Northern Ireland Assembly, 5 May 2026

353 contributions from 62 members. The official report.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Gerry Carroll has been given leave to make a statement on the Springhill inquest findings that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. Mr Carroll has three minutes, as will all other Members who are called to speak.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The families of the Springhill massacre have waited 54 years for some recognition of the deep hurt, pain, trauma and anguish that was caused to them and the wider community. On 9 July 1972, five people, including three young people, were shot dead by the British Army: a priest, Noel Fitzpatrick; Patrick Butler, a worker at Belfast City Council and a father; Margaret Gargan, who was 13 years old; David McCafferty, who was 15 years old; and John Dougal, who was just 16 years old.

For many decades, the families had to bat away false allegations about their loved ones: about who they were and about what they did on that tragic, painful day. It was those family members who led the fight to clear their relatives' names, supported by the wider community. While the verdict from last week's inquest was welcome, it would be remiss of me not to mention the family members who did not live to see it. I pay tribute to all family members of the Springhill massacre, who have stood up for truth and justice for so many years.

It would also be remiss of me not to mention the lives hurt and the damage caused by so much killing, misery and destruction inflicted by the state 54 years ago.

The court found that the British Army soldiers were in the wrong and that they lost control: how many times has that happened in west Belfast and other communities? The inquest declared that the force used was "not reasonable". The people who were shot and killed were unarmed. People were shot as they fled for safety and tried to help their neighbours and friends. That is what the inquest found. Of course, people in Springhill, west Belfast and, indeed, across the North have known that for decades.

The verdict is primarily for the family members who lost loved ones in July 1972. I pay tribute to them for their courageous and sterling work. The verdict also shines a light on how the past is viewed in the present. We still have claims that British Army veterans are being chased into court and dragged here, there and everywhere, but there has been a dearth of prosecutions. Communities in west Belfast, north Belfast and Derry — we think of Bloody Sunday — and other working-class communities have experienced the most injustice, pain and misery. They have led the fight for —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

On Thursday, we heard the findings of the inquest on the Springhill massacre. After 54 years, families heard an acknowledgement of the truth, which was that Margaret Gargan, aged 13; David McCafferty, aged 15; John Dougal, aged 16; Paddy Butler, aged 38; and Father Noel Fitzpatrick posed no threat; in fact, they were trying to go to the aid of their community and help. The families heard that the actions of the British Army were unjustified; that control was lost; and that unreasonable and excessive force was used.

The inquest confirmed what the community and the people in Springhill and Westrock have always known: citizens were deliberately targeted and killed, and that was followed by a concerted effort from the very top to conceal the truth. I have sat in rooms with the Springhill families on many occasions, and I was honoured to sit with them in the courtroom last week. For 50 years, they have shown dignity, resilience and determination. They never gave up. They fought to have their loved ones' names vindicated, and they have done that. The verdict will not bring Margaret, David, John, Paddy or Father Noel back. It will not undo the years of loss and hurt, but it matters that the truth is heard and that those families refused to be silenced. It matters that their perseverance has brought us to this point.

The Springhill/Westrock killings stand as a stark example of the harm and brutality inflicted during the Troubles by British state forces and of the long struggle that is needed to secure accountability. The British Government's approach to legacy is disgraceful. It is an attempt to pull the shutter down on other families, close off pathways to truth and justice and shield their forces from accountability. That is not acceptable. Any legacy process or legislation has to command the full confidence of families and be article 2-compliant. Sinn Féin will oppose any shambolic legislation that gives cover and protection to state forces that have committed human rights abuses, including the murder of Irish citizens.

Families deserve better. They deserve truth; they deserve justice; and they deserve to be heard. I commend the Springhill families, who, for 54 years, stood firm, fought tooth and nail and refused to give up. Their courageous fight for truth has been inspirational for many families who have suffered at the hands of the British Army and other state actors. They kept going and cleared Margaret, David, John, Paddy and Father Noel's names.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I acknowledge the findings of the inquest last week and pay tribute to the families who persevered and fought for the truth. Every person in the country who suffered during the Troubles deserves the truth at the very least. The families have made a statement. They said:

"Each of those who died was an individual - deeply loved and still deeply missed. For us, this is not history; it is something we have lived with every day."

I recognise that, and I believe that everyone who suffered during the Troubles recognises that.

That year, 472 people lost their lives due to the violence. Whilst that was before I was born, I have served this country and put on the uniform. During the time that I served this country, I saw nothing but professionalism from our armed forces. Back in 1972, there was absolute chaos on the streets. Homes were being burned, streets were being blockaded and the army was put in an impossible situation, with armed terrorists taking potshots at them from every direction. Should we have been surprised, then, when things like this happened?

While those young people lost their lives on that day, we should also be mindful of the coercion used by the terrorists who put those young people on to the streets and into harm's way and into their terrorist organisations to raise money, to shoplift and rob and everything else that went with that, only for them to mature into gunmen. That is what we should centre on and seek justice on. It is rich of Sinn Féin and others to talk about the British Establishment, when the inquest was heard in a court of law. That is what truth looks like, while Sinn Féin and the IRA, due to a code, will not give evidence on any of the atrocities that they were part of. That speaks of hypocrisy.

Everyone who lost loved ones or said goodbye to loved ones who never returned deserves the truth. They all deserve the truth; they all deserve to hear what happened and how and why it happened. It is about time that the republican movement came out and told that truth so that all of the families affected by the Troubles can rest easy, in the assurance of knowing exactly what happened to their loved ones.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Sometimes, the least said the better, in many ways. We had a tragedy in Northern Ireland, and we still feel that tragedy today. Therefore, my heart goes out to the families of Margaret Gargan, David McCafferty, John Dougal, Patrick Butler and Father Noel Fitzpatrick. They were five innocent victims of our Troubles, and they join a long queue of innocent victims of our Troubles, none better than the one before, and all should be remembered.

We know that, in July 1972, over 100 people were killed, my uncle being one of them. There has been no inquest for him, and no statements have been made about him in the House, yet he is equal to everybody else. We all need to remember that July 1972 culminated in the Claudy bombing, where eight people were murdered, and Bloody Friday, when nine were murdered. Again, we have to remember what was going on at the time. It was an absolute tragedy, but that does not take away from the families, who deserve truth, justice and accountability. They should get that from all corners of the Chamber. Some people decide to use a murder when it happens to apply to those whom they supported during the Troubles. Until they stand up and tell what they know, we will never get to the truth.

Was the killing of those five young people wrong? Yes, of course it was, and I acknowledge what the coroner said. There is always a wider context, however, and it is a simple one: hundreds if not thousands of people were killed and injured, and there are people who know who did it and say absolutely nothing. I reiterate what I have said many times: whether you are a soldier, a policeman, a member of the public or a politician, if you break the law, you need to face the law.

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

For more than half a century, the Springhill and Westrock families have, with dignity, courage and extraordinary resilience, maintained the innocence of their loved ones and the need to clear their names and to hold the British state to account for their murders on 9 July 1972. As the previous contributor said, that month was one of the most brutal in the history of our conflict. That is why it is even more important that the forces that are given a legal monopoly on the use of force, i.e., the security forces, are held to the highest possible legal standard. Sometimes, there are those in the Chamber who want to vacillate or, at times, talk out of both sides of their mouth in relation to holding the state to account. We do not and never have, because those who have a legal monopoly on the use of force need to be held to the highest legal standards.

For more than half a century, the killings — the murders — at Springhill/Westrock have been held to a different standard, and people have been denied justice. Margaret Gargan, Patrick Butler, John Dougal, David McCafferty and Father Noel Fitzpatrick were killed that day in a way that Mr Justice Scoffield said was "not reasonable". As he also said, the army "lost control" of the situation.

Let us be clear. Not only did the Springhill/Westrock families behave with extraordinary courage and resilience, but, if the legacy plans enacted by the previous Tory Government had been brought through, this kind of inquest would have been denied not just to those families but to any family who had lost their loved ones in our conflict and wanted some measure of truth, justice and accountability via the inquest process. That is number one. The next point is that a new or replacement legacy process for people in this society who are victims and survivors of the Troubles must be human rights-compliant. It cannot pander to the worst instincts of those on the English right who simply seek to shield state forces from any kind of accountability. The Springhill/Westrock families are a credit to the community in west Belfast and to our entire society. Against the most remarkable and overwhelming odds, they have stood up for their loved ones. I stand in solidarity with them today. I and my party have nothing but respect and admiration for their courage and for the courage of all families who lost their loved ones to republican and loyalist paramilitaries and to state forces. You deserve so much better than you have received over the past half century and more.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

One of the amazing privileges of not having grown up here is that I have been shielded from so much hurt that so many people in the Chamber have experienced. I think about that quite often. When the news coverage of the inquest was going on, I kept thinking about the three teenagers. Five people were killed, but three of them were teenagers. As a mother, the idea of anything happening to my child is incomprehensible, but for your child to have been murdered and for you to then have to spend 54 years trying to find truth, answers and justice is really extraordinary.

