?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for the question. Over the past two decades, across curriculum, statutory assessment and qualifications, Northern Ireland has relied on a model that has placed a disproportionate share of workload on schools and, in turn, individual teachers. That has driven avoidable workload by requiring schools to interpret vague curriculum and assessment expectations, design materials from scratch and manage complex assessment and moderation processes locally. Reducing the structural workload burden on teachers is a central long-term objective of the TransformED programme. Across curriculum, assessment and qualifications, the TransformED reforms have been deliberately designed to remove avoidable pressures, simplify processes and give teachers back time to focus on high-quality teaching and learning.

We are taking forward TransformED because we have listened to what the teachers and school leaders have told us. We have examined international best practice, and we have come forward with a clear plan and are implementing it. I am greatly encouraged by the feedback that I have had from the teaching profession — the school leaders and principals who are excited about the reforms that are taking place. Yes, we need to work through the reform, but the only way that we will get to the light at the end of the tunnel is by implementing these reforms. Failure to implement the reforms means retaining the status quo, but it is the status quo that has failed. That is what has created the burden; that is what is creating excessive workloads.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Minister, I do not know whether you bury your head in the sand or think that everyone in here has come up the Lagan in a bubble. Last week, the Children's Law Centre, teaching unions and children's rights advocates voiced their very serious concerns around your SEN reform agenda. It is clear that the responsibility for SEN priorities and provision is being placed back on schools. You keep mentioning your TransformED. You are the one who is overloading the system. Every school leader has said that, time and time again. That is on you. You are not listening. Only a couple of weeks ago, you would not even take questions from this side of the House.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Baker, I do not mind preambles, but I do not like rambles. Will you get to your question, please?

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

OK. Will the Minister finally commit to listening to the like of the Children's Law Centre and school leaders and admit that his crusade is wrong, and then reset?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member needs to listen to school principals in his constituency, some of whom are leading the TransformED agenda; actively participating in the curriculum reform process; leading by being on the principals' panel; and, when we implement policies, testing them and providing feedback. They are principals in the Member's constituency, serving pupils whom he claims to represent.

He does not want to listen to me because he is fixated on narrow, partisan politics. I ask him to listen to people in his community and those who are actively supporting what I am doing.

I would love Sinn Féin to help me with the SEN reform agenda. I would love Sinn Féin to allow the £1·7 billion capital programme for new schools to be implemented. I would love Sinn Féin to support me at the Executive table, where it has blocked my paper for nine months. Sinn Féin allowed only a discussion to take place on that capital investment. Sinn Féin therefore has a lot to reflect on when it comes to how it is participating in education. Focus —.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Will you work in partnership with Sinn Féin?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will work in partnership with anyone who will follow the evidence about the education system. I have worked in partnership with the trade unions. I had constructive engagement with them yesterday. We went through the 27 recommendations and produced a plan. The challenge that I put to Sinn Féin is this: what is your plan? In two years, you have not presented a single plan to me, as Minister of Education, setting out what you would do. You know what you are against and what you want to frustrate, but what are you for, apart from taking cheap political shots?

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

We are for giving girls the right to wear trousers in school.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Sheehan, you had the Floor. It is now Mr Kingston's turn.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I commend the Minister for his detailed and practical response to the report on the independent review of teacher workload. What does he say to those who are concerned that promises have been made about teacher workload before but not delivered on?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. He is right to highlight the fact that promises were made before but not delivered on, and that is why I have taken seriously the transformation process for the education system that I am leading in the Department.

Throughout the independent review of teacher workload and the development of the action plan that I have published today, I have been kept updated on emerging issues and on discussions with the teaching unions. Workload pressure is a long-standing issue that has multiple causes, and it has proven difficult to define the root cause and appropriate solutions. Over recent years, many of the workload actions identified by TNC have been delivered, but the Member will be aware that it is the actions that have not been delivered that often tend to be remembered.

Given the need to make further progress and the challenge in identifying the core issues, I decided to establish the independent review last year to examine the issue in detail and to bring all the previous work together into a single action plan. The plan translates the review's recommendations into practical, deliverable actions that protect professional autonomy, promote sustainable working practices and reinforce the status and importance of teaching. It represents a clear statement of intent that teachers' time, expertise and commitment are valued and that the system must work for them as well as through them.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. We are always keen for you to come to the Chamber to speak with us. I will ask you a question that is specifically about the statement. There is no mention in it at all of special educational needs coordinators (SENCOs). We will debate a motion later today on the workload pressures that that workforce is experiencing in schools. Will there be anything in your action plan that will specifically address the pressures that SENCOs face?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I will have more to say on that in response to the motion later, but, yes, the action plan includes how we can support schools administratively. Administrative support in schools is available for the whole school. It is not just about providing a personal assistant, so to speak, for the school principal. The action plan addresses principal and teacher workload, and that includes SENCO workload. My officials and I spoke about that issue yesterday with the trade unions. They asked that question, and I was able to give them an assurance that administrative support in schools can be utilised by the whole school.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Minister, from what I have heard this morning, you are trying to say that teachers are not leaving the profession and you have a stable workforce. That will be a slap in the face for many principals, who really struggle to fill vacancies. You said that you are "greatly encouraged" by the feedback from the teaching profession: I am horrified. I am horrified to hear the statistics: nine out of 10 teachers report burnout. Are you content having that on your watch? Are you, as Education Minister, seriously content that that is happening on your watch? Despite what you say in your statement, will you start listening to teachers and to the concern that nine out of 10 teachers are experiencing burnout?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I met a school principal from the Member's constituency this morning.

[Interruption.]

The Member does not want to hear about a school principal in her constituency. She has her clip for social media, and she is not interested in the response. That is typical of what we get from Sinn Féin. When I met the school principal from the Member's constituency this morning, she had nothing but praise regarding her vocation as a teacher; nothing other than what a worthy profession it is. I say this to Members: let us talk up our education system, not talk it down; let us encourage more young people to come into the profession, not put them off; and let us support them. As Minister, I am supporting them through all of my reform agenda to improve their circumstances, their terms and conditions and the structures in which they operate.

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

I thank the school leaders who have all been involved in helping me take forward the transformational work. That help has come from school leaders and teachers from every sector: Catholic maintained, controlled, integrated, special schools and Irish-language schools. They are all part of that work and have provided leadership and support.

When it comes to curriculum, which I have referenced, on the 13 subject working groups we had over 75 professionals involved from every school. They are providing us with their support, so, when the Member attacks me, she actually attacks the teaching profession, which is involved in that work. Get behind them. Do not talk them down.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his really important statement to the House.

Minister, some Members in the Chamber would do well to speak to the schools, principals and staff to hear what they have to say. Thank you for coming out to schools in South Antrim last week. We heard directly from them.

Will the Minister explain what he expects from AI and how it may assist in addressing some of the workload pressures?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for the invitation to visit a number of schools in her constituency last week. It was refreshing to hear what they had to say on the reforms that I will take forward through the support of the teaching profession.

The Member touches on a really important point that I have raised around how we can harness artificial intelligence and generative AI, something that, often, many people fear and, at times, rightly so. However, harnessed effectively, ethically and with the appropriate safeguards in place, it can be transformative. We have already piloted that work. We have had two proof-of-concept schemes with school leaders and teachers, working with Microsoft, Google and the Classroom 2000 (C2k) platform. That has proven to be impactful on the schools that piloted the work. We need to build on that. We need to allow that to be developed and rolled out across our education system.

The potential behind it is significant. An average reported workload reduction of 11 hours 52 minutes per week per participant is hugely significant for those who participated in the pilot, 75% of whom reported that GenAI had contributed to improvements in their well-being, and 41% of whom reported early improvements in pupil attainment, with a further 38% anticipating future benefits. Strong potential has also been identified for supporting SEN provision and inclusive practices. There are clear benefits in lesson creation, personalised support, automated feedback, qualitative feedback highlighting substantial reductions in lesson planning and a significant impact on school leadership and administrative workload, with almost half reporting time savings related specifically to leadership and management tasks.

I believe that there is huge potential for that. That is why I have said that I want to invest significantly in it. We have gone through all of the processes. I would be grateful if the Sinn Féin Finance Minister would sign off on it. It has been sitting in his Department for far too long.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the statement. We all know that there is burnout in the teaching profession, but the Minister is trying to change the system to make sure that it is attractive and that our teachers can continue in the workforce. I welcome the fact that he has been engaging with the trade unions. Are all the trade unions engaged in those conversations? Can he and the trade unions ensure the timely implementation of the proposed measures included in the statement today?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for that question. She is right to highlight the importance of the trade unions. That is why my team have been engaged with them. I have also been personally engaged with them, and the outworkings of the process, including setting up the panel, having the report commissioned and the recommendations in it came about from that engagement. We have gone through the recommendations. We have helped to produce the action plan, and I met them as recently as yesterday and spent time with them.

I respect trade unions. They engage with their membership, and I am sure that they will want to formally respond to the action plan in due course. However, the only way that we will be able to make the changes that will improve the conditions is by listening to the profession, engaging with its representatives — both school leaders and trade unions — which I have been doing, and coming forward with plans. They will rightly challenge the Department, the EA and the managing side of the education system. It is their job to do that, but we also need to have that shared responsibility and lead the processes of change over the next period of time. Therefore, I welcome that engagement. It has been constructive, and I publicly thank the trade unions for the engagement that they have had with me on the issue as recently as yesterday.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his statement. He spoke about generative AI, and I think that the fact that Departments now have to develop policy in the absence of an Executive strategy is due to the Executive Office's negligence. However, my question is specifically around the curriculum and the move from skills to knowledge in the development of AI. How does he see that squaring with children being able to develop what they need to be future teachers who are able to deal with the workload and the workforce in general? Knowledge and AI are often interchangeable: how is that squared with the move away from skills?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Digital literacy is hugely important, and the Member will be encouraged by the importance that we place on digital literacy when the new curriculum goes out for public consultation. We are not moving away from skills. Skills are hugely important. Having knowledge and mastery of subject matters is the foundation. Confidence through that subject knowledge allows you to build skills around critical thinking.

At a time of increased disinformation on social media, with the advent of generative AI, now, more than ever, we need a strong, knowledge-based education system. That is vital. Through powerful knowledge, you get powerful skills. It is not either/or; it is both. It is hugely important that we do that. The best way to develop skills is by having a powerful knowledge base, and that is the approach that we will take through the changes.

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

Teachers guide and inspire us with lessons from books and lessons for life. I have just watched a large group of primary-school students come into the Gallery wide-eyed and looking for inspiration, but I am sad to say that they will not have found much inspiration from the hate-filled exchanges between the two lead parties in our government: Sinn Féin and the DUP.

Some 91% of teachers surveyed in the North reported experiencing burnout, with 95% pointing to workload as a contributing factor. The independent review of teacher workload report points to social media as a partial contributor to increasing behaviour management issues and online abuse of teachers becoming all too common. Will the Minister commit to providing well-resourced and contemporary training to teachers, parents and students on the ever-growing challenges and harms presented by the omnipresence of social media?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member is absolutely right when it comes to the dangers of social media and the negative impact that it has on our young people.

That is why I brought forward a clear policy position on smartphones for our post-primary schools and primary schools. They are not to be brought to primary schools, and they are not to be used in post-primary schools. We are seeking better ways to implement that policy, including giving a role to the ETI so that, as part of its inspection process, it also reports on the effectiveness or otherwise of a school's implementation of that prohibition. I agree with the Member about the damaging aspects of social media.

I thank the two primary schools for coming to Stormont. I was with them in the Senate Chamber before I came in here. Those two schools — Killowen Primary Coleraine and St John's Primary School — are part of a shared education endeavour. I was very much encouraged by my engagement with them, as I have been when I have visited hundreds of schools. I am always encouraged by what we have in our schools because of our excellent teachers. We are here to support them. I have a plan that will give them much better support, and I believe that we are moving in the right direction of travel.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Minister, your statement mentioned the important pay settlement that you were able to secure for new teachers and the record increase for those teachers who are in post. Is there an Executive commitment, right across the political spectrum, to ensure that funding is in place to support that? That was one of the strongest messages that was sent to teachers because it showed that we value them by ensuring not only that the profession is recognised and that the starting salary is high but that those teachers who have experience and dedication continue to be remunerated correctly.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for that question. He is right about the work that went in to resolving a three-year industrial dispute. Indeed, there had been action short of strike for nearly a decade. The past two years have been one of the most stable industrial periods that we have had, and that has been as a result of providing the appropriate settlements on teachers' pay and conditions. A new graduate from our teacher training colleges would have started on only £23,000, well below any counterparts in the United Kingdom. I moved to increase that, and I have now done so by 36%, so it is a financially attractive profession. It is often a vocational calling: people come into the teaching profession because they want to empower and support children and young people. It is right that we seek to recognise that through the appropriate remuneration, and we have been able to move to do that. We have increased all teachers' pay by nearly £10,000 on average. That has been the right thing to do.