The Springhill/Westrock families are extraordinary. On behalf of the Alliance Party, I commend the families of Margaret Gargan, John Dougal, David McCafferty, Patrick Butler and Father Noel Fitzpatrick for their bravery and dignity, and make the point that all victims have the right to pursue justice and truth. When we discuss the awful atrocities and things that happened, it is in our human nature to reflect on other examples and other hurts that we may hold. I am lucky that I do not hold those, but I am so conscious that there is so much of that in our society. If we are truly going to create a shared society, the way that we approach legacy will have a real impact on our ability to do so on the basis of truth, justice and reconciliation. This morning, my party's thoughts are very much with the families who have fought for so long, as well as with the families who are still waiting for their answers.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Many people will look at the findings of the Springhill inquest and ask, "When is my day in court?" Today, I think of the many innocent victims of republican violence who will look at some of those who sit on the Sinn Féin Benches and rightly shake their heads. Why? It is because they know — we all know — that there are individuals in Sinn Féin who could, if they chose to, bring justice for thousands of people across our Province. Their knowledge of murders, injuries and destruction would, in any society in which the rule of law is respected, put people away and ensure that they never saw the outside of a prison cell again. Sinn Féin pontificates about justice, lectures us about truth and feigns sympathy for those who have lost loved ones, but that sympathy is very selective.

Today, I hear another voice; that which is spoken of in Genesis 4, where God says:

"The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground."

I say this to republicans: you may be interested in the findings of the court last week, but there is a higher court, before which you and all those who take innocent life will stand one day. The loss of any innocent life was wrong and is wrong. Sadly, there are those sitting in the Chamber who cannot say the same.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

The Springhill inquest findings are clear: five innocent civilians lost their lives. Everyone in the House should note that. The tragedy facing many families across Northern Ireland is not dissimilar from that faced by the families of Springhill: they lost their loved ones in some of the darkest days of Northern Ireland's Troubles. I can say that without equivocation. I know many families, including some of my wider family members, who feel that loss today.

There is an attempt by many to characterise every member of the armed forces who served in Northern Ireland in difficult times as evil, corrupt and barbaric. That could not be further from the truth. So many of them served with distinction and put their life on the line to protect civilians, regardless of their political opinion. That does not excuse the actions of some, and, where there are appropriate means, they should be held accountable, but let us be real: there are huge double standards, and there is huge hypocrisy, when debating the issue in the Chamber. In Northern Ireland, 1972 was a barbaric year: over 400 people lost their lives in the Troubles, including many security service personnel. The double standards from Sinn Féin about that period are clear. We are told by the party opposite that there should be accountability, truth and transparency. When I attended the inquest into the killing of 10 innocent Protestant workmen at Kingsmills, I heard the coroner state that Sinn Féin refused to take part in that inquest, but yet it has the brass neck to try to say in the Chamber today that everybody else was wrong and it was right.

A gun that was used in the attack at Kingsmills was also used by Raymond McCreesh later in the 1970s. How has republicanism presented Raymond McCreesh? It named a play park after him. That proposal was supported by the SDLP. If we are going to debate and reflect on the legacy of the past, let us be truthful, let us not spin things, and let us remember that many people who served in this country did so to protect innocent life —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— from terrorism.

Members' Statements

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Today, on the International Day of the Midwife, I recognise the extraordinary contribution that midwives here in the North make for women, babies and families. Our midwives are there at some of the most significant and vulnerable moments in people's lives. Their compassion, expertise and calm presence provide reassurance and care to expectant mothers when it matters most.

This year's global theme, "One million more midwives", is both a celebration and a call to action. It reflects a clear and urgent reality. Across the world, there are not enough midwives to meet the needs of women and babies, and that global message resonates strongly here in the North. While we are fortunate to have highly skilled and dedicated midwives, they are working in a system that is under significant pressure.

The North remains the only part of these islands without a maternity strategy. The Renfrew report, commissioned by the Department of Health and published in 2024, sets out clear evidence that maternity and midwifery services require a regional, coordinated five-year plan. It highlights the difficult experiences faced by many women throughout pregnancy, labour, birth and the postnatal period; experiences that have affected their physical and mental health, their well-being and their early relationship with their baby. Despite the strength of those findings, progress on implementing the report's core recommendations has not yet begun. Yet, in the face of those challenges, our midwives continue to deliver safe, compassionate care every day. They do so while managing increasing pressures, staffing shortages and rising complexity in the needs of women and babies. Their commitment ensures that families receive the support that they need, even when the system around them is under strain. Recognising the work of midwives today is also a reminder of the need to strengthen the services that they rely on by improving working conditions, investing in safe staffing and ensuring that every woman and baby receives the standard of care that they deserve.

As part of recognising midwives, I want to highlight an event that is taking place this weekend. On Saturday 9 May, there will be a special Stormont parkrun, here on the grounds. It is a wonderful opportunity for midwives, their families, colleagues and supporters to come together to get active and show appreciation for the profession. I hope to be kitted out and show my support to our midwives and the incredible work that they do. On International Day of the Midwife, let us celebrate their dedication, acknowledge the challenges that they face and commit to delivering the change that women, babies, families and midwives themselves deserve.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Reference has been made today to one inquiry, and I want to talk about a different inquiry: the inquiry into the Omagh bomb, which detonated in August 1998. Of course, we heard over the weekend about some of the officers who were affected by that and about how they are going to withdraw from the inquiry. I fully agree with them, and I support them wholeheartedly. Over the years, the PSNI has had difficulty in supporting its officers whilst in service, but now we have heard of the recent suicide of a man, a former police officer, who had been called to give evidence to the inquiry.

A number of weeks ago, I travelled to Omagh to meet representatives of Military and Police Support of West Tyrone (MAPS). I saw the work that that organisation does on a voluntary basis for the community of Omagh and beyond. I believe that it covers all of Northern Ireland because its services are so important and so vital to so many. During my time there, I walked around Omagh, and I have to admit that I had not been there since the atrocity. The gentleman who took me on that walk was one of the police officers who was there to serve and protect our community. He walked me through the street that day, and I felt as if it was 1998. You could see the horror on his face. He could show me where the dead bodies lay and where people were placed — every aspect of that bomb. Twenty-eight years later, that man is living it as if it was today.

Of course, I think of the barbarity of the actions of those who were responsible for that bomb. We heard in another debate today that some blame state forces, and I think that there is a fear in the police and among others that there will be finger-pointing in relation to the inquiry. Of course, I do not want to stray into that. However, let us be very clear. Those who are responsible are those who planted the bomb and detonated that bomb on that day. One thing is sure: I stand and my party colleagues stand with the retired officers until — not before — adequate trauma support is given to the officers who are being asked to give evidence at the inquiry.

It is important that we do not continue to re-traumatise those men and women, who were out to protect us. It is important that they give evidence but only when they are given adequate trauma support and the necessary counselling for what they witnessed, which they are having to revisit.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Last week, I attended an event titled 'The Mournes: Building a Sustainable Future' that looked at how uplands and the regional asset that is the Mournes can be looked after and at the agencies that do so. It was impossible for me not to reflect on the recent wildfires — the landscape arson — that continued up until the end of last week. We were thankful for the rains that came.

It is hard to convey the amount of damage that is being done to our upland areas. In a fire in 2021, over 90% of the invertebrates on Slieve Donard were lost. Five years later, 90% of the invertebrates on that hillside are still lost. The effect that that has had on the wildlife and ecosystems in our upland areas is hard to quantify. There may be a small positive. I was sent a video of the rare common lizard, but how will that little lizard — such a rare example of wildlife — survive in our upland areas following the removal of so many invertebrates? When the fires have burnt out, the land may flash up green after a few weeks and people will say, "It's not so bad looking any more. It's all nice and green", but it is just more flammable and combustible material, which makes it even more likely that, when they happen again, the wildfires will race through the land.

The fires are deliberate actions. Whether it is somebody deliberately setting a fire or somebody lighting a barbecue or a cigarette, after which negligence takes over, such fires all start with a deliberate action. If we want to see change and prevent such incidents, we must do all that we can to report anything suspicious. Only then will we be able to build a picture of what is happening.

The objectives of the wildfires action plan from the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and Minister Muir are prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and enforcement. Only when those objectives are enacted and given time will we really see a difference in our upland landscape.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Last Wednesday was a special day for Enniskillen. On 29 April, the Minister of Education announced funding for a new build for Enniskillen Royal Grammar School. On the same day, a blue plaque was unveiled in honour of James Gamble, the man from Enniskillen who went on to co-found Procter and Gamble, one of the biggest companies in the world. That is no small thing.

That is Enniskillen's story in one day, and it got me thinking about what Portora Royal School and Enniskillen Collegiate Grammar School — Enniskillen Royal Grammar School as they are today — have given to the world. Between them, they have produced truly remarkable people. Oscar Wilde walked the halls of Portora, as did Samuel Beckett, and they are two of the greatest writers that the English language has ever known. Neil Hannon, the singer and founder of the Divine Comedy, is another Portora man. Dr Denis Burkitt, who identified Burkitt's lymphoma and changed the lives of countless children across the world, was educated there too. In sport, Jimmy McCoy wore the green jersey of Ireland in rugby from1984 to 1989, winning 16 caps and playing in the Rugby World Cup. The sporting tradition runs deep. Today, the school's rowing club is one of the best in the UK and Ireland, with two Olympic coaches leading the next generation on the waters of Lough Erne.

Enniskillen Collegiate Grammar, as the first girls' grammar school to be built by a public body anywhere in Northern Ireland, has its own special place in history. That alone tells us something about the ambition for and belief in young women that the town has always had. In 2016, Portora Royal School and Enniskillen Collegiate Grammar School came together to form Enniskillen Royal Grammar School. The students who walk through its doors today are the heirs to all that history.

Those are not lucky accidents: those young people were given a chance, teachers who believed in them and schools that opened doors for them. That is the point that I want to make. The funding announced last week matters not just as bricks and mortar but as a promise to the next generation. Somewhere in Enniskillen right now there is a child who could be the next great writer, the next rugby international or the next James Gamble. What we owe that child is simple: we owe them a great school, teachers and staff who are supported and a building fit for learning.

Last week showed us that Enniskillen remembers where it came from. The blue plaque for James Gamble is a mark of pride in our past, and the new school funding is a mark of belief in our future. I welcome both and ask the Assembly to keep believing in what such schools can do, because history tells us that their results can be truly remarkable.

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

I wish to say a few words about two young men who make us stop, think and put everything into perspective. Jordan and Cian Adams, two young brothers, also known as the "FTD brothers", are running 32 marathons in 32 days across Ireland — last week, they ran through my constituency — to raise money for frontotemporal dementia, the illness that took their mother, Geraldine, at the age of 52. Jordan Adams also recently finished the London marathon with a fridge weighing 25 kg on his back, which is just remarkable.

Despite being young men in their late 20s and early 30s, sadly, they found out the devastating news that they also carry the gene that means that, having lost 12 relatives, they, too, are almost certain to develop this form of dementia. That is hard to comprehend, which brings me to the point that I am raising in the Assembly. Right now, there are almost 1 million people across these islands who live with dementia, and that number is only going one way — sadly, upwards — which is why those young men have taken it on themselves to raise awareness and funds for research to end this horrific condition. They have raised almost £150,000, which is just incredible.

This form of dementia is rare, under-researched and often misunderstood. The brothers said, on finding out their diagnosis, that they have 10 to 15 years, and then they will be stripped of everything. That is absolutely devastating, given that they are so young; they know what the future looks like and what lies ahead.

I feel strongly that this has to change. I put on record a "Well done" to Cian and Jordan, who have turned something that is deeply personal into something very powerful. Conditions like frontotemporal dementia affect the whole family. It is life-altering and life-ruining. Thanks to Cian and Jordan, citizens and politicians like us across these islands have learnt about frontotemporal dementia: the signs, the symptoms, the importance of fundraising and, of course, the urgent need to find a cure. Today, the Assembly says, "Well done and thank you so much for teaching us more about the diagnosis".

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Seolfar tionscadal taighde in Ollscoil na Banríona inniu, dar teideal Éire aontaithe: Deis chlaochlaitheach don Ghaeilge agus don Ghaeltacht. Tharla go bhfuil práinn agus fuinneamh leis an díospóireacht ar athaontú na hÉireann, tá tábhacht ar leith le tionscadail taighde den chineál sin, nó is ar a leithéid de thaighde a thógfar an Éire nua.

Tá an tionscadal taighde seo thar a bheith ábhartha, nó chíonn muid an bealach a bhfuil an Ghaeilge ag dul agus go bhfuil an Ghaelscolaíocht ag fás léi. Lena chois sin, is léir ó fhigiúirí an daonáirimh an méadú atá ag teacht ar líon na nGaelgeoirí ar fud an oileáin. Tá ár dteanga ag dul chun cinn in ainneoin na n-ionsaithe atá á ndéanamh uirthi sna Sé Chontae agus sa tSeomra seo, in ainneoin an bhéalghrá a thugtar di sna Sé Chontae is Fiche agus in ainneoin ghéarchéim na nGaeltachtaí. Tá pobal na Gaeilge ag fás leis, agus tá fuinneamh agus dóchas ann. Ina theannta sin, tá sé réidh le páirt a ghlacadh sa díospóireacht ar an athrú bhunreachtúil ar an oileán seo. Molaim Róisín as dul i gceann an taighde seo agus as a chur i gcrích. Tá mé ag dúil go mór leis an tuairisc a léamh agus leis na torthaí a phlé.

Is linn uilig an teanga. Ceanglaíonn sí den tír muid, ó thaobh staire agus cultúir de, inár logainmneacha agus inár sloinnte. Cruthaíonn sí an domhan mórthimpeall orainn. Mhúnlaigh an Ghaeilge an stair againn; tá an saol san am i láthair á mhúnlú aici, agus déanfaidh sí amhlaidh san am atá romhainn. Is linne uilig an Ghaeilge. Is linne uilig Éire nua athaontaithe.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Last week, the Education Minister, Paul Givan, announced that four new-build major works projects and nine school enhancement projects would progress to construction stage. The four major works projects are Enniskillen Royal Grammar School; Priory Integrated College, Holywood; St Malachy's Primary School, Armagh; and Dunclug College, Ballymena. Those projects have been in planning for a significant number of years, and I am so glad that the Education Minister, Paul Givan — a Minister who continually delivers — was able to advance them.

Knowing where we sat with regard to Dunclug College, I knew that it was vital to get the Education Minister to Dunclug to see for himself the excellent facility that is Dunclug and the talented pupils who are educated at that school in Ballymena. Irrespective of my really good lobbying skills, the school sold itself. The pupils put on a display for the Education Minister that was second to none. I know that the Minister went away knowing that he made the right decision in progressing Dunclug College in Ballymena through the major works programme.

It is vital for Dunclug — for that area, Ballymena — and for pupils, families, parents and everyone connected with education that the school builds progress. However, we should not stop there. I am glad to say that the Education Minister is not content to stop there: he wants to push on. He wants more capital in order to bring forward more school-build projects across the Province. The Finance Minister, the Executive and the Assembly should support the Education Minister, who is delivering for education, for our children and for Dunclug.

I have a list of schools that the Education Minister should go to throughout North Antrim that need new builds and better facilities, but we have made a start. I am glad that the Education Minister is from my party and that we are able to progress those projects. I wish that the Executive and the Assembly would support him more, because we have in him a Minister who is delivering, who set down a marker by saying that he would progress education in this country and who has done so.

I thank Paul Givan, the Education Minister, for his work on Dunclug, for coming to see the talent on display in that school and for the new build that Dunclug will surely get now.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I will highlight an issue that impacts unfairly on families across Northern Ireland who are denied access to vital childcare support. Tax-free childcare is aligned to the English school year, which means that, in Northern Ireland, children born in July and August can miss out on up to a full year of support during their final year of primary school.

That is not the only impact. To access the Northern Ireland childcare subsidy scheme, parents must be in receipt of tax-free childcare, so the parents who are impacted on are hit twice. That is an untenable position at a time when childcare costs remain high and families are in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis.

I raised the matter at the Education Committee and directly with the Finance Minister. I will continue to press the UK Government to address that clear inequality. I call on the Education Minister to look at how families who are excluded from tax-free childcare by that administrative anomaly in Westminster can at least be brought into the Northern Ireland childcare subsidy scheme.