Obviously, when we look at this financial year, we see that the Executive's finances are in a very difficult position across a whole range of Departments. The challenge will be in how we deliver on public-sector pay, but I do not support the notion that has been put forward that pay settlements should be found within Departments' existing allocations, because, through version 2 of the Budget, my Department faces a shortfall somewhere in the region of £500 million to £600 million. That is saying, "Agree to the Budget, sign up to something that leaves Education short by £0·6 billion, and, by the way, go figure out how you are going to pay your teachers". Does anyone seriously believe that the Executive should support that proposition? I will not support it. All our public-sector workers should be dealt with equally, while recognising that there will be some variance between different professions. To place that responsibility on my Department is effectively to say that there should not be any increase in pay, and I will not support that approach.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you mentioned industrial relations. Will your announcement do anything to address the ongoing industrial dispute with the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT)?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I believe and hope that it will. Again, I have said that people should be given the space to work through this. I say this to the NAHT: thank you for your engagement on this and for raising issues. You have articulated the needs of school leaders, as have all of the trade unions that are dealing with the issues, whether that is the Ulster Teachers' Union (UTU), the Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO), the National Education Union (NEU) or NASUWT. There are some others, but, along with the NAHT, those are the four recognised official ones. They have been engaged in that process, and the NAHT has brought forward its issues. I was encouraged yesterday by the recognition that the action plan has reflected that and seeks to find a way through supporting school leaders in particular and addressing workloads and the challenges that they are facing. Ultimately, it is a matter for the NAHT and all the other unions as to how they respond officially, but I certainly believe that they want to see progress being made. I believe that they recognise that the document contains a route to achieve that. However, in order for us to get to the end destination, we need to work through all those issues. That requires industrial stability, shared ownership and collaboration and partnership, and I hope that that will be the case when it comes to the trade unions.

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

Minister, a good teacher knows how to deal with messing and attention-seeking. I am afraid that, in the Chamber today, we have seen messing, attention-seeking and squabbling for theatrical purposes from your party and Sinn Féin, which is genuinely pathetic. You are collectively responsible for our education system and for setting a Budget. Today's spectacle is genuinely shameful.

I want to ask a question about teachers and teacher development days. Your TransformED agenda, with its upsides and downsides, will require a significant additional number of teacher development days. Teachers deserve those in order to familiarise themselves with your reform proposals and be trained up. However, that creates an additional burden on parents, who have to deal with significant additional school closures. Are you comfortable with that, and have you made a calculation of the average additional cost to workers who have to take time off or pay for childcare on those extra days when schools are closed because of your agenda?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am sure that the Member will lead by example in future after that rebuke and will not engage in the very same behaviour that he has accused others of. He does it himself. Indeed, the first Member who had the Floor, Mr McCrossan, engaged in exactly the behaviour for which he has just rebuked others. People will see through that shallowness from the Opposition.

The question on the substantive issue is a valid one, and I thank the Member for raising it. There is a balance when it comes to development days — Baker days — and how they are utilised effectively. It is important that, as we go through the transformation, teachers need to be given the opportunity to engage in it at the school level and to work through the issues; that is something that the teaching profession has relayed to me. Therefore, we have to facilitate an opportunity for them to do so. There are, clearly, minimum requirements for the number of days on which schools have to be open, and provision is made when it comes to teaching. I will, in no way, seek to undermine that. I have to listen to the teaching profession, because it has asked for those opportunities to engage in the transformation work, and it is only right that we provide that support to them.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister rightly praises progress on teachers' pay. Minister, when will you take the same action for classroom assistants, who face months without pay each year, as they, too, play an integral part in pupil learning? Many classroom assistants received just two weeks' pay in April because of the Easter break and now face a gap from July until the end of September without income. No one in the Chamber will go three months without pay, so why should classroom assistants? When can we expect you to bring forward a solution for that?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member is right to praise the work of classroom assistants, and I join him in that. That is why, as part of SEN reform, I want to be able to provide opportunities for career development and pathways to enhance what classroom assistants are able to provide in our schools and to give them the professional support that will allow them to develop, including when it comes to better pay.

I say to the Member that the Executive supported a new business case — it was collectively supported by all the parties in the Executive — that contained a significant increase in terms and conditions for support staff, including classroom assistants as well as a range of different support staff. Significant investment by the Executive was required to provide the financial support for that.

Those support staff also sit within the national joint-working agreements at a UK-wide level. We feed into that process. Support staff have had pay rises as a result of the framework that they are engaged in. Teaching pay sits within a Northern Ireland framework and is subject to negotiations at a Northern Ireland level, but support staff are handled at a UK-wide level, and, over the past number of years, they have received pay rises as a result of that. We all want to do more. We all want to give more, recognising the important contribution that they make. That is why, through the reform of the SEN model, I want to identify greater ways in which to recognise our support staff, especially our classroom assistants.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I welcome the Minister's statement. There is much merit in some aspects of the action plan. At the outset, I will say that some of the conduct today has been really disappointing. One area that we should not have a political slanging match about is our children's education.

I will make a couple of points. Burnout is about more than workload. It is about feeling valued and about a person's overall morale. I worry about some issues in schools that are described to me as "taboo", such as workplace violence. I speak to teaching assistants and teachers who are being bullied and injured in their workplace, some of whom end up in hospital with concussion and broken bones. That is a significant issue affecting teachers' morale, and we need to deal with it. I keep being told that sub teachers —.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Question.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Does the Minister agree that there is a responsibility to deal with those issues, including the issue of sub teachers and that of EA-induced bureaucracy? I am told that, every week, the EA sends a dump of emails to school principals who then have to disaggregate it all and decide who to send it to, which takes them a lot of time. Does the Minister agree that, while there is much merit in the action plan, there is much more to do to support teachers against workplace violence, deal with the EA's bureaucracy and fully support teachers who need to get sub teachers?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for the question and for the encouraging comments that he made about aspects of the proposals. It is important that we work through them in order to allow them to be implemented. The benefit will then be accrued to the teaching profession.

The Member mentioned workplace violence and poor behaviour in our schools, which is extremely concerning. It happens in all schools; it is not unique to one setting. Principals have raised the issue with me. A clear framework will be established in the action plan, and there is a commitment to publish that by the end of June to recognise the importance associated with it. It should be of concern to all of us that there is workplace violence, including in our primary schools, towards some of our teachers. It is a regular occurrence, not an irregular one. That is not appropriate. There clearly needs to be support for teaching staff and children on whom it has an impact. Parental responsibility also needs to be engaged. Some pupils who show that behaviour will come from challenging backgrounds. Principals tell me that, at times, when they make contact with a child's home, the parents are very defensive of their child, who can do no wrong. Those parents do not want to engage constructively. That is not acceptable. Schools are respected institutions, and our teachers are trusted. We have to place great value in them. When they seek to work through issues, we need to make sure that the supports from outside services and in the home are there in a positive way. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. I stand very much behind our teaching professionals as they seek to address that issue. Behavioural policy is very much something that I will look at. I intend to provide greater clarity on the expectations and consistency of practice across our schools and how we deal with that.

The Member is right about EA bureaucracy. That is why a subcommittee will be established in the TNC that will look at identifying what bureaucracy is necessary. We should ask of schools only what is needed, not what is nice to have. Where unnecessary information is being sought, I want to reduce that. Teachers want to focus on what they do best, which is teaching in the classroom. Often, so much of their time is spent dealing with issues other than teaching.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

The Speaker has received notice from the Minister of Education that he wishes to make another statement. Again, before I call the Minister, I remind Members that they must be concise in asking their questions. Members know what that means. This is not an opportunity for debate, and long introductions will not be allowed.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I will make the following statement on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in the education sectoral format that was held on 22 April this year. The Minister of Finance has agreed that I will make the statement on behalf of us both.

The meeting was held in Rathvarna Youth Resource Centre in Lisburn. It was attended by me; Hildegarde Naughton TD, the Minister for Education and Youth in the Republic of Ireland; and John O'Dowd MLA, the Minister of Finance. I chaired the meeting. Topics for discussion were addressing educational disadvantage, special educational needs and early years education. We also received a presentation from Creative Connections.

Ministers noted the continued cooperation between the Departments on the pilot cooperation programme to address educational disadvantage. The Council acknowledged the progress of the RAISE programme, including the calls for and selection of locality-led projects to deliver against objectives in the strategic area plans for the RAISE localities. We also welcomed the progress of the teachers' research exchange (T-REX) platform and the Creative Connections arts education pilot programme, which are connecting education professionals across both jurisdictions and empowering young people to shape their own learning experiences. The Council noted the continued delivery of existing PEACE PLUS projects and the exploration of further funding award opportunities that focus on empowering and investing in young people.

Ministers received an update from the CEO of Middletown Centre for Autism, Stephen Douthart, and the Council recognised the continuing cooperation and positive reciprocal collaboration on a variety of challenges in the special educational needs sector between the two jurisdictions. The NSMC welcomed the progress that is being made by the two Education Departments and Middletown Centre for Autism to facilitate and maintain the delivery of the centre's range of services. Building on the successful North/South teacher training event delivered by Middletown Centre for Autism on school non-attendance among autistic young people, Ministers noted that both Departments are facilitating further cooperation among teachers and sharing experiences and information on current trends in education provision to those with special needs. The Council welcomed the establishment of further policy exchange events between officials and experts from each Department to discuss issues and potential solutions to shared challenges in the area of SEN, and it looks forward to further updates.

The NSMC welcomed the cooperation between officials from the Department of Education and the Department of Children, Disability and Equality (DCDE) in the area of early education, learning and care. Ministers noted the commitment of the two Departments to engage in cooperation in a way that builds on existing work being progressed between them. The Council agreed that officials should explore potential options for further collaboration and knowledge exchange and provide an update at a future meeting. It also welcomed ongoing work on enhancing cooperation and collaboration on specific initiatives in the areas of equality and inclusion.

Ministers received a presentation on the Creative Connections pilot programme from departmental officials in the Department of Education and the Department of Education and Youth (DEY) and from Creative Connections, which is a cross-border scheme that was designed to bring creativity and the arts into schools to enhance learning, teaching and assessment through creative partnerships. The Council acknowledged the strong progress made by the programme to date, which has resulted in its being confirmed for continuation and further development in 2026-27.

The Council agreed to hold its next meeting in the education sectoral format in the autumn of 2026. I am now happy to take questions.

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

Minister, that was a very short statement. There was some interesting stuff in it, but I am going to ask about something that was not in it. In December 2023, some progress was announced, although it has not been followed through on, on making it easier for pupils from the North — Northern Ireland — to apply for top Central Applications Office (CAO) courses in the South. You yourself have very theatrically complained about that structural issue in the Chamber. What are you doing to make it easier for Northern students to get into Trinity College Dublin (TCD), University College Dublin (UCD), Dublin City University (DCU) and all the rest? Did you raise the issue at that meeting, and if not, why not?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Minister, the Member acknowledged that the content of his question was not in the statement, so whether you wish to answer it is up to you. I am happy to move on.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Normal protocol is that Members ought to ask questions that relate to the statement. That was not in the statement, so it is not relevant. The leader of the Opposition should focus on asking questions that relate the statement. Rather than just make that point to the Member, however, I will say that it is an issue of concern for me. It is an issue that I have recently raised again with the Minister for the Economy, because responsibility for higher education access rests with the Department for the Economy. I very much would support the Republic of Ireland giving proper recognition to the qualifications that our young people have, and I will happily engage collectively to try to get the Republic of Ireland to respect qualifications from Northern Ireland. It was not on the agenda and was not a matter of discussion, but it is an active issue, outside of that meeting, that I am pursuing.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his statement. He referenced an update provided by the CEO of Middletown Centre for Autism. Can the Minister provide a further update on the SEN reform agenda? As part of that, there was an action on reviewing the work and functions of Middletown Centre for Autism, with a view, according to evidence that the Committee heard, for that role to be enhanced. Can you provide an update on where that sits?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Within the SEN work, the update that Stephen Douthart provided on Middletown was very much about what more it can do with the expertise that it has to provide support to schools to address autism. That was a matter that we discussed. A landscape review of the Middletown Centre for Autism will be carried out, and that will provide an opportunity to ensure that the current purposes for which it is commissioned are being fulfilled. It is also an opportunity to look at what more it could do. We discussed where we can enhance that provision, subject to all the caveats around how that can be resourced and so on. I think that the landscape review, which will be commissioned shortly, is an opportunity to consider and address that particular issue.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The education system in the South is by no means perfect, but the educational outcomes there far exceed the outcomes here in the North. Far fewer young people in the South leave school without qualifications, and far more are going on to third-level education. Can the Minister point us to what lessons he has learned in his engagements with his counterparts in the South that can be transferred to the education system here?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member is right: there are better outcomes for young people in the education system in the South. That is why we have looked at it and why we have incorporated into our transformation programme some of what the Republic of Ireland is doing. For that to be brought into the process, a former chief inspector in the Republic of Ireland is part of the international ministerial advisory panel, directly inputting into the processes that we are taking forward. We are harnessing that information.

The South faces similar issues with the increasing numbers of children with SEN and how to work through those issues, so my officials are in constant engagement with those in the Republic so that we can learn from what they have been doing. I believe that the South can learn from some of the practices that we are taking forward. Where there can be joint collaboration on these endeavours, I am very much up for that happening. I have already acted to incorporate input from the South formally through my processes, and I will continue to do so.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, before I take another question, questions must be related to the statement. Members have a copy of the statement. The next question that is not related to the statement will not be taken.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his statement, and I hope that my question is in relation to it. Can the Minister provide an update on capital projects for special schools?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, I can, because SEN was discussed at the North/South meeting. We talked about the need for capital provision for special schools. The Member's question is related. I can say to the Assembly on this issue that, over the past decade, particularly the past five years, there has been extraordinary growth in the demand for specialist places, with over 30,000 children having more-complex needs and a formal statement of SEN, something that we touched on and that is shared in both jurisdictions. As a result, there has been a 49% increase in the number of pupils attending a special school and a 205% increase in the number of pupils requiring a place in specialist provision in mainstream schools (SPiMs). Projections indicate that demand will continue to rise over the next 10 years, meaning a need for over 6,000 additional places in our special schools and over 500 new SPiMs places.