At a time when families are struggling, our Ministers, who have the power to act and make a difference to the cost that families pay, should do just that.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will raise the issue of the collapse of the Place-Name Project on the watch of the Minister for Communities. Continued funding of £90,000 per annum for that project would mean only a fraction of the funding that the Minister has announced for his pet projects. He is a Minister who can spend over £700,000 on musical instruments for marching bands; a further £100,000 to cover bands' travel expenses; £425,000 on American independence celebrations; and £40,000 on Belfast Orangefest

[Interruption.]

Shamefully, the Members opposite cheer those partisan funding allocations.

Instead of promoting the Irish language, the Minister has embroiled himself in multiple court cases on Irish language signage in Grand Central station and in the Belfast City Council area, which recently failed. He has removed Irish language logos from his Department's branding, blocked increased funding for the Irish language, failed to bring forward an Irish language strategy and failed to support the key Place-Name Project. The Minister has tried again today to claim that it is not his responsibility, and, once again, he has failed. The fact that it is his responsibility is evidenced not only by his letter to me in April but by a letter from his Department in 2022 accepting that he is responsible for funding it. The Minister's strategy is not to promote or to develop the Irish language. Instead, he seeks to suppress it and to make it invisible. He will also fail in that.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Once again, a crisis in domiciliary care is being talked about in the news cycle. This time, an independent provider is saying that it will withdraw services in rural areas. I wish that I could say that this is a new crisis, but it is part of a continuing crisis that, I am sad to say, the Minister has refused to address. No action has been taken on this issue, despite many promises having been given. In many ways, that is symptomatic of the way in which the Health Department works: refusing to address issues that are of primary concern to our constituents across Northern Ireland. Sadly, the impact of that failure will be felt by the most vulnerable in our community, including the disabled and the elderly. That is particularly the case in rural areas, where it is very difficult to find those additional care packages.

Not only is it a failure to look after our most vulnerable but it puts enormous stress on families across Northern Ireland. I am sure that I am no different from any other MLA across the Chamber in receiving many emails about this issue in any given week. The statement from the care sector that it may have to withdraw services in rural areas is heartbreaking for those who deliver the care. They do the job not for the money or the glory but because they care about their patients, their community and the elderly within it. Last year, the Minister made promises to deliver the real living wage to the domiciliary care sector. Unfortunately, we have not yet seen that done. That is a signal failure. The crisis has been exacerbated by the rise in fuel prices. We need to see the trusts in particular address the issue. I have had a number of representations from domiciliary care workers who simply state that it is impossible to go to work because the cost of doing so is exorbitant.

This morning's news about the Southern Trust is very concerning. I will be meeting domiciliary care workers from the Southern Trust shortly. They talk about a reduction in time spent with clients, a reduction in the number of —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

Sorry. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

The scale and duration of violence during the Troubles demands not only remembrance but rigorous examination. Regrettably, that examination has been lopsided. All violence was wrong, but, too often, history has been rewritten north of the border and untold south of the border. For more than two decades, over 10,000 explosive devices were deployed across Northern Ireland and Great Britain, mainly by the Provisional IRA. That bombing campaign destroyed infrastructure, cost billions of pounds and destroyed lives. The question of who armed the Provisional IRA before Semtex arrived from Libya has never been asked. Evidence presented at Westminster and the Houses of the Oireachtas over many years has pointed to the loss, theft and diversion of commercial-grade explosives from a factory in the Irish Republic. The concerns were not isolated; they were raised repeatedly. However, no action was taken on the loss of explosive material from that factory.

A former colleague of mine has spent years researching evidential and archival material from the 1970s and 1980s, and it shows that a very substantial proportion of the high explosives that were in the hands of the IRA and that were recovered by the security forces from either undetonated devices or searches originated from a single source: the Irish Industrial Explosives facility in Enfield, County Meath. The security forces in Northern Ireland have been accused of collusion simply for missing a piece of intelligence or not having the opportunity to interview one witness, yet, over many years, tons of commercial explosives from a factory in the Republic of Ireland end up in the murderous hands of the IRA. That issue was raised multiple times, and little or no action was taken. Why is that? The scale of the leak of explosives is vast. In 1973, 1974 and 1982, it is clear, if you review Hansard, that all gelignite recovered by the security forces emanated from that factory in the Republic of Ireland.

This is a matter of profound public importance. It goes to the heart of how the IRA sustained its bombing campaign. Our victims need the truth. Human rights lawyers have used endless inquiries that have lined the pockets of a small number of solicitors in Northern Ireland, yet Dublin has not instigated any inquiry into those bombs that originated from the Irish Republic. The UK Government's handling of legacy has been disgraceful. They have allowed history to be rewritten; they have allowed terrorists to turn the tables on the honourable men who served; they have been led by the Dublin Government; and they have had rings run round them by republican lawfare. I now ask that the Government take steps to find out why explosives came from Irish Industrial Explosives without checks.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

It is with great pleasure today that I offer my heartfelt congratulations to Coleraine FC on a truly magnificent achievement on Saturday, as it won its seventh Irish Cup after a thrilling 3-2 win over Dungannon Swifts. That was made all the more important given the way in which Dungannon played under the management of Rodney McAree. It was a fantastic final — one of the best that I have seen in many years. This was not just a win; it was a statement and a showcase of resilience, quality and belief. To come through such a competitive final and emerge victorious speaks volumes about the character of the squad.

Credit must go, first and foremost, to Henry Ross, Ranald and Patrick, the club shareholders; Dale Pryde-MacDonald, whose leadership as CEO has helped to guide the club with clarity and ambition; and manager Ruaidhrí Higgins and his backroom staff, whose technical acumen, preparation and commitment have been evident in every performance. To the players, what a journey you have delivered for the fans: runners-up in the league and Irish Cup winners. The run-in to the season after the split has been nothing short of exceptional. Week after week, you have treated supporters to some of the most entertaining football for many's a day at the Showgrounds.

The attacking intent, cohesion and spirit have re-energised the club and supporters alike. The triumph feels especially significant as we look ahead to next year, with the centenary of Coleraine Football Club's acceptance into the Irish League in 1927. Born from an amalgamation of Coleraine Olympic and Coleraine Alexandra, the club has grown into a cornerstone of Northern Ireland football. To mark that milestone on the back of cup success feels both fitting and symbolic. Today, we celebrate not just a victory but a legacy — past, present and future.

I pay a personal tribute to big Colin and the patrons of Patsy's Bar in the town for their personal messages of support over the past week. I had to get that in, Mr Speaker.

[Laughter.]

Once again, congratulations to everyone connected to Coleraine Football Club. You have done your town proud.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I, too, recognise what was truly a special moment at the weekend, as Coleraine Football Club lifted the Irish Cup following a thrilling final against Dungannon Swifts. More than 11,000 supporters from both clubs travelled to Windsor Park, creating an atmosphere that reflected the very best of our local game. Dungannon Swifts deserve real credit for their part in that occasion, both on the pitch and in the stands.

This is about more than just a great result. In the weeks leading up to the final, you could feel something building right across Coleraine. The blue and white army was out in force. There were flags on the lamp posts and in windows, and businesses proudly showed their support. The support was everywhere, and it spoke to a town coming together behind something that belongs to them. For those of us who are Bannsiders, the connection runs deep. It is about identity as much as football. It is about the club that we grew up with, stand by and feel part of through the highs and the lows. That was clear in the stands: the support was constant, loud and fully behind the team from the start to the finish. There was a real sense that the players were carrying an entire town with them.

Coleraine FC fans are exceptional. Week after week, they turn out in numbers that rival and often exceed some of the bigger clubs in Belfast. Anyone who has stood in the Showgrounds on a Saturday afternoon knows exactly what the club means to people, and that matters more when we recognise where the club is based. Coleraine Football Club sits in one of the most socially deprived areas of Northern Ireland, yet it brings something incredibly positive into that space. It brings joy, pride and opportunity, not just in one area but across the town and the wider north-west. Our success comes on the back of a strong league campaign, where we finished as the runners-up, and it is a team that is clearly on an upward trajectory. It is Coleraine's seventh Irish Cup, and the first since 2018, which makes the moment all the more meaningful. I pay tribute to Ruaidhrí Higgins because it has been an incredibly difficult time in his personal life, yet he has led his team to silverware in his first year in charge, and that speaks to the resilience and belief that he has built in the squad.

There is real opportunity in what Coleraine FC is building. It is a club on the rise. We are going to Europe, and the team has a strong community behind it and a proven ability to deliver success. The team will take it as far as it can, but it cannot do it alone. We need to see more consistent investment in local sport. Too often, funding feels like it is concentrated in the same spaces, where clubs such as Coleraine, despite their success and community impact, are left trying to bridge the gap themselves. If we are serious about growing our game, supporting our communities and building on success, the investment needs to be spread more fairly. This is not just about one club; it is about what clubs such as Coleraine represent right across Northern Ireland. I am mindful that the Minister for Communities knows both clubs well. I hope that he will recognise the opportunity here and consider how we can better support them going forward.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Nick Mathison has sought leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

I am grateful for the opportunity to present the petition to the Assembly today. Members may not be familiar with the village of Drumaness; it is a very small rural community that is just past Ballynahinch in my constituency. I carried out a constituency surgery in Drumaness just before Christmas and received feedback that there was real concern in the community about the safety of the bus stops as you leave the village and head towards the A24 to Newcastle and Ballynahinch, particularly because schoolchildren have to cross a 40 mph road in the winter months, with no street lighting to access their school buses. It is simply not safe. When I spoke to residents — I knocked on lots of doors to highlight the petition calling for street lighting to be installed — the support in the village was unanimous.

There are only a few hundred houses in Drumaness, but we have 321 signatures from residents who support the installation of street lighting at the bus stops on that road. It is a simple matter of basic road safety. I am sure that all Members have received correspondence from the Infrastructure Minister when requests like this are submitted, and policy is often quoted about frontage development not being present on both sides of the road. The residents of Drumaness are very clear that the lack of frontage development has no bearing on the safety of their children and young people who cross that road in the winter months to access school transport. There is no objective way to defend asking children to cross a road in complete darkness just so that they can get to school.

I hope that the Minister will listen to the calls. The petition is very simple; we are not asking for street lights along the whole length of the A24. I completely accept that it is a rural road and full lighting would not be appropriate, but if we expect our children to use those bus stops every day, they should be lit and safe so that the children can access school transport without being concerned about drivers coming down the road at 40 mph, or in excess of that, as they try to access public transport. I trust that the Minister has some discretion that she can exercise. The residents of Drumaness will be watching very closely to see how she responds to the request for street lighting to be installed at a key location in their community.

Mr Mathison moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I will forward the petition to the Minister for Infrastructure and send a copy to the Committee for Infrastructure.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Last Tuesday, during the debate on the motion on NHS dentistry, I pointed out that the Irish Sea border will create further complexity for the supply and cost of dental amalgam. In his response to the debate, Mr Nesbitt told the House that I was "entirely wrong". He said:

"It is UK-wide, following an international agreement. I am happy to put that correction on the record." — [Official Report (Hansard), 28 April 2026, p63, col 1].

Well, well, Mr Nesbitt. The Government's own explanatory memorandum to the Control —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Gaston, you requested to make a point of order.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I did indeed, Mr Speaker.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Will you therefore make a point of order?

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Absolutely.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

You are making a statement, and it will not be tolerated.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

To back up what I said during the debate, the Government's own explanatory memorandum to the Control of Mercury (Enforcement) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 makes clear that the EU mercury regulations apply directly in Northern Ireland under the terms of the Windsor framework.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I trust, Mr Speaker, that —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order, Mr Gaston. Order.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— you will call the Minister of Health to the House to correct the record.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. If you want to make the case that Mr Nesbitt has misled the House, you can do so, but we do not need a whole speech and drama about it. You can make your case, but we will not have a whole speech about something that should take about 30 seconds to raise.

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

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

Ministerial Statement

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I have received notice from the Minister of Justice that she wishes to make a statement. Before I call the Minister, I remind Members that they must be concise in asking their questions. This is not an opportunity for debate, and long introductions will not be allowed. Minister, over to you.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. We all know the name "Katie Simpson". Regrettably, we do so because of her senseless, untimely and tragic death. We also know the name "Jonathan Creswell", a convicted abuser and the man charged with Katie's rape and murder, who was found dead at home on the second day of his criminal trial. Moreover, we know that many individuals raised concerns about the circumstances surrounding Katie's death and the investigation that followed.??I thank all those individuals for their moral integrity, their bravery in coming forward?and their persistence. They fought to?give?Katie a voice. As a society, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the publication of the report of the independent review that I commissioned into Katie's death. I commissioned the review to seek to understand what can be done at the earliest stages to identify and manage serious offenders and to identify and protect potential victims. The independent review was undertaken by Dr Jan Melia, and I thank and commend Dr Melia for the integrity, sensitivity and thoroughness that she brought to the work.

I also pay tribute to Katie's family. Their lives changed irrevocably when Katie died. We cannot imagine the pain or magnitude of their loss, but we witnessed their courage and determination to seek answers to ensure that Katie's death was not in vain.

Before I continue, I ask Members to pause and remember Katie: a beautiful, talented and innocent young woman whose memory lives on among those who knew and loved her.

[Pause.]

I publish the report today in the alarming knowledge that, since 2020, 30 women have been violently killed in Northern Ireland. Murder is the ultimate manifestation of domestic and sexual violence and abuse. All abuse is reprehensible, but it is pervasive in all its forms and across all walks of life in Northern Ireland. We must therefore be relentless in our condemnation of that behaviour, and we must support victims by giving them the protection that they need to live safely and without fear. As politicians, our responsibility is to compel, facilitate and deliver tangible change.

Too often, in reviews such as this, the personal story can be overshadowed by the necessary focus on external systems and procedures. However, Dr Melia's report very much keeps Katie and her family front and centre. It was a bespoke review without the legislative underpinning of a domestic homicide review or a public protection arrangements Northern Ireland (PPANI) serious case review. However, my Department and, indeed, the Executive are committed to tackling abuse and ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG). As such,?I had to find a way to look into this case for Katie's sake and to ensure that systems change, attitudes change and we all get better at preventing harm, protecting the vulnerable and avoiding the circumstances that led to Katie's untimely death. At the outset of the work, I received a commitment to fully cooperate with the independent reviewer from the senior leaders of a range of relevant organisations. I am grateful to them for their active participation and candour throughout.

With the endorsement of Katie's family, the report is published today in its entirety. I urge everyone to take the time to read it and to reflect on the missed opportunities, both for Katie and the agencies that encountered her and her abuser over many years. It makes for uncomfortable reading, but that transparency is vital.

I ask Members and the general public to consider whether anything in the report resonates with their lives or the lives of people they know. If the answer is yes, please take that first step and reach out to someone you trust and can talk to. If you do not have that trusted person, then please make contact with professional services and organisations.

In anticipation that the publication of the report may trigger distress for victims and survivors, I have asked my Department to engage proactively with support services to ensure that they are prepared for an increase in requests for help. Anyone in immediate danger should always contact the police, without delay.

The message that I hear often from victims’ representatives is that we must not shy away from difficult conversations. That is a simple but critically important point. For too long, abuse has been allowed to thrive in the shadows that are created by fear, silence, stigma and control. We need to shine a light into those shadows. We need to remove the stigma, and we need to speak openly and honestly about abuse. Avoiding those conversations does not protect victims: it entrenches harm.

The lives of Katie's family and those who loved her have been tainted and irreversibly impacted on by what happened. The only way that we can truly pay tribute to Katie’s memory is to learn the lessons from the circumstances that led to and, ultimately, resulted in Katie's untimely death. The only good that can possibly come from this tragic loss is if others are better protected from such harm in the future.

I turn now to the report itself. Dr Melia sets out, in stark and uncompromising detail, what went wrong. The review, however, is not about focusing on individual practices or apportioning blame. Its fundamental purpose is to instigate collective, system-wide learning and to implement change. I also welcome the fact that the review’s report will help inform the ongoing Coroner’s Court inquest into Katie's death.

There are 16 detailed recommendations codified in a proposed action plan. In testament to Katie’s memory and her family, we must give that action plan our undivided attention without delay. I am therefore pleased to announce that Dr Melia will coordinate and chair an implementation group. That will provide much-needed continuity, which I welcome. I also hope that it provides assurance to Katie's family and friends that the action plan will be actioned. I call on the relevant agencies and organisations to fully support and cooperate with Dr Melia in that process.

The majority of the 16 recommendations are policing-focused, and the PSNI has made a number of recommendations as part of the review. Lessons from Katie's death, however, are not confined to the criminal justice arena, so there is no hierarchy of importance.

I wish to emphasise the six critical areas that Dr Melia identified for intervention. There is much room for improvement. Katie’s death was concealed and staged as suicide, and it is abundantly clear that investigative practices and mindsets must change.