The SEN capital investment programme provides a structured approach to meeting that demand around maintenance, new specialist classes and extension and refurbishment of special schools. In the past two years, there has been an investment of over £110 million in the SEN capital investment programme. That has created 242 SPiMs places, and 98 additional classrooms in special schools. We have had two major extensions, at Kilronan School and Lisanally Special School. Those are now on-site, and the business case is under review by the Department of Finance for the first of the new Belfast schools. A key aspect of SEN capital investment was the publication of the special schools plan of action.

This is an important issue, and we have been dealing with it in how we can move it forward. To update the Assembly: I recently decided to approve three major priority capital projects in the special schools plan of action to allow them to move to the planning and design stages. They are a 320-pupil new-build school for Longstone, a 220-pupil extension to St Gerard's Special School and a new 500-pupil special school in south Belfast. Those are three significant projects that I have approved to move into the planning phases to get to the pre-tender stage. That decision builds on my previous decisions for Sperrinview, Knockevin and the second campus at Ardnashee.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

On the special educational needs aspect of the statement, can any learning be elicited from the increase in the number of children turning up at school who are behind on major milestones such as toilet training? That seems to be a major issue; I am sure that it is island-wide.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, it is a challenge. It is why we have invested in early years intervention through the early learning childcare strategy. Notably, one principal informed me that of the 26 nursery-school children that she has, 13 did not come toilet trained. That figure will alarm people: half of the pupils in a nursery-school class were not toilet trained. Rather than nursery-school teachers being able to engage children in learning, they are having to provide them with basic toilet training. That speaks to a real challenge. It is impacting on the early years provision. It needs to be addressed, and not just within education. Before those children got to nursery school, there was clearly a failure by other services to detect that issue and to support those families.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement on the education-themed meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, which shows the advantages of practical cooperation for mutual benefit. In addition to meeting his Irish counterparts, has the Minister met UK Ministers in recent months?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members should not stray into questions that are not related to the statement. Members know that, and they also know what they are doing. Minister, it is up to you whether you answer. The next question in a similar vein will not be taken.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I appreciate that, but given that I gave latitude to Mr O'Toole, I will give latitude to my colleague who asked that question. I answered Mr O'Toole. In order to give equality of treatment, which I am sure that all Members would support, it would be unfair of me to discriminate against my colleague from North Belfast.

He is right about the engagement. North/South engagement is important. So, too, is east-west engagement. I have had many meetings with my counterparts; most recently, I met Louise Sandher-Jones MP, Minister for Veterans and People. That was to discuss how the armed forces covenant is being implemented within education. I recently met the Secretary of State, the Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP; the Rt Hon Nick Thomas–Symonds MP, Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office; Matthew Patrick MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Northern Ireland Office; Olivia Bailey MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Early Education) and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Equalities) at the Department for Education. The list goes on.

That engagement takes place whether it is North/South or indeed east-west.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Minister. You will be aware that a number of really innovative projects are being taken forward as part of the RAISE programme in our constituency of Lagan Valley. Can you confirm for how long the RAISE funding is set to be available? Does it ensure that we will see long-term value from the programme?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for that question. It was discussed at the meeting by way of an update on a number of those RAISE projects. I am excited about the various projects that have come forward and that we are now moving into that implementation period. All of that is being funded through the Shared Island initiative, and Ministers have indicated that the support that has been there will continue. It is in the region of around €20 million; that is what funds the RAISE initiatives. I hope that we can move now. Having implemented the schemes, I want to open up discussions on how we can continue them, and not just for a two-year period on which the original offer was based. How can we extend that? I know that the South is open to that conversation taking place. We need to see the roll-out of the various projects. That allows evaluation and any refinement to take place, to allow us to go back to the South and say, "Can we continue with this funding? Here is how we would change it", or, based on the evidence, it may not need to be changed at all if it proves to be successful. The South is open to having that conversation with us. I will certainly take any opportunity to get funding from whatever source.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement to the House. I welcome the fact that special educational needs was discussed at the meeting, given the importance that it has in our school community. Will the Minister provide an update on further special educational needs provision, with particular reference to Dromore?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I can. I am delighted to advise that my Department is progressing plans for a new priority special school called Quillyburn Special School, which will be located on a greenfield site owned by the Education Authority on the Quillyburn Road in Dromore. The new Quillyburn Special School will provide state-of-the-art, purpose-built accommodation for up to 275 pupils that is designed to meet a wide range of learning, therapeutic and well-being needs. I am particularly pleased that Quillyburn Special School will be co-located alongside a new-build Dromore High School on the same site. It is important, though, that I am absolutely clear: these will be two separate schools, each with its own leadership, ethos, identity and educational mission, tailored to the distinct needs of their respective school communities. At this stage, we are moving through the various processes, but I am pleased with the progress that is being made and the prioritisation that is being given to the development of that location.

At the meeting, we discussed the importance of SEN, SEN placements and capital investment in our special schools, and, today, I have been able to update the House on some areas where we are moving forward on the planning stages for three special schools. As well as those, Quillyburn Special School, co-located with Dromore High School, is a priority, and we are making good progress on it. I commend all the school leaders who have been involved in that process.

Daniel McCrossan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

Minister, as you well know, SEN families are at breaking point. Parents are not asking for any special treatment here, just basic support. They wait months and sometimes years for that intervention. Children are in limbo and parents are forced to fight. Teachers are stretched beyond capacity. Meanwhile, support in the South is getting to our children earlier without the same barriers or bureaucracy. Do you accept that the system continues to fail families? When will you stop talking about reform and deliver it for those who are affected?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am delivering the reform. There are clear plans and they are being implemented. That is why £27·5 million of funding was allocated by the Finance Minister on the transformation of SEN. We are already taking forward tangible changes that are having a positive impact. I would not present the Republic of Ireland as a panacea when it comes to how it deals with SEN. It has challenges and so have England, Scotland and Wales. The Labour Government have had to bail out local authorities to the tune of billions of pounds because of the challenges that they face. The challenges that we have are not unique. They are happening everywhere. However, we have a clear pathway to try to make improvements here. We are making improvements. Is it good enough? No, it is not. We must be better at identifying placements earlier — we are making progress on that — and at getting new schools. We need to do better, and that is a collective endeavour that requires all of us in the Executive to provide the appropriate support.

Parents should not have to fight for basic support. They should not have to get a statement in the first instance; they go down that route because they do not get support. We need to change our systems so that there is support in schools for the early years without parents having to get a legal document to say, "You must", because that does not always produce the support. That is why we need to make the changes that we propose.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The statement speaks in grand terms of what the North/South Ministerial Council is doing to help to address educational underachievement. Minister, how many programmes are running to tackle educational underachievement amongst working-class Protestant boys? How many programmes to tackle that problem operate on a North/South basis, and what funding is involved?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Numerous schemes operate through various funding mechanisms. Targeting social need — TSN — funding goes into all schools, including those in working-class Protestant communities, in every sector. The extended schools programme is another scheme that operates on the basis of free school meal entitlement, which can unlock funding for schools in those areas. The RAISE programme is designed to address educational underachievement, albeit it is not available in every part of Northern Ireland but only in the areas that are selected for it.

The question that I have posed is this: how effective is the expenditure, and is it being used to achieve the purpose for which it was allocated? It is a legitimate question, and I would welcome Members' further scrutiny of that, because we need to ensure that the funding is spent effectively.

I want to make sure that we tackle educational underachievement. That is one of the underpinning reasons for the entire TransformED project. If we are to close the attainment gap between the well-off, whose families can afford private tutors and extra support, and those from working-class families who do not have the same privilege, we need to give them equal opportunity in every classroom in every school. The new curriculum and our new approaches will help to close that attainment gap. Those who advocate for the working class, as I do, will support the transformation that we are taking forward.

[Interruption.]

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

That concludes questions on the statement. I ask Members to take their ease before we move to the next item of business.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Executive Committee Business

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Utility Regulator (Support for Decarbonisation Preparation) Bill [NIA Bill 32/22-27] be agreed.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

In accordance with convention, the Business Committee has not allocated a time limit for the debate. I call the Minister to open the debate on the Bill.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

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

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

In 2022, the House agreed that we should work together to address the climate crisis. The Climate Change Act (NI) 2022 includes requirements on my Department to develop sectoral action plans for the energy sector and industrial processes. It also set a target of ensuring that at least 80% of electricity consumption comes from renewal sources by 2030.

Over half of greenhouse gas emissions come from energy. It is therefore essential that we find ways of decarbonising the energy sector while creating the right conditions for growth in low-carbon and renewable solutions. Members will be aware that I intend to introduce legislation to deliver a support scheme to incentivise the growth of renewable solutions, but that is just one part of the solution. We need to develop policies and legislation across a wide range of new and emerging technologies that will help us on our decarbonisation journey. Creating the conditions to allow new low-carbon technologies to flourish can support economic opportunity for business growth and job creation and help us to develop a self-sustaining and flexible energy system, reducing our reliance on fossil fuels and freeing us from global energy shocks. To achieve that goal, we must work in partnership, across government, and it is essential that my Department has access to the technical expertise that the Utility Regulator (UR) can provide on that journey.

The Utility Regulator is restricted in its ability to support us because its legislative underpinning has not been updated to reflect the significant change in policy direction that is required to deliver on the Climate Change Act and the Executive's energy strategy. The Bill is the result of collaboration with the Utility Regulator and is designed to empower that organisation as a key delivery partner. The Bill is quite short and states:

"The Utility Regulator may provide advice, information or assistance to the Department for the purposes of"

developing proposals, policies, strategies or plans relating to the energy sector to support obligations under the Climate Change Act. It also includes a requirement:

"The Utility Regulator must, so far as reasonably practicable, comply with any reasonable request by the Department".

That allows for occasions when the regulator may be unable to meet a request from the Department, reflecting the importance of its remaining independent from government but a strategic adviser to government. Access to its technical insight and regulatory advice will allow officials in my Department to design energy policies that will create an environment in which new low-carbon energy solutions can flourish and to develop legislation that will provide the necessary conditions for inward investment and innovation.

My Department held a consultation on the draft Bill, which received 50 responses. Overall, 76% of respondents expressed support for the intent of the Bill, recognising the importance of the regulator in supporting us on our journey.

The Bill is an important step in creating a pathway to decarbonise the energy sector and highlights my Department's commitment to meet the challenge of climate change. I commend the Bill to the House.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

As Chair of the Committee for the Economy, I support the Bill at Second Stage. This is the fourth Economy Bill that has got as far as Second Stage, and I pay tribute to the Department and the Minister for that. That is probably a record for any Department in this mandate, so fair play to them.

The Department briefed the Committee in 2024 on the proposals in the Bill, and officials briefed the Committee on the Bill again just after Easter of this year. As the Minister indicated, the Utility Regulator needs to be able to support the Department in the development of low-carbon policies, which are essential to the energy sector. It is argued that the Utility Regulator is currently:

"restricted in its ability to fulfil its strategic role, as regulatory advisor to government on the energy sector, as the legislative framework underpinning its operation has not been updated to reflect"

legislative changes that have been passed in the House. The Electricity (Northern Ireland) Order 1992 and the Gas (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, which set out the role of the UR, are to be changed, therefore, to allow it to give advice on low-carbon energy solutions in line with the Climate Change Act and the energy strategy. The low-carbon solutions are understood to include offshore renewables, heat policy, hydrogen and systems services and new activities. The Bill deals with the provision of advice on those subjects to only the Department for the Economy. The Department has indicated that, following the passage of the legislation, should other Departments or arm's-length bodies (ALBs) need advice on decarbonisation, it would consider their requests and decide whether to route them through the Utility Regulator.

In evidence to the Committee, the Utility Regulator contrasted its vires with that of Ofgem, indicating that there have been at least 12 Acts to amend Ofgem's statutory powers, including primary legislation on microgeneration, information-gathering, promotion of reduction in carbon emissions, promotion of reduction in home heating costs, consumer redress and complaints-handling. The Utility Regulator also advised that the Energy Act 2023 in Great Britain introduced an amendment to the principal objective of Ofgem, stating that the:

" Climate Change Act 2008 (net zero target for 2050 and five-year carbon budgets)"

would have to be considered as part of consumers' interests.

Accordingly, as the House is aware, the Single Electricity Market Committee (SEMC) regulates all-island activity that involves the Commission for Regulation of Utilities (CRU), which is the energy regulator for the Republic of Ireland. Among other things, the SEMC also provides advice on climate change plans in Northern Ireland. It is understood, however, that there is no such provision for the Utility Regulator to develop its own plan in that regard. The Minister, in her comments later, can hopefully address why there is that gap in provision.

On behalf of the Committee for the Economy, I am keen for the Minister to clarify why, in the two years since the Committee was first briefed by the Department on the Bill, additional provisions were not developed in line with other fair transition climate change measures, including customer redress, complaints handling and the linkage of consumer interests to decarbonisation.

I believe that the majority of Economy Committee members view the Bill as being an opportunity that could have gone further, but they will support it nonetheless. If the Bill passes its Second Stage today, I expect amendments on what I have outlined to be tabled, and the Committee may then have to come back to the House to seek an extension to the Committee Stage.

I will now make some remarks in my capacity as a DUP MLA. The Minister is right: the Bill is relatively short and tightly scoped, with just two clauses. Given the Utility Regulator's comments to the Committee that it believes that the Bill should have been more expansive, I wonder why that opportunity was not taken in the two years since the Department first briefed the Committee on it.