In the Chamber today, I will highlight just some of Dr Melia’s detailed recommendations. In policing, coercive control must be recognised as a serious and potentially lethal factor. Patterns of behaviour, not isolated incidents, must drive assessments of risk. The review provides a clear framework, including six new indicators of concealed homicide, which should be embedded across sudden death investigations and specialist training. There, too, is a clear need to develop mandatory use of trauma-informed, victim-centred investigative models. Information about Katie was missing from the case. Suspicious death and suicide investigations should therefore include comprehensive victim profiling. Relatedly, we must seek to combat cognitive bias and confirmation bias. Police officers need to be fully trained to recognise and challenge gendered stereotypes or victim-blaming narratives. A lack of trust in victims and poor investigations empower perpetrators such as Jonathan Creswell. That also extends to forensic investigation standards in all sudden or unexplained deaths. Forensic protocols should reflect trauma-informed and gender-sensitive practices and require pathologists to consider coercive control and staged suicide as part of their analysis.

The absence of specialist domestic abuse input at the earliest stages of Katie’s investigation was also a critical failing. The review is clear: specialist domestic abuse officers must be involved from day one wherever there is any history of violence within a family. We must ensure that expertise is shared, not siloed. Police team coordination and case ownership must also improve. In Katie’s case, the investigation was passed between departments without a designated lead, causing confusion and delays. That lack of ownership contributed to missed opportunities and a failure to act on known risks.

In her recommendations, Dr Melia also sets out that, in cases involving allegations of violence, coercive control or intimate partner abuse, bail conditions must focus on the safety of victims and their families. It is a matter for policing and the judiciary as to the granting and setting of bail conditions. However, I implore decision-makers to recognise the importance of incorporating coercive control risk indicators and including victim/family consultation when making bail decisions.

I also welcome the recommendation relating to risk assessment in PPANI, specifically the need for recognising coercive control as a continuing risk even in the absence of a current relationship.

I mentioned earlier that the lessons from Katie’s case also extend beyond the sphere of criminal justice. We are all aware of the sustained pressure on our emergency departments, but recommendation 14 is a critical learning point, and that is to:

"Ensure that all emergency department (A&E) attendances involving physical injury prompt safeguarding considerations, particularly where domestic abuse is suspected or could be a contributing factor, or where there are multiple presentations."

The equestrian industry was also central to Katie’s young life. Recommendation 16 makes clear the need to:

"Introduce mandatory safeguarding policies, training, and vetting across all equestrian facilities, including unaffiliated stables."

It is of great concern to me that, as I stand in the Chamber today, there may be other young girls or women unknowingly vulnerable or already subject to predatory and secretive abuse.

That brings me to reflect on a final recommendation, perhaps most fundamental of all, which is to develop and broaden Northern Ireland-wide campaigns on coercive control to include suicide and homicide. It is absolutely imperative that we educate all our citizens on coercive control, in all its forms and potency.

I conclude the statement today with a clear message. My Department and our partners will act on the recommendations contained in Dr Melia’s report and ensure that lessons are not simply learned but embedded in practice. I do not underestimate the scale of the task. However, the work will be led by Dr Melia, and, therefore, I can confidently say that it will be in very capable hands.

I must also take this opportunity to remind Members of the domestic and sexual abuse strategy 2024-2031, led by my Department and the Department of Health. The initial three-year action plan contains 56 actions, which is a resounding reminder of how much work is yet to be done.

The Executive's strategy on ending violence against women and girls has now entered its second delivery phase. Both strategies quite rightly demand that the Executive work collaboratively and tenaciously to deliver on those many commitments. We must do so in Katie’s memory. We must do so in memory of all victims before and after Katie’s death. We must do so to reduce harm and save lives. I commend the report to the Assembly.

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

Members in the Chamber will particularly be remembering and thinking about Katie Simpson and will want to extend our sincerest sympathy and thoughts to her family and friends, some of whom are with us today. Minister, what robust protocols will be put in place to ensure that there is full accountability for police officers where investigations have been poorly conducted, such as the investigations into the abuse and murder of Katie Simpson?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I pay tribute to the family of Katie Simpson and to the many people, friends and colleagues who loved her and have campaigned for justice on her behalf. The Member is right to pay tribute to them at the beginning of this.

It is important that the report is recognised for what it is. I was clear when I initiated it that it would not hold individuals to account. The Member will be aware that there is still an ongoing inquest, and the report does not cut across that. Police Ombudsman investigations also remain open at this time. It is important that, before we discuss issues around direct accountability, we allow those processes to conclude, but I agree with the Member in principle that those who failed Katie and, indeed, other victims should be held accountable for those failures.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement on this important issue. Like her, I pay tribute to Katie Simpson's family and everyone who loved her and knew her as a friend. The Minister has welcomed the recommendation for risk assessment within PPANI arrangements and:

"specifically the need for recognising coercive control as a continuing risk".

However, Jonathan Creswell was never referred to PPANI, and the review was to consider whether there had been opportunities for referral. What did the review determine about why he was never referred to PPANI, and what specific recommendations have been made about when it may be appropriate to refer such an offender to PPANI to help to prevent similar tragic cases in the future? Similarly, the review was to consider whether there had been opportunities for referral to the multi-agency risk assessment conferences (MARAC) process, given that Katie had presented to hospital with Creswell on a number of occasions. What were the review's findings and recommendations on that matter?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his question. Of course, he is correct that PPANI did not have oversight of the case and that MARAC responses had not been triggered. Dr Melia's review identified that missed opportunity to bring Creswell into PPANI, and that is critical learning for everyone who is involved. Practitioners in the public protection agencies have to use their professional judgement to identify dangerous individuals and ensure that they are referred at the appropriate points. Key agencies have committed to working with Dr Melia to implement the findings of her report and ensure that dangerous offenders are referred to PPANI in the future. My Department does not have an operational role in the day-to-day delivery of those arrangements, but we have responsibility for the overall statutory framework and associated guidance. I have already commissioned my officials to review the guidance to ensure that it continues to provide a robust and consistent framework for safeguarding and maintaining public protection so that people can have confidence that those referrals will be made and that there is clarity for all involved as to how and when to do so.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Like others, I echo the remarks that have paid tribute to Katie Simpson's family. This case has touched the hearts of many who have read the details of it, because it was sickening and harrowing. Katie was very clearly failed by systems that should have protected her.

Minister, have you given any consideration to a review of a specific offence of suicide that has been induced by domestic violence? Although Katie was murdered, even when it was thought that she had died by suicide, there was no further investigation of the person who was responsible for her death.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for her question. We have corresponded on the matter for some time. There are two aspects to that, the first being that coerced suicide is already against the law. Encouraging or enabling someone to take their own life is a criminal offence. That is the first thing to say. The more challenging part of it is recognition that the person responsible for that is fully responsible for the suicide. For example, the inclusion of suicide in the sphere of domestic homicide reviews, as is happening now and is starting to be rolled out in England and Wales, is something that we are looking at. The problem can be in identifying a causal link that is beyond challenge. Whilst there may be learning from those cases, holding someone legally accountable, beyond reasonable doubt, for the death of another person who has died by suicide can be incredibly complex.

In this case, however, the more pressing part is for people not to accept the cognitive bias, when they are told that someone has taken their own life, and to simply accept that at face value or not to continue to collect the forensic evidence that would be necessary either to confirm the death as a suicide or, indeed, to confirm that the death was not a suicide. That is the learning that comes from the report today.

The issue of coerced suicide, particularly in domestic settings, is one that weighs very heavily on me, because I am aware of the impact that it can have on individuals. There is, as I said, already an offence of coercing or contributing to someone taking their own life. However, proving beyond reasonable doubt that that is the cause is the biggest challenge that we face.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Minister, I am grateful for your initiating the review. If you do not mind, Mr Deputy Speaker, I pay tribute to Katie's family — her mum and dad — who are in the Public Gallery today. It is a really difficult time for everyone who loved Katie, including her friends and family, and we will continue in the quest to get answers and make change permanent.

I have been raising questions about the murder of Katie Simpson for years now, and it is really important that we have those answers. My question today is about the entirety of the police misconduct process. It has been reported that almost all the officers who were under investigation in relation to the Katie Simpson murder investigation have either retired or resigned. Does the Minister agree that the law that allows the investigation and, therefore, the misconduct proceedings to stop must be changed so that any investigation can continue regardless of whether an officer resigns or retires?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for her diligence and commitment to pressing this issue, even, at times, when others would have been happier had she not done so. It has shown real commitment and courage on her part that she stood up for Katie and for those who loved her and to find the truth.

I share the Member's concerns about the number of officers who have retired from the PSNI while under investigation and the impact that that has on confidence in policing. I am committed to ensuring that we work to close the gaps in the misconduct process and to ensure that officers who have committed wrongdoing do not walk away from policing with a clean slate. The Department is already progressing a number of legislative proposals in relation to police officer misconduct by way of an amendment to the police conduct regulatory framework. The Member will also be aware that I have committed to drafting clauses for inclusion in the Justice Bill that will create a barred and advisory list for policing in Northern Ireland as well as facilitate misconduct proceedings in relation to former officers. An amendment to the Justice Bill is to be tabled at Consideration Stage in order to facilitate the lists and former officer proceedings.

I want to see a misconduct process that is as efficient as possible, and I am committed to working to take any potential steps that we can to improve those processes. In that respect, we are also working to make a number of improvements to wider misconduct procedures and to make legislative provision for matters where officers fail to meet vetting standards. That will result in two statutory rules relating to misconduct and vetting. The planned amendments to the Police (Conduct) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2016 will also reflect the recently revised code of ethics in statute as a schedule to the conduct regulations. The vetting regulations will be a bespoke set of regulations that will be introduced in order to deal with officers who fail to maintain vetting standards. All the proposed amendments will be subject to the relevant statutory scrutiny process. It is important to ensure the public's trust and confidence in policing and to challenge attitudes and behaviour where they fall short of those acceptable standards.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I welcome the Minister's statement. Katie Simpson was an innocent women murdered by an evil man.

The issue of bail pops up. Despite being charged with murder, facing a trial, living near the border and having already tried to interfere with witnesses and pervert the course of justice, Jonathan Creswell was granted bail. That is inexplicable. That decision allowed him to commit suicide and deny justice to the family. Does the Minister agree that there is something deeper in our justice system — I have warned about it for a long time — including our Police Service, whereby the rights of the suspect are given too much weight and the rights of the victim and the need for public protection are not given enough weight? Does she agree that it is time for a fundamental reset so that we protect victims, protect the public and do not always err on the side of the suspect's rights?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I think that we all agree in principle, with the benefit of hindsight, that the decision to permit bail on that occasion was deeply flawed. However, such a decision is made without the benefit of hindsight, and it falls to the PSNI and the courts and not to me as Justice Minister. As I said in my statement, it is important that the risk to victims and witnesses and, indeed, the risk to any future trial should be properly considered when making a decision about granting bail.

I do not agree with the Member when he says that the pendulum has swung too far towards the rights of those who are accused, but I agree that there has to be a careful balance. That balance has to be maintained by the information that the PPS and the PSNI present to the courts and by the judiciary's careful consideration of it. There is a balance of rights. Decisions not to grant bail where bail is appropriate can, of course, be challenged, as can decisions to grant bail. There is a balance to be struck. From my perspective, I want to ensure that, when such decisions are made, particularly in cases where coercive control has been a factor, the implications for victims and witnesses are properly and thoroughly considered before any decision is reached.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I extend my thoughts to Katie's family, who are very bravely here.

Minister, last week, the Criminal Justice Inspection review of the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act 2021 showed a poor uptake and a reducing quality of training in the justice system. It is clear from your statement that more work needs to be done in policing to recognise coercive control as a serious and potentially lethal risk factor and to recognise and challenge gendered stereotypes and victim-blaming narratives. What more can be done by you and your Department to ensure that the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act is implemented in full?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, we will ensure that this report's specific recommendations are implemented. As I said, I have already asked Dr Melia to continue her work, which is unique in this space, to oversee the implementation of the arrangements, because it is important that there is uptake. It is also important that we monitor delivery of training. Whilst my Department is not responsible for the training of front-line police officers or of members of the judiciary or Public Prosecution Service, given that they are operational and independent, it is nevertheless important that the House and my Department have the information necessary for us to scrutinise that training and see whether its uptake has been adequate or whether more can be done. A number of areas have been identified as part of the CJINI report and, more widely, as part of reviews that have been undertaken over recent weeks and months of the PSNI's conduct and attitude that give food for thought about where further training may be beneficial to officers, not just at the commencement of their training to become officers but throughout their time serving in the PSNI. We will continue to have that conversation with the PSNI, the PPS and the other parts of the justice system, as well as, crucially, with the Policing Board, which holds the Chief Constable to account for performance on such matters.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

The murder of Katie Simpson and the attempted cover-up by Jonathan Creswell were deeply disturbing, and the review has rightly attempted to learn lessons and make lasting changes to statutory responses.

Minister, the review highlights the need for pathologists to consider coercive control and staged suicide as part of their analysis of all sudden or unexplained deaths and for all attendances at medical facilities or elsewhere that involve physical injury to prompt safeguarding considerations. Some may consider such routine questioning to be unwanted and even distressing, but, in the interest of victims, how will you and the wider Executive promote public messaging that such considerations must be taken into account and such questions asked in every difficult circumstance?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

In the case of any unexplained or sudden death, there are always opportunities to remain alert to the fact that the facts as they present themselves initially may not reflect what has happened. I think that the Chief Constable referred to it as maintaining "professional curiosity". That needs to be done. Every unexplained or sudden death, even where it is assumed to be a suicide and presents as such, needs to be treated as a crime scene until such times as it can be verified that it no longer is. That has already changed in how the PSNI conducts its investigations. Time has elapsed since Katie's case, and changes have already been instigated in that regard.

There is also a need for professional staff in hospitals to broach such issues sensitively. They often have to do so in the context of visits to the maternity ward, prenatal appointments and other sensitive circumstances, particularly where there is a pattern of repeat attending or where people turn up at hospital always with the same person accompanying them, who always answers questions on their behalf. There is therefore a need for us to be willing to ask those questions and to be asked those questions. We have to accept that, while it may not be relevant to our particular case, it is part of the overall picture that staff are trying to build of what has happened in each case that comes through the doors. There are things that we, as individuals, can do to promote that approach. As Members will see as a result of the recommendations, there are things that the health trusts will, undoubtedly, need to do with regard to guidance on how that can be done most appropriately, but, in the majority of cases, people in the health trusts will understand the need for sensitivity and will know how to broach those subjects.

I suppose that the real challenge for hospital staff is to get the time and space privately to engage with a patient so that they can ask those questions in an appropriate way and, hopefully, elicit the right answers. Staff cannot rely on a simple denial as evidence that no abuse is taking place, because people may be under pressure, particularly where there is coercive control, to cover up the violence and abuse and to cover for the perpetrator. That also needs to be at the back of people's minds. If people are at least given the opportunity to make a disclosure, that is a starting point.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

I join others in paying tribute to Katie's family and loved ones, who have very much been in my thoughts.

Minister, you said that the review is about honouring Katie's memory by ensuring that all the ways in which she was so sadly failed cannot be repeated. That is hugely relevant for tackling violence against women and girls. Will you outline some of the wider work that will complement the implementation of the review's recommendations?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Member is right: the recommendations are specific to what happened in Katie's case. Although the learning from them is specific to her case, there are significant implications more widely. Such things do not happen in isolation; they form patterns of practice, thought and behaviour that can also impact on other people.

The implementation of some of the recommendations will make a tangible difference to our system. In addition, through the EVAWG strategy, we continue to work with the PSNI and the Executive Office to deliver the Power to Change public awareness campaign. I have talked a little already with Members about the need to raise awareness of why people might be asked those questions when they turn up at hospital, for example. We are also looking at the implementation of the domestic abuse offence to capture coercive and threatening behaviour. Training is very much part of that. A diverse range of legislative measures aimed at addressing sexual offending, coercive control and domestic abuse has been introduced, and further measures are planned that will tackle the use of online or technologically aided abuse. Officials are also planning the introduction of domestic abuse protection notices and orders, and, hopefully, that will provide additional protections for victims of domestic abuse. A new, enhanced, multi-agency model that will replace MARAC is being developed and will be in place in 2026-27. It will deliver earlier intervention, stronger coordination and a greater focus on managing perpetrator behaviour.

A comprehensive review of the statutory guidance underpinning PPANI is being scoped by officials. PPANI was first introduced in 2008, and amendments have been made to the guidance to keep pace with legislative developments in recent years. However, a review of the guidance in its entirety is long overdue, so that is what we are embarking on at this point. By taking together that review, the domestic homicide reviews and, in particular, the review of Katie Simpson's case we have a robust work plan for putting the mechanisms in place that will better protect the community. However, ultimately, it will work only if those who are engaged in that work are committed to implementing it fully and faithfully on every occasion.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I acknowledge the family of Katie Simpson and the people who have supported them and the families of all of the women who have died at the hands of their partners, ex-partners and men in their lives. The word "charming" was often used about Jonathan Creswell, and that is how such men get access to women and girls. That is how they get away with what they do.