I ask the Minister to define what is meant by a "reasonable request". Subsection (2) of clause 1 states:

"The Utility Regulator must, so far as reasonably practicable, comply with any reasonable request".

I am keen to get a definition of "reasonable request".

Another reasonable question to ask is this: why does the Bill not allow the Executive as a whole or other Departments individually to take advantage of the expertise that the Utility Regulator clearly has? The Utility Regulator is defined as being the strategic adviser to government, so why are we giving support or information just to the Department for the Economy and not to other Departments? For example, the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, which sponsored what is now the Climate Change Act, may want to be included in the legislation. The Bill, which is a tidying-up exercise, is welcome progress. The Committee will engage with the Department, the Utility Regulator and consumers to see whether any changes to the Bill are required.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

It is good to speak for the SDLP on such an important topic. As Members from across the Chamber will appreciate, there could not be a more timely opportunity to speak about energy issues and reaching our net zero objectives. As the price of energy has soared in recent weeks, thanks to the war in Iran, we have seen that, once again, being in hock to and at the mercy of global oil and gas markets costs our consumers and communities here at home dearly. Households across Northern Ireland are facing huge spikes in prices, with the cost of home heating oil rising by around 80% and prices in the all-island wholesale electricity market rising by 19%. We need to accelerate our long-term move to escape that dependency and take control of our own energy. We rapidly need to decarbonise the energy sector, end the use of fossil fuels and promote a market in which renewable energy sources are readily available and affordable and in which much faster progress is achieved on making sure that homes are energy efficient and properly insulated. That is a big task. It is therefore only right and proper that we bring the full weight of every statutory body behind achieving those objectives, and that includes ensuring that the Utility Regulator can properly provide the advice and support that the Executive will need.

The Bill is a critical part of the jigsaw for making sure that the Department can effectively prioritise low-carbon solutions and emerging technology sectors. If we want to develop low-carbon energy policies and meet the commitments that the Assembly has set itself on energy policy and on contributing to addressing the challenges of climate change, we should progress it without delay.

I also put on record that I am disappointed that the Bill does not confer the same powers on other Departments to request advice from the Utility Regulator, as the Chair of the Committee just said. While it is right that DFE is the ministry responsible, other Departments have a critical role to play in ensuring that we reach our climate goals in a fair and sustainable way, and the Utility Regulator could have helped with that. It could also have helped to meet the requirements of article 24 of the 2022 Act, which places responsibility on DFE, alongside other Departments, to ensure that net emissions do not exceed the carbon budgets. I would like to hear from the Minister on how she intends to meet the challenge of joined-up government without such powers.

While the Bill has been presented as being only a first step, it is really quite moderate. My party and I remain concerned that its ambition falls short of the scale of the crisis that we are facing and the size of our ambitions.

The Economy Committee has heard directly from the Utility Regulator that, while the legislative framework for Ofgem has been updated several times, the Energy (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 has not been updated. As recently as last month at the Committee, the Utility Regulator repeated its desire to see Northern Ireland’s energy legislation brought into line with that in Britain and the relevant legislation in the South of Ireland. The Minister must answer why she believes it is appropriate to take such a piecemeal approach to the legislation. I put on record that I welcome where we are at the minute, but I am concerned about the scale and ambition of the legislation. Since we set out on this journey, things have moved way ahead of us, particularly in recent days and months, and we probably now need to consider the context for the Department’s work on energy and the statutory obligations in the Bill. Our economy needs a big change in a range of areas, including energy. Sadly, the Bill will not deliver that.

Of course, there are other outstanding questions, such as the extent of the operation of the Bill's qualified power, and I encourage the Minister to outline how she will safeguard the independence of the Utility Regulator while affording it the powers to provide relevant advice. We also want to see more detail from the Minister about the alternative funding mechanisms that are suggested in the Bill's explanatory memorandum, and we need maximum transparency on what they might look like.

Despite those concerns, we support the Bill's principles at Second Stage. I look forward to progressing the Bill in the Economy Committee and working with colleagues from across the House to explore some of the issues that I have outlined in this important legislation.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Utility Regulator Bill today. I acknowledge the work of the Minister and the officials in the Department for the Economy on bringing the Bill forward. I also acknowledge the role that the Utility Regulator and its team have played through their continuous work and engagement with the Committee on this important piece of legislation.

The Bill is one of eight pieces of legislation that are due to be brought forward by the Minister in a shortened mandate, and it highlights delivery in the Department for the Economy. It is an important Bill, and, as Sinéad mentioned, the timing is right. We are already living through a major change in how we generate, move and use energy. The Utility Regulator has an established role in protecting consumers and securing value for money in the electricity and gas markets, but the system that it regulates is changing and diversifying.

Decarbonisation is a legislative requirement, and these new powers will help the regulator support that transition while maintaining its core duties. Formalising the role of the regulator is pivotal to ensuring that the Minister's economic vision is delivered and is another step in the path towards net zero. In practical terms, the Bill helps the regulator to get ready for that shift. It strengthens the regulator's ability to support the infrastructure and investment that we need for a lower-carbon system and its capacity to support the Department on energy policy. Good policy needs independent expertise, proper evidence and a clear view of what decisions mean for households, businesses and communities. Therefore the Minister has taken a pragmatic approach to ensure strong and independent expert advice in decision-making.

We do not need to look far for a lesson in what happens when oversight is weak. The disastrous RHI scheme, which was presided over by the DUP, damaged the public finances and public trust. Sinn Féin is ensuring that that will never happen again by ensuring robust scrutiny and augmenting the advisory role of the Utility Regulator.

This is a sensible step in the right direction. If we get this transition right, we can cut emissions, build a more resilient energy system and support skilled, good-quality jobs along the way. For those reasons, I am happy to support the Bill. I look forward to seeing it progress through the House.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

We have had two pieces of energy legislation in two days. I thank the Minister for bringing this forward. I rise to support the Bill at its Second Stage. Alliance supports its proceeding to Committee Stage. However, I will spend some time to make my remarks, because supporting the Bill moving to the next stage is not the same as endorsing the pace, ambition or vision that has brought us to this point. The Bill has two clauses. We have to be honest about what those are there to do. I will take my time, because energy is too important to have legislation on it rushed through the House.

Europe, collectively, is actively recalibrating towards home-grown energy security. That provides green jobs, skills and opportunities. I met the Canadian high commissioner last week. Canada is in a similar place to us. We need to be, and should be, at the front and centre of the curve for energy security, which reduces costs for households, and not be held hostage to world oil prices. To achieve that, we need a plan that sets out a legislative pathway to delivery. I have talked many times in the House about the economy. It is our role to create the conditions and the platform — the pitch, if you like — for others to play on. We do not deliver any of this — it is the people in business who provide the outworking. We need to provide the platform and pitch for research and development, skills and opportunities to flourish and drive down costs for people and businesses.

Look at what the Bill does. Clause 1(1) states that:

"The Utility Regulator may provide advice".

The word "may" is pretty ambiguous. Clause 1(2) states that:

"The Utility Regulator must, so far as reasonably practicable, comply with".

Again, I question that wording and what it means, in practice. That is it; that is the entire Bill.

I draw the Assembly's attention to something that the Department acknowledged at the Committee back in November 2024. Some respondents argued that the Bill was not necessary and that article 12(5)(c) of the Energy (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 already provided the Utility Regulator with adequate cover to give advice to the Department on energy-related obligations in the Climate Change Act. The word "may", in clause 1(1), does not compel anyone to do anything: it does not direct; set targets; give the Utility Regulator any new enforcement powers; or update the regulator's statutory duties, which, as has been said, are decades old. We are, in essence, therefore, legislating for a conversation. Four years on from passing the Climate Change Act, we are legislating for a conversation.

Let us look at the timeline and put it on the record. In December 2021, the energy strategy was published. In June 2022, we had the Climate Change Act, which compelled every Department. I agree with Sinéad and Phillip: this is compelling only one Department. We then had two years of DUP collapse, so nothing happened. Take that as a gap. We returned in February 2024. In May 2024, the Executive agreed the draft Bill to go to public consultation, and that was completed in August 2024. In November 2024, officials briefed the Economy Committee and told us that the intention was to introduce the Bill before the summer recess in 2025. We need clarity on why we are here. It will be May 2026 later this week. Why did that not happen? I am not trying to score points; I am not interested in any of that. I genuinely want to push the transition faster. I am trying to get answers from the Department, because we do not get answers from the Department at Committee. What caused that additional delay? With a 2030 renewable electricity target bearing down on us — it is four years away — we cannot afford to waste time, and, from where I sit, that is exactly what has been happening. Recently, we have seen movement but not in the years before.

When officials briefed the Committee in 2024, they were asked directly whether the Bill should go further. I will quote what was said:

"I would not like anyone to think that this Bill is the entirety of the request from the Utility Regulator, because it is not. There is a range of stuff coming forward."

"A range of stuff", in November 2024, was the assurance to the Committee. When pressed on what that range would look like, it was said that the "range of stuff" was:

"about how far down the road we get on that and how settled policies are".

We are almost 18 months later. I asked that same question last week in Committee. I asked what the next step was, and I am still waiting for an answer. There were words, but there was absolutely no answer about a timetable, a commitment or a plan. They talked about steps but could not tell us what the next step was. That needs to go on the record, because we do not get answers at Committee from the energy section of the Department.

In 2024, I asked the Department directly whether there was a master plan for energy, and the answer was an outright no. We talked about this yesterday in the Chamber. We were told that we are working towards a midterm review of an energy strategy — not a plan but a review of a strategy that is already five years old. That was 18 months ago, and when we are four years — I stress: four years — from an 80% renewable electricity target, we need a plan on how to get there. There is a difference between a review and a decision; a strategy and a plan; a "range of stuff coming forward" and an actual legislative programme. We do not have those. I want to put that in context, because we deserve to have what other jurisdictions have.

In GB, Ofgem was given statutory net zero duties under the Energy Act 2023. There is now an explicit legal obligation to support the Government in meeting their net zero targets. It delivers renewable energy schemes worth more than £10 billion a year and is actively involved in the National Energy System Operator. It is delivering a clean power plan. In the South, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities has a dedicated decarbonisation division. It has developed offshore grid policies, reviewed large energy user connections and actively aligned its regulatory framework with the climate action plan.

Here, John French, our Utility Regulator, has publicly said that he does not have a statutory duty to support the Government in meeting their legal duties on net zero. The Bill will go some way towards that, but it does not come close to what other jurisdictions have. That is the gap. What does the Bill do to close that gap? Very little. It gives the Utility Regulator the permission to give advice if asked. That is the distance between where we are and where Ofgem and the CRU are. I really fear that we are missing out on huge potential and opportunity that will cost every household in their pocket every year into the future. The current framework was not designed for net zero. Even hydrogen does not fall within the definition of "gas" under the Gas (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.The regulator cannot act on hydrogen because the law does not even recognise it. The regulator has identified specific areas where it needs proper legislative cover, but the Bill addresses none of them directly. It simply enables the regulator to talk to the Department about those things without legal risk.

If we are to become energy secure on this island, we must move away from fossil fuels. That requires infrastructural investment, building grid capacity ahead of demand and a stop to reacting to things. It requires regulatory certainty so that businesses can plan. It requires consumer protection so that households can transition. It requires offshore development, interconnections, heat decarbonisation, new technologies and storage units all moving in parallel and all requiring legislative underpinning. It requires smart meters so that consumers can benefit from flexibility in pricing, rather than dispatch rates rising or staying steady with that waste of energy. Rural communities need assurance that areas of environmental sensitivity are given protection. However, we have no timeline, no visibility and no certainty on what is coming forward or whether it is coming forward at all. None of that can happen without a plan: not a strategy document or a mid-term review but an actual master plan with milestones, accountability and a legislative programme attached so that it tells investors, the regulator, the consumers and the Assembly what is coming and when in order to give confidence, certainty and function to what the energy Department delivers.

Energy is at the heart of everything that the Assembly is trying to do. It is central to our economic competitiveness, our cost-of-living crisis and our climate obligations and to working together in sharing this island through the North/South interconnector, the single energy market and the shared ambition for offshore wind. Yet, when we look at the Department for the Economy and what it has delivered over the past decade, we see that it is unbelievably slow, which is really concerning. The Bills that were promised have not appeared. Timetables do not get met. When you ask the same questions two years later, you get the answers that you got two years ago. I do not say that to be difficult. I do not want to be difficult. I want to work for a transition, but I make the point that people whom we represent are paying the consequences for that drift.

We are paying the price for being tied to fossil fuels and world oil and gas prices, literally every week. Yesterday, we heard from Members in the Chamber — they are not here at the minute — who champion Trump's ideology and challenge transition away from oil and gas. They challenge costs, yet they champion oil companies that are making billions of pounds of additional profit. Meanwhile, families here have to heat their homes and go to the BPs of this world to fill their cars, and we do not have a plan from the Department for the Economy to get us off fossil fuels and to make that transition. That is what I want to see. We need a delivery of energy transition, but there seems to be a complete lack of vision coming through from the Department and a culture in that energy section that needs to change.

The Bill is not the programme that we need, but it is a step forward. I acknowledge that, and I support its going to the Committee Stage. However, the Utility Regulator needs real powers, not permission slips. We are running out of time in the mandate. We will work in the Committee to do whatever we can to make sure that the Bill is strengthened to be what the people here need. Energy and the transition is the defining challenge of this generation. We need to get on with delivering it.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Diana Armstrong is our next Member to speak.

Diana, I may have to interrupt your speech, as we will suspend the sitting while the Business Committee meets. With that, go ahead.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I will be brief.

I support the Bill's passage at Second Stage and welcome the move towards decarbonisation to meet our statutory obligations. There is no doubt that decarbonisation is urgent and necessary. The Department for the Economy carries significant statutory responsibility under the Climate Change Act, so I acknowledge the intent behind the Bill. However, while I recognise the motivation, I have concerns about how the Bill proposes to proceed. It is a narrowly drafted Bill, containing a single substantive clause, yet it represents a significant shift in the role of the Utility Regulator. The Bill formally extends the regulator's functions to include providing decarbonisation-related advice, information and assistance to the Department for the Economy at the Department's request. Others have spoken of their concerns about the conditions expressed in the proposed legislation.

My concern is not about the expertise. There is no question that the Utility Regulator holds deep, technical knowledge of the energy system, as acknowledged in the Minister's foreword. However, with governance accountability and institutional boundaries, I ask the Minister whether we can expect the regulator to now offer advice to other Departments, such as the Department for Communities on poverty issues, or DAERA, as referenced by others.

The Utility Regulator is and should remain an independent economic regulator. Its core purpose is to protect consumers, ensure value for money and regulate monopoly networks. Drawing it directly in with the preparation of decarbonisation policy risks blurring the lines between independent regulation and Executive policy development. Indeed, the Assembly's Research and Information Service highlights that some consultation respondents raised exactly that point, and it risks pulling the regulator into territory that properly belongs to Ministers and the Department.

There are also unresolved questions about how that qualified power would operate in practice. The regulator must comply with departmental requests as far as reasonably practical, but the Bill does not set out what happens if advice conflicts with the departmental policy direction or if the regulator considers a request inappropriate. That ambiguity is not insignificant.

We must also consider duplication and overlap. The Climate Change Act provides for a just transition commission. The Consumer Council already has a statutory advisory role on energy impact for consumers. The Bill does not clearly explain how potentially conflicting advice would be managed or how those bodies would interact in a joined-up way.

I am particularly concerned about the incremental approach being taken. The Department has been clear that the Bill is only a first step, with further legislation, offshore renewables, hydrogen smart metering and licensing to come, though not in this mandate. We are clearly coming to a point where an energy Bill encompassing policy and interconnectors, offshore renewables, hydrogen and battery storage, as well as others, along with enhanced consumer protection measures such as those that exist in Great Britain, should be in place. That is precisely the problem. Decarbonisation is transformational. It requires a coherent, transparent and accountable energy Bill, setting out governance arrangements, advisory structures and regulatory roles, not piecemeal extensions of powers through narrow stopgap legislation.

There is also the public purse issue. While the explanatory and financial memorandum suggests that costs may be recovered through licence fees, it is clear that alternative funding mechanisms could be required. Ultimately, that raises questions around consumer bills and departmental budgets, issues that deserve full Assembly scrutiny within comprehensive energy legislation.

Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I know that we are short on time, but it is for those reasons that I urge caution at Second Stage. I call on the Minister to reconsider whether the approach strengthens or complicates energy governance in Northern Ireland.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Thank you, Diana.

As I mentioned, the Business Committee has arranged to meet at 1.00 pm. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue at 2.45 pm, after Question Time, when the next Member to be called will be Aoife Finnegan.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.58 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Finance

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

1. Ms Forsythe asked the Minister of Finance whether there has been a central budgetary assessment of the known and potential costs associated with net zero climate policies and funding streams for each Department and arm’s-length body to inform future financial planning. (AQO 3482/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Protecting the environment is a priority in the Executive's Programme for Government (PFG). The Executive published their Budget sustainability plan in October 2024. The associated forward work programme is led by my Department and examines improvements in the Budget process, including how to link the Budget to the strategic direction of the PFG, which has associated climate targets.

Under the Climate Change Act 2022, all Departments are required to exercise their functions in a manner that is consistent with achieving emissions targets and carbon budgets as far as possible. As climate action is so far-reaching, it is a consideration in all departmental spending and is not limited to actions that can be funded from additional allocations in what is a very constrained financial environment. Any additional funding bids arising from assessments may be submitted for consideration by the Executive as part of their wider prioritisation and financial planning process.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. We are under incredible financial pressure, and Departments are being required to prioritise some things over others. Some Departments are spending a lot more than others on their journey to achieve climate policies. Is there or should there be a requirement to isolate that spending and compare it as part of a cost-benefit analysis to ensure that what is being spent does not go towards chasing unattainable targets but actually benefits public services in Northern Ireland?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

All public expenditure should be measured to ensure that it is an efficient and effective use of public funds and delivers the policy intention of the Department and/or the Executive. Spending to tackle climate change is no different. Such expenditure is already built into some Departments' spends, but it brings broader advantages in other areas. For instance, the affordable warmth scheme and the warm healthy homes scheme are primarily intended to tackle fuel poverty and improve health, but they also deliver emissions savings. Given the pressures that families are under at the moment from heating costs et cetera, that expenditure should be encouraged and supported in order to assist families with the rising cost-of-living crisis, but it has the added benefit of tackling climate change.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Minister, how is your Department supporting the climate action plan (CAP)?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Under the draft CAP, my Department is not sector-led. It plays a central enabling role, providing frameworks and guidance to Departments on how they need to consider climate change in decision-making and procurement processes. We are committed to supporting the delivery of the CAP, as is demonstrated by our inclusion of policies that enable such actions.

Outside of the CAP, we are also leading by example. The Department's 'Climate and Sustainability Action Plan 2025-2026' — the first — was published in May 2025. It sets out 38 actions to fulfil our climate commitments and improve sustainability. An end-of-year progress report and the plan for 2026-27 will be published shortly.

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

Minister, we need to develop a just transition framework not only for our farmers but for our wider rural societies that is progressive and forward-looking and has support. What bid did the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs make to you for that just transition, and what allocation was made by your Department in the draft multi-year Budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Unfortunately, I do not have the figures in front of me, but I am more than happy to share them with the Member in due course.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Time and time again in the Chamber, we hear that the net zero ideology reigns supreme over common sense. Minister, do you have any central role in ensuring that common sense is applied to spending in Departments, or is it the case that the dangers and the hamstringing that will limit industry and our economy will not be taken into consideration when it comes to pursuing the zealot net zero fantasy?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Tackling climate change is a common-sense approach. It is common sense to take on the challenges that we face in relation to extreme weather events, whether that be increased rainfall or more frequent storms, not only in this part of the world but in other parts of the world that are facing real and direct challenges as a result of climate change. Investment in warm homes, for example, is the right way forward to ensure that people's homes are properly insulated and built to a standard that ensures that we use less energy than we did previously. The current cost-of-living crisis and the war in Iran, which has driven up oil and fuel prices, are other examples of why we should do that.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

2. Mr Sheehan asked the Minister of Finance to outline any work his Department has undertaken to increase awareness of public procurement opportunities. (AQO 3483/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My Department has taken decisive steps to make public procurement more accessible and supportive of business growth. The public procurement policy statement agreed by the Executive in June 2025 requires Departments, either directly or through its centre of procurement expertise (CoPE), to publish an 18-month procurement pipeline. That gives businesses greater visibility of upcoming opportunities and greater confidence to plan and invest.

Central to that is the operation of eTendersNI, which is the single online portal for advertising public-sector procurement opportunities above £50,000. Used by 147 contracting authorities and more than 35,000 registered suppliers, it provides a single, consistent route for suppliers to access tender opportunities from government Departments, agencies, arm’s-length bodies and the wider public sector. Increasing supplier participation in eTendersNI is a key priority.

On 8 July 2025, Construction and Procurement Delivery (CPD) published a procurement supplier communication strategy in consultation with other centres of procurement expertise, Invest NI, InterTradeIreland and industry and sector representative bodies. The strategy focuses on widening access to procurement, supporting suppliers to tender competitively and encouraging new entrants to the public-sector marketplace. Since the launch, 1,061 new microbusinesses and 159 new voluntary and community organisations have registered on eTendersNI.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.

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

How will a simplified procurement process help to deliver small, local public-sector contracts, for example, in schools?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for his question. We have cut red tape for low-value procurement for public bodies, including our schools. Schools can now buy what they need quickly and locally for anything under £50,000 or £65,000 for utilities. There is no more jumping through hoops; they can simply get quotes by email without having to use the eTendersNI system. That removes a major barrier for schools, whose focus, as we know, should be on teaching, not tackling bureaucracy. It also opens the door for more local businesses to work in the public sector. The message is simple: if a school needs a joiner to fix a door or a painter to freshen up a classroom, nothing in procurement policy stops them obtaining a couple of local quotes and getting on with the job.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Following on from that, many small and medium-sized businesses feel pushed out of public procurement opportunities because they are advertised as a multi-project spread. Local businesses watch as contractors travel to an area from 40 miles away. It is exactly the same in infrastructure when it comes to filling in potholes etc. Does the Minister agree that more should be done to award local projects to local contractors and communities in order to create efficiencies and cut down on bigger companies travelling in?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There are some areas where procurement takes place on a wider geographical spread. Road repairs, for example, are split up into a number of geographical locations. That, in turn, can mean that you get more for your money.

I continue to engage with my officials on how we ensure that the procurement process allows access for small- and medium-sized enterprises. We have been successful to date in ensuring that local organisations and companies get access to it, but I continue to discuss and refine the process to ensure that we improve it.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Minister, you may or may not be aware that my TD comrades in Dáil Éireann are trying to introduce legislation to stop trade with Israel. Will you introduce procurement legislation or policy to isolate Israel, which would include but not be limited to not giving public money to organisations that are invested in the apartheid state?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I recently introduced a procurement policy to the Executive that has the highest standards and examples of international human rights compliance. We have gone as far as and much further than has been the case previously in this state or, indeed, some other places. I will always continue to examine how we can play our part and ensure that we do not work alongside companies that support the genocide in Gaza and elsewhere and that we isolate those in the Israeli state who are conducting that genocide or who continue to support and campaign for it.

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

Minister, without strong central direction, procurement becomes fragmented, inconsistent and reactive instead of being strategic. Will you provide details of the oversight body that is charged with ensuring accountability, accessibility, performance monitoring and proper governance structures?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

We recently underwent a review of procurement to see how we should bring forward new governance models. It is an area that requires constant updating and refreshment. I am studying a report from an expert panel on the way forward to see how we can improve on our governance models and ensure that we have the most up-to-date governance in place and do not have the fragmentation that the Member mentioned. I will take a while to study that report, and I will then make recommendations to my Executive colleagues on the way forward.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Butler is not in his place.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

4. Mr Blair asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the proposed draft Budget 2026-29/2030. (AQO 3485/22-27)

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

8. Ms Sheerin asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the multi-year Budget process. (AQO 3489/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I intend to answer questions 4 and 8 together.

On 6 January, I published proposals for a multi-year Budget and formally launched a public consultation. The consultation closed on 3 March. Subsequent to that, the Secretary of State wrote to update the funding available, which I laid out in my written ministerial statement to the Assembly on 25 March 2026. In addition, while not reflected in the control totals outlined in the Secretary of State's letter, provision must also be made for the repayment of the £400 million reserve claim. In light of those changes, I brought revised Budget proposals to Executive colleagues for consideration at the Executive meeting on 16 April. It is clear that there is a determination around the Executive table to progress a multi-year Budget. Achieving that ambition will depend on securing adequate funding from Westminster to ensure the sustainability of services and improved outcomes for the people whom we serve.

The proposals that I have brought forward have been developed against the backdrop of an exceptionally constrained financial position. I fully acknowledge that they do not provide the level of funding that Departments have indicated that they require, nor the level of investment in public services that I want to see. I continue to make the case to the British Government that additional support is required. However, notwithstanding the significant pressures that we face, the Executive must seize the opportunity presented by a multi-year Budget. Doing so will provide much-needed certainty, support our long-term planning and enable strategic investment that delivers lasting benefits for our economy, our environment and our society.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that reply. Will he tell us the likely consequences for our public services if he fails to reach agreement with the Treasury and secure Executive approval for a draft Budget, and will he tell us the timeline and deadline for all that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Without significant and proper investment from the British Government, the consequences for our public services will be severe. We have heard individual Ministers stating their case over the past weeks and months and explaining what will happen to public services if there is no further investment. The consequences are bleak, so there is a responsibility on the Government to step forward. We have set out a very strong case, including referring to the funding above the level of need that Scotland and Wales receive. It is only right and proper that the British Government fairly fund this place in order to allow the Executive to carry out their functions on behalf of the people.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.

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

Minister, will you give more detail on the conversations that you have had with the British Government about the multi-year Budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have ongoing engagement with the Treasury and the Secretary of State in relation to the Budget, including as recently as last week. I have made a very strong case to them about their responsibilities to fund this place properly in order to allow the Executive to carry out their functions and support public services and the economy. I have also referred to the disparity in funding between this place and Scotland and Wales. The fact is that Wales is funded 8% above its level of need and Scotland is funded 20% above its level of need, which equates to £1 billion and £3 billion respectively. I assure you that, if our Executive had access to such funds, we would have a multi-year Budget in place and that, over the next three years, Ministers would be planning for delivery and transformation of public services to ensure that they were delivered in an effective and efficient manner.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

The UK Treasury awarded extra money to bodies across the UK to address the significant increase in demand for special educational needs services. The Education Minister has for some time been referring to the pressure that SEN provision is putting on his Department's budget. Will the additional £380 million in Barnett consequentials, given the UK Government's decision to fund SEN, be ring-fenced and applied to the NI Education budget, version 2?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member will be aware that Barnett consequentials are unhypothecated, so how they are applied is a matter for the Executive. It is also worth nothing that the funding came as a result of funding pressures in the delivery of SEN services by English and Welsh councils, which cover those services not only in education but in further education and health. All those Departments will have bids in place to ensure that SEN services are delivered and that the increased demand for them is met. The fact is that we do not have the quantum of funding available to meet all the demands of individual Ministers, so the Executive will have to come to a conclusion on those matters.

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

Minister, at the Finance Committee in December last year, you told me that you were 10 out of 10 confident that a Budget would be agreed. In January, when you published the draft Budget, you said that it would transform public services. Were you wrong then, or are you wrong now?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I make no apologies for having been an optimist in December or for being an optimist in the last few days of April. My job as Finance Minister is to bring a draft Budget to the Executive. I have done that. I believe that the draft Budget that I brought forward was the best possible attempt at delivering change with the quantum of funding that we have. I note, however, that, since 6 January — the public consultation closed on 3 March — the SDLP — the official Opposition — has not produced an alternative Budget.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

5. Mr Kearney asked the Minister of Finance to outline the benefits of being an accredited living wage employer. (AQO 3486/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am pleased that the Civil Service here has maintained its living wage employer accreditation since achieving it in 2021. This year's living wage increase was implemented from the start of this month, benefiting between 600 and 700 civil servants. I continue to encourage other public-sector employers to consider paying the real living wage through my public-sector pay guidance to address low pay.

In addition, last month, I met Living Wage NI, which provides accreditation for employers here, to discuss how I can support its movement to promote the payment of the real living wage further in the sector. Over and above paying valued staff a fair wage, there are many benefits to being an accredited living wage employer, including better staff recruitment and retention outcomes and increased productivity, with living wage employers often reporting more positive manager-employee relationships. Furthermore, securing accreditation shows a strong public commitment to fair pay by an employer, going beyond the statutory minimums and enhancing their reputation and brand with customers, staff and, in our case, the public. I strongly encourage other employers, in the public and private sectors, to join the accreditation scheme.

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra.

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

Today is Workers' Memorial Day, and, this weekend, the trade union movement will celebrate International Workers' Day. The North remains a low-wage economy. Minister, based on what you have just said, how will you seek to prioritise in the coming period the absolute imperative of ensuring that all public-sector organisations commit to becoming living wage employers on a fully accredited basis?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

One of the best strategies to tackle poverty is to have good jobs with good pay, and offering the living wage shows a commitment from the public sector that we are determined to tackle low pay. I encourage others to do so. On my responsibility for public-sector pay guidance, my Department has strongly encouraged other public-sector employees outside the Civil Service to pay the real living wage, and we will continue to do so. I know that a sizable number of staff groups in arm's-length bodies follow Civil Service pay awards. Consequently, those bodies will be paying those staff at least the real living wage, but that may not necessarily have been brought through accreditation and accreditation may not have been sought. I will continue to voice my support for the real living wage, and I encourage the bodies that are paying it to sign up to the accreditation scheme as well.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Domiciliary care workers are not within the Northern Ireland Civil Service staffing structure. They are employed by the trusts and deliver most essential healthcare in our communities. They are leaving the profession due to low pay, soaring fuel costs and low morale. Does the Minister agree that more should be done to improve their conditions, as in other public-sector bodies? Will he do anything to encourage that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am on the record as saying that one of the first tasks that Ministers need to do when we agree the multi-year Budget is that we settle public-sector pay awards. We cannot wait until the end of the year or until a crisis moment to support our public-sector workers. One of the awards that needs to be settled is for care workers and others, who remain on the lower pay brackets. We need to ensure that everyone is paid a fair wage, and, as I said, I encourage employers who do not have living wage accreditation to pay the living wage and to sign up to the accreditation scheme.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

6. Mr Delargy asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the Northern Ireland Investment Fund. (AQO 3487/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The investment fund has provided £178·5 million in support, which has generated a further £179 million in additional investment. That has helped to support around 5,200 jobs and the development of close to 100,000 square metres of employment space. The fund recently provided an £8·1 million loan to support the development of a wind farm near Castlederg. That illustrates the role that the fund can play in the transition towards more renewable energy generation. The fund therefore continues to meet its goals of contributing to economic and social regeneration and supporting the low-carbon economy.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Obviously, there are huge benefits from the investment fund. Minister, can you outline any of the specific benefits for Derry?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes. In February, I visited a new aparthotel and hospitality complex in Derry city centre that was supported by the fund. The scheme represents an investment of £5 million in the local economy, which will support around 30 jobs. That was precisely the type of scheme that the fund was set up to support, one that contributes to tourism, jobs and regional balance in economic activity. The fund has also supported Ebrington Hotel in Derry, which has played a key role in the wider generation of the city.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

Minister, as you have set out, millions of pounds are earned each year from the Northern Ireland Investment Fund, with over £8 million in 2024. Can the Minister clarify how that interest is being managed and whether it is being reinvested to fund public services in Northern Ireland?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There has been a change to how the Treasury manages the use of financial transactions capital. We will have the net return of that, which allows us to reinvest into the public sector, businesses, wherever it may be, so there will be a churning of that investment throughout the system. We have to continue to engage with our Departments and the business sector to ensure that we are maximising that fund, and, in turn, boosting our economy and public services as much as we can.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

7. Mr Baker asked the Minister of Finance for an update on the Back in Business rate relief scheme. (AQO 3488/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Back in Business scheme has been extended to 2026-27, and will continue to offer a 50% rate discount for up to two years where a business occupies a long-term vacant property that was previously used for retail from1 April 2024 onwards. The scheme is designed to incentivise the occupation of empty retail units, reduce long-term vacancy and support regeneration of town centres and high streets by encouraging new and expanding businesses to establish themselves in those locations.

Since the scheme was launched in May 2024, 113 businesses have benefited, receiving over £600,000 in rate support, helping to reduce operating costs during the early stages of trading. They include nine businesses from the West Belfast constituency. Applications remain open until 31 March 2027, and I encourage any eligible business that is considering occupying a long-term vacant retail unit to apply for the support available through the scheme.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he outline his next steps in the business growth accelerator policy proposal?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I outlined in November that I wanted to have a public consultation on that policy proposal. My officials have been developing a consultation paper and have started preliminary engagement with key stakeholders. My intention is for the consultation to commence prior to the summer recess.

When a business decides to expand, that would usually increase the rates liability immediately once the work is completed. That additional rates liability creates more revenue for public services. I recognise, however, that the initial outlay, coupled with the increased rates liability associated with an expansion, can be off-putting for some businesses that are waiting to take those steps. To that end, I want to progress rating policy so that the additional rates liability incurred is staggered. That may mean the difference between a business deciding to expand or deciding not to expand.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

The Back in Business scheme plays an important role but the lack of strategy in what type of businesses build premises, and ongoing dereliction, still leaves many town centres run down. Does the Minister support the reinstatement of the high street task force?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My understanding is that the high street task force was under the auspices of TEO, so that question is probably best directed at TEO. I am not sure that I accept that there is a lack of strategy. The scheme is market driven, so the businesses that we want to encourage back into town centres and villages are driven by what they believe the market will deliver or how they can change the market.

Having said that, I visited an interesting business in Ballinascreen recently that created a fitness and well-being spa and sports facility right in the town centre in what used to be a bank. You might imagine that that business does not fit there but it does, and other local businesses have been impressed by the footfall that it has brought into the town. Without the Back in Business scheme, that business would not have been able to do that.

We have to allow businesses to decide what they believe will work in a town centre under the scheme, and to create the momentum. There are many success stories across the board of how the scheme has brought not only a business back to life but supported the businesses around it.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

9. Ms Mulholland asked the Minister of Finance whether his Department will bring forward any proposals to reform private family law in light of the findings of the report, ‘Totally Invisible: The experiences of domestic violence and abuse victims/survivors and children engaging with private law family court processes in Northern Ireland’. (AQO 3490/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I welcome the 'Totally Invisible' report and have considered its key findings, which highlight a number of concerns about the experiences of the victims, survivors and children who have been involved in private family law cases. I recently met Connie Egan MLA, alongside representatives from Women's Aid and the NSPCC, to discuss the report and to hear their views directly, and those discussions have helped to inform my understanding of the issues that have been raised.

The report places significant emphasis on issues of court practice, culture and system design and refers to the family court pilot task and finish working group that the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime is establishing to explore more trauma-informed approaches. To support that cross-departmental work, I have nominated a Department of Finance official to participate in the working group, and my Department will engage constructively with colleagues in the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and other Departments.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Minister, do you agree that, where domestic abuse and coercive control are present, the starting point must be the child — their voice and point of view — and that there should not be an assumption that contact with a parent is always beneficial?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes. The well-being of the child has to be paramount in all those decisions, and I assure the Member that my Department and I will play our part in the ongoing discussions and, where we believe they are required, work our way through policy and legislative changes.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We will now move on to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr O'Toole asked the Minister of Finance, after stating that he does not know whether the Minister was in the room when his colleague Pearse Doherty said at his party's ard-fheis at the weekend that it was time for an emergency Budget for the people of the South of Ireland, whether he felt a degree of embarrassment or shame at the fact that this Executive, in which he is the Minister of Finance, has failed to pass a Budget at all, not even a routine Budget, even if we accept that the main fiscal levers for doing so sit with the British Government. (AQT 2291/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I was in the room, along with around 1,000 other delegates at an all-Ireland party conference. I encourage the Member to follow that pathway and get more involved in all-Ireland politics and end his party's partitionist stance on a lot of matters. It was really refreshing and thrilling to listen to debate and discussions at which TDs, seanadóirí

[Translation: senators]

, MEPs, MPs, MLAs, councillors and activists all came together to discuss a range of international issues and all-Ireland politics. I encourage the Member to follow a similar path.

Matthew continues his solo run in defending the British Government and the NIO over their underfunding of the Executive, public services and the economy here. He stands alone in constantly trying to make the point that it is all the fault of the Executive and the Assembly and that the British Government have done their bit. Let me tell you, Matthew, that the facts and figures do not stack up in favour of your argument. The British Government fund Wales to 8% above its level of need, Scotland to 20% above its level of need and this place to its level of need. If they were to fund us to a similar level of need as they do Wales, we would be getting £1 billion extra. If they were to fund us to the level of need that they do Scotland, we would be getting £3 billion extra. If the British Government had given us that money, Matthew, I assure you that there would be a Budget in place.

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

Minister, you have, once again, utterly misrepresented everything that I said. I want the British Government to give us more money. I want a fair financial settlement for here. A better settlement for this place is more likely to happen when your party and the DUP act like parties in a grown-up, proper Government and stop squabbling. I am not the one who invited in the British Government to do something called an open-book exercise, which you said would strengthen our argument for funding for public services but has instead turned out to be a farce. Minister, I will ask you this again: given that you said in January of this year that the draft Budget, which you have now apparently disowned, was transformative for public services, when will we have a final Budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

You talk about squabbling, but the SDLP is the only party, and I mean the only party, that stands up for the British Government on this point. The DUP, the Alliance Party, the Ulster Unionist Party and Sinn Féin are united on the position that the Executive are being underfunded by the British Government and that, for us to be allowed to achieve our objective of transforming public services, delivering modern public services and supporting our economy, we need a fair and proper funding formula from the British Government. I have listened to you misquoting me on the airwaves on a range of matters, but you are a solo runner on this issue. Rather than running round being a spokesperson for the NIO, come and join the rest of us who have a common cause to ensure that this place is properly funded.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

T2. Mrs Dillon asked the Minister of Finance, after welcoming the fact that it was not only the DUP that watched Sinn Féin's party conference but parties across the House, or, at least, the Opposition, noting that, as she said this morning, it was a great ard-fheis and well worth viewing, and stating that it was great to know that Sinn Féin influenced other parties, what legislation he plans to introduce in the remainder of the mandate. (AQT 2292/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There has been a degree of envy in the Chamber since our ard-fheis in Belfast at the weekend. Those who hold their party conferences in a telephone box now realise that there are parties with representation across the island of Ireland that have a mandate and a strategy for the way forward.

As Members of the Legislative Assembly, our role is to shape legislation that makes a real difference in people's lives. As I intended, I have brought a number of important pieces of legislation through the Assembly in this mandate. Members will be aware that the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill, which contains provisions to establish a new baby loss certificate scheme, passed its Final Stage in December. Last week, the Assembly progressed the Marriage and Civil Partnership Bill to Committee Stage. That Bill will increase the minimum age of marriage and civil partnership from 16 to 18, which will help to better safeguard our children. Following comprehensive scrutiny by the Finance Committee, the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill was debated in the Chamber and has advanced to Further Consideration Stage. Finally, I intend to move the Consideration Stage of the Fiscal Council Bill next week.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for outlining his Department's legislative programme. Minister, when I previously asked about the baby loss certificate scheme, you said that people would be able to access the certificates very soon. Will you give us an update on when that access might start, given that families are really looking forward to finally having something to acknowledge the existence — the life and death — of their child?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It is important legislation, and, again, its delivery showed unity of purpose across the Chamber, which is welcome. The SL1 for the baby loss certificate scheme regulations was forwarded to the Finance Committee on 27 March and will be provided to the Assembly when the Committee has considered it. Should the regulations proceed through the Committee's scrutiny and approval process without delay, we hope that they can be debated by the Assembly in May 2026. If the regulations are agreed, the scheme will become operational in June 2026.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T3. Mr Delargy asked the Minister of Finance how local companies benefit from public procurement opportunities. (AQT 2293/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My procurement officials regularly collaborate with InterTradeIreland and participate in its Go-2-Tender programme. It delivered 10 sessions last year and has commenced delivery of the 17 sessions that are scheduled to be delivered by December this year. My Department's buyers engage with SMEs and microbusinesses through those online workshops to highlight opportunities in, and the accessibility of, the public sector.

Since July 2025, centres of procurement expertise have participated in 23 supplier events to raise awareness of public tender opportunities. A further 26 events are planned for this year.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister. You partially answered my supplementary question about how to better understand the tender opportunities. How exactly does your Department promote them to SMEs?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As I said earlier in Question Time, the eTendersNI portal is used by 147 contracting authorities and has over 35,000 registered suppliers. It is encouraging to note that eTendersNI figures for the 2025-26 financial year show that the vast majority of public spend here benefits local suppliers. Of the total value of the contracts awarded across the public sector, which was £1·93 billion, 65% went to local suppliers, with 62% going to SMEs. The figures for central government for 2025-26 are equally encouraging, with 65% of contracts, of an overall value of £1·25 billion, being awarded to local suppliers and 62% of the contracts benefiting local SMEs.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

T4. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister of Finance whether there has been an update from the UK Treasury on the potential to increase funding for Northern Ireland through the proposals from the Minister for Communities on the recovery of funds from fraud and error in the benefits system. (AQT 2294/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

No update is available. There have been back-and-forth communications with the Treasury on questions that it had on submissions that were made by the Department for Communities. My officials have engaged with the Department for Communities, and information has been supplied back and forth.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. With over £350 million a year being lost through benefit fraud and error, there is huge potential to recoup funds. I urge the Minister to support the Communities Minister and push the UK Treasury on that topic.

What practical steps has the Finance Minister taken to address funding pressures in Northern Ireland himself, rather than just blaming the Brits?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There is no actual agreement with the British Government for a share of that funding pot. We need to be conscious of that at all times. There is a statement on those matters in 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA), I think, although I may be wrong — it may be further back than that. We do not have a firm commitment from the British Government on a percentage or amount of money that will be returned to the Executive through the work that the Member mentioned.

The Member might not have caught up on the latest press conferences by her party leader, DFM and a number of her party's other spokespeople. It is not a case of blaming the Brits; it is a case of ensuring that the British Government, who collect taxes from all the citizens we represent, fund this place fairly. By and large, the response from the British Government has been, "Tax workers, families and small businesses more". Here is the thing, though: workers, families and small businesses here pay their fair share of taxes, and those taxes go to the Treasury. We are not getting a fair return on those taxes from the Treasury.

As I have said on numerous occasions at the Executive table, every Minister has a responsibility to run an efficient and effective Department and ensure that all the public funds that they use are used wisely and deliver real change for the people whom they serve.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T5. Mrs Erskine asked the Finance Minister whether he has worked with the Minister for Infrastructure to assess the value and potential cost of climate change legislation to the Department for Infrastructure? (AQT 2295/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have had a number of engagements with the Infrastructure Minister about her Department and her bids to the Budget. It is the responsibility of each Minister to run their Department and its policies.

As I said in response to the first listed question of Question Time, the costs of climate change are real and include severe weather events, such as the prolonged rain and the storms that our society has faced. DFI has borne the brunt of those weather events in responding to storms over the past number of years. We have just had the wettest January in over 100 years, which did not help the state of our roads.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Yeah, the costs are real; they are real to each Department. The Minister knows full well that, due to delay, there are increased costs to road projects as a result of inflation. The A5 has been paused, £6·6 million has been handed back from the A4 Enniskillen southern bypass project and the A1 safety measures scheme has been halted. The Audit Office has said that the costs for the A5 are £1·7 billion and counting because of the legal action. Given that Departments are cash-strapped, would it not be better to sort out climate change legislation so that we can stop the pauses to our road infrastructure projects, stop their costs spiralling and get Northern Ireland moving again?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member is aware that the A5 case is before the courts and that there is an ongoing appeal involving the AERA Minister, the Infrastructure Minister and the A5 Enough is Enough campaign. I hope that the appeal is successful and that we then move rapidly to the delivery of all the road schemes to which the Member referred.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

T7. Mr K Buchanan asked the Minister of Finance to confirm what checks take place to ensure that new and emerging high street businesses contribute fairly to the rating system. (AQT 2297/22-27)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

There are assessments by members of staff, when they are available to carry them out. Like other bodies, Land and Property Services (LPS) has a constrained budget and a constrained number of staff, but spot checks can be carried out on request.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Thank you, Minister. Some towns such as Magherafelt have several new and emerging businesses. On Boxing Day alone, I could have got my hair cut — not that I have much — at two places within a stone's throw of each other. The demand was that great that those businesses were open on Boxing Day, which rings alarm bells. I appreciate that that is not a rating issue, but it is an alarming thing in a town.

What else can you do for businesses, Minister? I appreciate that we have the online world, but what else can you as Finance Minister do to assist those struggling businesses? They see those other businesses — I am not labelling all hairdressing businesses as fraudulent — as sending out a serious signal in a town.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As I said, if the Member has any concerns, he can contact LPS, and it will carry out due diligence on those matters.

I am supporting businesses. We have just talked about the Back in Business scheme. I want to support businesses by allowing them to physically expand and giving rates relief in the first year of their expansion. In the draft Budget, I have proposed providing £10 million in further support to small businesses. I have also proposed that the finance from some of the domestic rate relief schemes be redirected to supporting our small and medium enterprises. I am always looking for opportunities to support our small and medium enterprises.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That concludes questions to the Minister of Finance.

Before Members take their ease, I welcome to the Chamber today a lot of additional people who are here for the Final Stage of the historic Sign Language Bill. You are all very welcome.

The Member signed: Hello.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Executive Committee Business

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I call the Minister for the Economy to wind up the debate on the Bill.

Caoimhe Archibald (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle.

First, I thank Members for their consideration. I am encouraged by the support that has been expressed for the Bill in the Chamber today. I acknowledge the other comments that were made, and I will come on to those in a little bit. That reflects the importance of the Bill.

As I outlined when I opened the debate, the Bill will allow the Department to access technical advice that only the Utility Regulator has the information and expertise to provide. It will complement in-house analytical and policy expertise, enabling the development of the proposals, policies, strategies and plans needed to support the Department in delivering the Climate Change Act and energy strategy objectives. By fully empowering the Utility Regulator in the net zero conversation with my Department, my officials can work to design low-carbon energy environments that unlock economic and decarbonisation opportunities.

I will talk to some of the points raised by Members in the debate. Similar comments were made across the Chamber about the scope of the Bill. It is a case of ensuring that the Utility Regulator is in a position to advise the Department on the different elements that will be required to meet our targets, the areas of policy that it will have a role in and what additional powers may be needed at a future date to help it to deliver. At this point, it is a case of giving the Utility Regulator the power to advise and help the Department on the way forward, and, at a later date, we will work with it to develop the additional powers that it also requires. We will continue to do that work. We will work with Utility Regulator on those future powers.

Some comments were made about the wording of the legislation. Members asked why it says "may provide advice" and why it talks about "any reasonable request" from the Department. Diana made comments about ensuring that the Utility Regulator maintains its independence while ensuring that a level of governance is in place; that is the balance that we are trying to strike. As the Utility Regulator is independent of the Department, the Department cannot instruct it on what it should do or the advice that it should provide. The reasonableness is to ensure that, if the regulator is asked to do something that goes beyond what it is resourced to do, it is in a position to make that point.

We often need to speak to the issue of resourcing, and points were made about other Departments asking the Utility Regulator to provide advice. The current functions that are set out in the Bill are intended to be resourced through the electricity and gas licence fees, and it can be used only to resource work associated with the Bill that aligns with the statutory electricity and gas functions. Therefore, if other Departments have asks that sit outwith that, a conversation will need to be had about where the resourcing will come from and the funding to support it.

Those are some of the issues that we have had to strike a balance on in the drafting of the Bill, and I am assured that the Committee will fully scrutinise all elements of the Bill.

I will pick up on a point that was made by Mr Honeyford about the advice and information that comes to the Committee. It is not acceptable to me that the Committee feels that it is not getting the information that it needs, but I am also clear that none of my officials goes to the Committee to be unhelpful. If there is a difference between expectation and what the Committee is getting, we need to ensure that the gap is bridged. The Chair had correspondence from the permanent secretary offering to meet to discuss any issues, and, hopefully, the offer will be taken up so that we can ensure that those issues are resolved.

I hope that I have not missed any of the points that were made. I am conscious that people in the Public Gallery are more anxious to hear another debate. I will begin to wrap up. I am grateful to everyone who contributed to the debate on the Utility Regulator Bill. I ask Members to agree the Bill's Second Stage so that it can be referred to the Economy Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Second Stage of the Utility Regulator (Support for Decarbonisation Preparation) Bill [NIA Bill 32/22-27] be agreed.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Members, take your ease, please.

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

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, before we commence, I extend my welcome, as well as that of the Speaker, to all of those in our Galleries.

I call the Minister for Communities to move the Final Stage of the Sign Language Bill.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member signed: I beg to move

That the Sign Language Bill (NIA Bill 10/22-27) do now pass.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

[Applause.]

[Members signed applause.]

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Thank you, Minister. The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Minister for Communities to open the debate.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am delighted to move the Final Stage of the Northern Ireland Sign Language Bill, and I am grateful for the opportunity to address the Assembly at what is clearly an historic moment.

I am absolutely delighted to welcome the deaf community here. As I look up into the Public Gallery, I can see that the community has turned up in large numbers from near and far to witness what is happening. For many of them, this day has been a long time coming. In my time in the House, I cannot remember so many people being in the Public Gallery for the Final Stage of any legislation. I am delighted at such a strong turnout. It speaks to the importance of the legislation for the community that is represented here today.

I am also delighted that, over the past few weeks, planning for this day has been led by members of the deaf signing community, supported by my officials. I am grateful for their efforts. I also thank Parliament Buildings staff and the British Sign Language (BSL) and Irish Sign Language (ISL) interpreters who have facilitated the signposting and escorting of visitors to the Public Gallery. I also thank the students from the Department for Communities-funded Queen's University MA in sign language interpreting. They have volunteered their services to help with supporting deaf visitors during their visit to Parliament Buildings today. I wish them well with their final dissertations. We are also joined by representatives of the deaf community who have travelled from other jurisdictions. They are very welcome.

This is a day that has been much anticipated by the deaf and deafblind signing community. For them and for the whole of Northern Ireland society, this is a day that truly merits being described as "historic". As Members, we are being asked a simple but significant question: should Northern Ireland formally recognise BSL and ISL and strengthen our commitment to equality, dignity and inclusion for deaf and deafblind signing people? I am confident that the answer from the Assembly today will be an emphatic yes.

To understand why the Bill matters, we must first acknowledge the long experience of deaf people not only in Northern Ireland but across these islands and beyond. For generations, deaf people have built rich linguistic, cultural and social communities through sign language, yet, too often, that history has been marked by exclusion. Legal recognition of sign languages has lagged far beyond the lived reality. At the Bill's Further Consideration Stage, I spoke of the Milan conference in 1880 and how its decisions contributed to deaf children being discouraged from learning and using their own language and deaf people in general being marginalised in employment and civic life — often seen and treated as outsiders and not quite belonging.

Despite those challenges, deaf people persevered. They organised, advocated and passed their languages from one generation to the next. They ensured that their sign languages did not simply survive but flourish.

Those from the deaf community who are gathered here today will know of a central figure in that struggle: Francis Maginn. He was born near Mallow in County Cork in 1861 and spent most of his working life in Belfast until his death in 1918. He advocated on behalf of the deaf community to improve living standards, promote sign language and undo the injustices that flowed from the decisions made in Milan. Maginn was buried in Belfast city cemetery and is remembered in College Square North in Belfast, where an Ulster History Circle blue plaque at Wilton House reads:

"Pioneer for Rights and Education of Deaf People".

I am pleased to have joined other funders, including the Ulster Society for Promoting the Education of the Deaf and the Blind, to support c21 Theatre Company and ensure that its play 'Call to Adventure: The Life and Travels of Francis Maginn' can tour venues across Northern Ireland. I am also pleased that the cast and crew will perform a short excerpt from the play in the Long Gallery after this debate at an event sponsored by me that will, I trust, mark the passing of the Northern Ireland Sign Language Bill. I reiterate my invitation to Members to attend that event.

The passing of the Bill would be a fitting tribute to the life and travels of Francis Maginn, because it delivers on many of the issues that he championed. It recognises BSL and ISL as languages in their own right, not as supports or accommodations but as full languages, with their own grammar, structure and cultural significance. That recognition matters. It sends a clear signal that deaf people and sign language users are valued members of our society. It ensures true equality, respects human rights and aligns Northern Ireland with international good practice. The Bill moves us away from a deficit-based model and one that focuses solely on impairment towards a model that recognises the linguistic identity and, importantly, cultural identity of our deaf and deafblind community.

It has been a privilege for me to lead on this groundbreaking work on behalf of the Executive. Long before the Bill reached the Assembly, my Department was already engaging with the deaf community, its representatives and service providers to understand lived experience and practical need. That work included developing sign language interpreting services across public services; working in partnership with deaf-led organisations to co-design, develop and fund strategic interventions, including the family sign language programme, which is a priority for me and for which the Bill provides a statutory guarantee that classes will remain free of charge; establishing structured engagement through advisory and partnership groups; and improving awareness of sign language across Departments and public bodies.

The Bill builds on that foundation, gives legislative shape to the work that has already begun and provides the clarity and stability that is needed to drive progress in the long term. The Bill is about rectifying a long-standing inequality. It reflects values that, I believe, are shared across the Assembly: fairness, dignity and inclusion. For far too long, that has not been the reality for members of our deaf community, but that ends today. I am therefore proud to have brought the legislation to its Final Stage, and I commend the Bill to the House.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

[Applause.]

Mr Gildernew made some of his contribution in Irish sign language.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As Chair of the Committee for Communities, I welcome the opportunity to speak at the Final Stage of the Sign Language Bill. I thank the sign language community for its contribution to the Bill and wish it well going forward. I give my commitment that we will continue to work with it in the time ahead. I say to the community that, based on our experience of the Committee process for the Bill, we see you, we hear you and we will continue to work on your behalf.

As Chair of the Committee, it is, for me, a significant and long-awaited moment for the deaf and deafblind communities, for British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language users and for all who have campaigned tirelessly over many years to see the legislation brought to fruition. I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill to the Assembly today and my colleague Carál Ní Chuilín, who was involved in the earlier stages of the Bill. At previous stages of the Bill's passage, the Committee set out its clear support for the overarching aims and principles of the legislation: to recognise, respect and promote Irish Sign Language and British Sign Language and to address the systemic barriers that are faced by those who rely on them in their daily lives.

The Bill moves beyond disability legislation, recognising that sign language is not just an accessibility tool but a core aspect of your community, culture and linguistic identity. Today, we move from intent to delivery, and that carries both opportunity and responsibility.

The Committee undertook detailed scrutiny of the Bill during Committee Stage. We engaged extensively with stakeholders, including deaf organisations, advocacy groups and deaf and deafblind people. Their contributions were invaluable. They did not simply inform our work; they shaped and strengthened it.

Members will recall that a consistent theme emerging from that evidence was the need for the Bill to be meaningful in practice. Recognition alone, while important, is not sufficient: the legislation must lead to tangible improvements in access to services, information, education and, fundamentally, participation in public life that we all take for granted. The Department's future work on extending any central system outside the public sector will be key to that. Stakeholders raised that consistently with the Committee. The Committee looks forward to seeing each Department's sign language action plan to see how duties will come to life and eagerly awaits further information on enforcement and reasonable steps within the forthcoming guidance. We also look forward to seeing a significant increase in the number of interpreters available to deliver the legislation and the specific actions that will be taken to support and enable the deafblind community.

It is important to reiterate the Committee's expectation that the reporting clause in the Bill be commenced at or within weeks of Royal Assent so that the first report about the effectiveness of the Bill is delivered five years from now and without undue delay.

It was with implementation and effectiveness in mind that the Committee developed proposals for amendments aimed at strengthening the Bill and worked with the Department, which accepted and drafted the amendments and then proposed them at Consideration Stage. The amendments included: raising to 25 the age of young people who can access sign language classes; provisions to enhance accountability; reporting mechanisms; consultation; and the level of Assembly scrutiny that will be applied going forward.

At Further Consideration Stage, the Committee reflected carefully on the Minister's amendments and the assurances that he provided. The process has undoubtedly improved the Bill and clarified its intent. Importantly, it has reinforced the need for robust implementation.

As is often the case at Final Stage, it is right to acknowledge what has been achieved and what remains to be done. The Bill represents a step forward. It is not the final destination, and its success will ultimately be judged not by words on a page but by the lived experience, going forward, of sign language users, including those who are with us here today.

The Committee is particularly mindful of the importance of co-design and ongoing engagement with the deaf community. Implementation must not be done to people; it must be done with them. That principle should guide all future action arising from the legislation.

We also emphasised the importance of adequate resourcing. Duties placed on public bodies must be matched with the capacity to deliver them effectively. Without that, there is a risk that expectations will not be met and confidence may be undermined.

I will take the opportunity to recognise the resilience and determination of the deaf community and the organisations that work on its behalf. Your advocacy has brought us to this point. Many of you have waited for a long time to see your language, culture and identity formally recognised in law. Today's debate is, in many ways, a testament to your persistence.

I acknowledge again the work of my Committee colleagues and the officials and staff right across the Assembly who supported the unique scrutiny of the Bill. Their diligence has contributed to a more informed and constructive legislative process. I also thank the departmental officials who assisted the Committee in that work.

In closing as Chair, the Committee for Communities supports the Final Stage of the Sign Language Bill. We do so with a clear expectation that its provisions will be implemented in a way that delivers real, measurable change. This is an opportunity to build a more inclusive society, one in which sign language users are not marginalised but empowered, not overlooked but recognised and not excluded but fully involved in all aspects of public life. Let us ensure that the legislation is not the end of a journey but the beginning of a meaningful process.

I will now make some brief comments as Sinn Féin spokesperson for communities. From the very beginning, the Bill has belonged to the deaf and deafblind community, and its members should be immensely proud of themselves for what they have achieved. I know that I speak for everyone in the Assembly when I say that we are extremely proud of the role that they all played.

As we sign off on the Bill here today, we should remember the long and difficult road that it took to get here, with many false starts and dashed hopes. However, through sheer grit and determination, not to mention a fair amount of patience, we have arrived at Final Stage. The origins of the Bill go way back to 2015, when my party colleague Carál Ní Chuilín was Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, and I thank her for getting the ball rolling on the Bill all those years ago.

I touched on some of the provisions of the Bill in my remarks as Chairperson, but I remind Members that, finally, Irish Sign Language and British Sign Language will be officially recognised as languages for the first time. That is a hugely symbolic achievement. The Bill will place a legal duty on the Department for Communities to promote greater use and understanding of BSL and ISL. Visibility of any language is hugely important for its development and growth, and I have found both sign languages that we have dealt with, and sign language across the world, to be beautiful, expressive languages that absolutely must be worthy of value and protection in their own right.

I think of the long history from which you have come, particularly when it comes to oralisation. Those attempts to drive the language underground have failed. It is a momentous day, as we recognise in the Chamber the legal status of the language, as well as the validity of your community and your rights.

I very much welcome the provision of free sign language classes for children and young people up to the age of 25 and their families. I welcome the addition at Consideration Stage of charged classes for adults. Public services should be accessible to everyone on the basis of full equality. The Bill places a duty on the Department to properly consult members of the deaf community in relation to the drafting of guidance and best practice documents and the development of regulations. I thank the Department for working closely with the Committee to strengthen that part of the Bill to ensure that at least two or more groups or individuals are consulted, thus cementing the principle of co-design in the Bill.

A chairde

[Translation: Friends]

, at its core, this is an equality Bill. It delivers real and tangible rights to a minority community, members of which have been victims of discrimination for far too long. The Bill will ensure that they are seen, listened to and given the space to reach their full potential and fully engage in our society. I accept that many challenges remain in delivering full equality for the deaf community, and we must continue to do everything that we can to make that a reality, but the passage of the Bill is a huge leap forward in achieving that goal, and that is certainly worth celebrating.

I not only praise but thank the deaf community. Yours has been a story of resilience and resistance, stoicism and solidarity, community and creativity. You have shown us today how we can create a better society and how inclusion, respect and rights can create a better future for us all.

[Applause.]

Mr Durkan made some of his contribution in sign language.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Today is a great day for the deaf community and for progress towards a more inclusive society that works for everyone. It represents a truly historic moment for Northern Ireland. We are leading the way as the first jurisdiction on these islands to pass a sign language Bill. The beauty of our Bill is that both British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language are valued, respected and recognised as part of the rich cultural fabric of this place.

Inclusion means access to public services on an equal footing. It is about ensuring that everyone has the opportunity that they need, be that in the classroom, at work or in their interactions with health services or other public services. That begins with the most basic tenet of the human experience: communication. For far too long, the deaf community has had to fight for the basics. Accessibility has been treated as an afterthought rather than a basic right. The Bill is the springboard for changing that, but legislation of its kind does not happen by accident; rather, it is the result of relentless campaigning, engagement and careful drafting. I record my and the SDLP's appreciation of campaigners from and for the deaf community, many of whom are in the Public Gallery. While so many people have played such a part in this, all politics is local, so I pay particular thanks to those who have been so active in the north-west. All of you deserve credit and applause.

I also thank the Minister for Communities for taking a constructive approach to the legislation. The Minister is not renowned for compromising, but he has made constructive compromises along the way in order to strengthen the Bill. I also thank the officials whose hard work has been key in bringing the Bill to its Final Stage.

The Bill will improve lives. I hope that it can mean a better future for deaf children and young people and their families. We know the importance of early access to language and how that will improve outcomes across education, employment, well-being and confidence. Today, however, as the Chair said, is not the finish line; it is the starter's pistol signalling that the race has just begun. We have a responsibility to build on the positive momentum created by the Bill. We must continue to listen, engage and break down barriers wherever they remain.

Today should be a proud day for the Assembly. At a time when politics can often if not always seem divided, the Bill shows what can be achieved when we work together: delivery for all the people whom we represent.

[Applause.]

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

Today marks an important and positive step forward for our society as we reach the Final Stage of the Communities Minister's Sign Language Bill. I join others in welcoming our guests in the Public Gallery. As a member of the Committee for Communities, I have had the privilege of being directly involved in the scrutiny and consideration of the legislation. The Committee Chair has demonstrated that he not only talked the talk but walked the walk, and I congratulate him on that. I record my sincere thanks and congratulations to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Committee and fellow Committee members past and present for the significant work that was undertaken to bring the Bill to this stage, as well as to the Committee Clerk and staff for all their hard work.

The Committee engaged extensively with stakeholders and approached its work with diligence and care to ensure that the Bill was robust and responsive to the needs of those whom it was intended to support. It is also important to recognise that the Bill delivers on a clear manifesto commitment by the Democratic Unionist Party. Therefore, I commend my colleague, the Minister for Communities, Gordon Lyons, for introducing the legislation and delivering on that commitment. That demonstrates the importance of following through promises with meaningful action.

The Bill represents real progress in addressing the long-standing gaps faced by those who use sign language as their first language. For too long, individuals in the deaf community have encountered barriers in accessing public services, education and everyday communication. The Bill is a practical and necessary step forward in improving inclusion, recognition and accessibility. While legislation alone cannot resolve every issue, it provides a strong foundation and a clear direction of travel. As we move forward, the focus must now be on effective implementation. The commitments in the Bill must translate into tangible improvements in services, better communication support and enhanced opportunities for sign language users across Northern Ireland.

Today is an important milestone for the BSL and ISL community. It reflects the work that has been done and the progress that is still to be made. The Bill sends a clear and positive message about our commitment to building a more inclusive society. I am happy to support the Bill, and I look forward to the difference that it will make in the years ahead.

[Applause.]

Ms K Armstrong made some of her contribution in sign language.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Today is a fantastic day — a fantastic day — for me and for the deaf community. Today, we will agree the Sign Language Bill. Today, Northern Ireland joins everyone else on National BSL Day in celebrating the progress of sign language. "Thank you" to all in the deaf community for your patience. It has been a hard-won battle. Today, you get legislation that will enable public services to deliver in your language. Today and from today forward, you have a lot of work to do — more work to ensure that public services live up to the action plans that you will help to create. You have enabled the Sign Language Bill. This is your victory. Thank you for all your hard work so far.

What will we see in five years' time? In five years, we hope to see every Department with an action plan that sets out how it will provide access to services in sign language when you need them. As we heard in the evidence provided to the Committee, we hope that nobody else will have to attend a health appointment without sign language, go to work and be unable to use sign language or be turned away from an employment support mechanism because there is no sign language there. Today and for the next five years, there is a lot of work to do to make sure that the action plans are right for you as a community.

The process was long in coming, but it was not so long for the Bill. I thank the Minister and his departmental colleagues for their hard work in taking the Sign Language Bill through. I also thank the Assembly. This is the first time that the Assembly has provided such an inclusive consultation period. We provided video links so that people could sign their responses to and thoughts about the Bill to us online. We provided Committee sessions with live interpretation, meaning that we could have a one-to-one discussion with someone in their language as part of our considerations. Those considerations have been reflected in the Bill, and I very much acknowledge the Minister, the Committee and the Assembly for accepting the amendments that were tabled. The amendments were not difficult, because they made the Bill the best that it could be for all of you.

As a member of the deaf community — I am hard of hearing — I do not know at which stage of my life I may have to depend on sign language. The Bill recognises that there will be an opportunity for deaf and deafblind people to access training for the time when they need to depend on sign language as their main form of communication. I welcome that.

Today is a fantastic day. It is a day that you have long waited for. It is a day that Francis Maginn long waited for. It is the day on which we say goodbye to the Milan decision and say in BSL and ISL, "Welcome to Northern Ireland, sign language". Your languages are exactly the same as all other languages. Today is a fantastic day.

[Applause.]

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

I welcome the Sign Language Bill reaching its Final Stage this afternoon. As has been said, the Bill provides formal recognition for British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language and puts in place a framework to support their greater use and improve accessibility for the deaf community across Northern Ireland. As others have highlighted, it also places duties on the Department for Communities and prescribed organisations to take steps to ensure that information and services are accessible. Like other Members, I acknowledge the work of the Minister, his officials, my Committee colleagues and the Committee staff and wider Assembly teams for their role in supporting the scrutiny and overall progression of the Bill. In particular, I recognise the engagement of the deaf community. Their input and lived experience helped shape the Bill throughout its passage.

As the Bill moves to Royal Assent, the focus must now be on implementation. That includes introducing the necessary regulations alongside guidance and action plans to support consistent delivery in practice. As I have said at previous stages, it is also essential that the Bill's measures are properly resourced and clearly understood so that they also deliver in practice.

This is a positive and important step, and we fully support the Bill.

[Applause.]