In that vein, Minister, you talked about training, and we know that, in the PSNI, training is compulsory. We as Policing Board members will certainly ensure that we do our job in holding the PSNI accountable. However, much wider training is needed. I understand that the judiciary cannot be compelled to take part in training, but there are many failures. I look forward to reading the report in full to see exactly what the recommendations are and what has come out of it. There are many failures through the judicial system and through the PPS. Many of the women and girls we deal with tell us how they are being failed right from the beginning to the end of the system, not just in one part. I want to understand what conversations you have had with the judiciary, with the PPS and with the Health Minister on how we can seriously make sure that that training is compulsory through the powers that you have and the conversations that you have. The judiciary and the Health Minister have the powers to make it compulsory, and we need to see that happen.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The first thing that I can commit to is to ensuring that every leader in every part of the justice system has a copy of the report and is able to reflect on its content. The Member makes the valid point that people are often referred to as "charming" or that they seemed to be reliable or trustworthy or an upstanding member of the community. I am tired of hearing people wax lyrical about abusers. It does not matter how they present to the public. It does not matter how they present to the people around them in their church or in their golf club or wherever it might be. What matters is what they do at home with the people they abuse, and that is the only thing that should matter. The fact that somebody can present themselves as a Jekyll and Hyde character should not be to their advantage.

Abusers know how to present themselves. They know how to behave. They know how to get away with what other people would not get away with. They are predatory individuals. As you know, I have serious concerns about the use of things such as good character references in those categories of cases because we know that good character, as seen by those outside, means nothing in the context of the relationship that they have used to abuse another individual. Therefore, to me, they are not worth the paper they are written on. We need to be much clearer about where the law sits, and the Member will know that I am looking at that.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for her statement and for the publication of the independent review. Like everyone else, I pay heartfelt tribute to the family of Katie Simpson. This must be a difficult day, and our thoughts and prayers are with the family at this time.

Minister, the review sets it out that, in cases involving coercive control and domestic violence, bail conditions must focus on the safety of victims and their families. Is there a role for you in bringing in new legislation to amend the current bail regulations, and will you commit to including any changes in the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill or in the forthcoming victims and witnesses Bill?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The content of the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill and the victims and witnesses Bill at this stage in the mandate is probably fairly tightly controlled. Any change to wider bail legislation would require significant policy development. It would also require us to look carefully at the balance of responsibilities and independence of the judiciary. However, that does not preclude what is in this report being implemented today. The recommendations in the report regarding consideration of the impact on victims and families in cases where coercive control is part of the mix can be implemented by any judge sitting today making a decision about bail. Bail can be resisted by the Public Prosecution Service or the PSNI on the basis of their assessment of the risk to the safety of the victim and their family. With or without legislation, therefore, that balance can already be considered. I encourage all involved in the justice system to read the report, read what is recommended and implement it as of today so that we do not end up with a further situation where a young woman not only loses her life but is robbed of the right to justice as a result of decisions taken.

The Member is correct: this will be a painful day for Katie's family and friends. As I said, the report is a difficult read, and they are aware of its contents. I thank them for two things. First, I thank them for their dedication and commitment to ensuring that Katie would get some measure of justice and accountability. Secondly, I thank them for allowing the report, unusually, to be produced in full rather than simply be a kind of executive summary. The fullness of the report and the detail that is in it really matter. I hope that they will see a step change in how we deal with such cases and that, if nothing else, that will be a legacy that Katie will have left behind for other young women who follow in her footsteps.

Peter McReynolds (Alliance, Belfast East)

Minister, what will change immediately as a result of the review?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

A lot of things can change immediately. For example, I have outlined issues around the consideration of bail. That is simply a matter for the courts to consider. There is a plethora of issues that the courts can consider. Some changes have already occurred. A table at the end of the report shows the recommendations. Some have commenced, some are in progress and some are yet to be progressed, so there are opportunities even now with changes that have already happened.

The PSNI has identified and embedded learning in its death investigation manual, which I referred to earlier, and extra training has been mandated in relation to domestic abuse and coercive control, which is hugely important. Aspects of the EVAWG strategy, domestic and sexual abuse strategy and so on have been driven by operational learning predating publication of the report but linked to it. For me, whilst some areas will continue to develop over time, much in the report can be implemented straight away if there is the will to do so. With regard to cooperation to date with Dr Melia, there has been a willingness by all who were involved to engage with the report fulsomely and openly and to try to make the changes necessary to ensure that there is no repeat of what happened in that case.

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

I, too, add my love and support to Katie's family, who have been so badly failed. I greatly admire their advocacy, bravery and resilience.

Right now, Minister, there are families across Northern Ireland in the same horrific predicament: the murder of a loved one staged as a suicide. How many families are having the death of loved ones re-examined?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I do not have those operational figures to hand. The number has changed over time in that some have been investigated and discharged as genuine suicides, whilst others have been investigated and reopened as having, potentially, more sinister motivations. However, the report shines a light on the fact that simply because something is presented as suicide, particularly by the person's partner or by somebody in a close relationship, it should not be taken for granted that what is being said and presented represents the true facts of the case.

There has to be a presumption, until it can be proven to be a suicide, that there could be sinister motives. That is really important in terms of the professional curiosity that the Chief Constable spoke of in his response to some of these cases. It is important that all the evidence is gathered and that everything is handled in the way that you would handle a homicide until such times as you are absolutely certain that it is not one. It is clear from this report that evidential opportunities were lost as a result of the acceptance at face value of what was told to officers about the death of Katie Simpson. Had that not happened, perhaps what had actually happened would have been clearer sooner.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Like everyone else, I put on record my admiration for Katie's friends and those who loved her and her family. The Minister knows that I am really interested in safeguarding. There have been many failings in that area over the last while. Can you give us a bit more information about what changes in safeguarding, particularly in equestrian settings, you will bring in with this?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Real issues have been highlighted. I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to meet with Katie's family and discuss some of their concerns, particularly around safeguarding in the equestrian environment. Katie's death has exposed systemic safeguarding failures across Northern Ireland's equestrian sector. Many facilities, particularly unaffiliated yards and freelance operations, continue to operate without regulation, oversight or basic safeguarding protections. Dr Melia recommends that a phased, multi-agency approach is urgently needed, beginning with practical steps and building towards mandatory vetting, cultural reform and sector-wide accountability. That is obviously not just an issue for the equestrian sector. We have to be alive to the potential for abuse of position and exploitation of children and vulnerable adults across all walks of life, whether those vulnerable adults are in a workplace or conducting a hobby or whether it crosses the line between the two, as so often is the case when it comes to equestrian pursuits. We need to look beyond the equestrian sector, though it is very important in Katie's case. We need to look to other areas where you have adults and young people mixing with differential power narratives between them and to how we ensure that those young people are adequately and properly safeguarded at all times from the abuse of power and trust.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

I concur with what others have said in paying tribute to Katie Simpson's family, and I thank Dr Melia for her work on the review. Minister, the term "coercive control" has come up a number of times today. Will you please outline how the justice system will take more cognisance of that?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021 significantly strengthened protections for victims of domestic abuse, particularly when it comes to coercive control. It recognised that serious harm can be caused by not only physical violence but psychological, emotional, coercive and controlling behaviours. Dr Melia has made recommendations for further training for staff to identify indicators of coercive control and respond to them correctly. She calls for that to be embedded in decision-making during investigations, at bail hearings and in risk assessment and management. It also calls on multi-agency management of offenders under PPANI to ensure that coercive control is recognised as a continuing risk, even in the absence of a current relationship. The fact that someone has ended the relationship does not necessarily mean that the coercive controlling behaviour has ended, and it is important that people recognise the long tail that that can have on someone's life.

Furthermore, and importantly, the review recommends that we have to strengthen and broaden public awareness initiatives across Northern Ireland when it comes to coercive control. Those campaigns should also address and challenge victim-blaming attitudes. Sadly, we have heard some of those victim-blaming attitudes in our media, even over the past weekend. We need to foster better public understanding of abuse and its serious consequences and reach the public where they are, whether that is at home, in work, medical settings or education, to ensure that we recognise that coercive control is a serious issue and does serious harm. It is no less harmful than physical violence; indeed, it has often led to some of the most serious cases of physical violence and homicide that we have seen.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for her statement and for having had such an important piece of work carried out. Our thoughts today are with Katie's family and friends, but I cannot help thinking also of the late Paul Lusby, a constituent of mine, who raised early concerns about Creswell and felt not only that those concerns were dismissed but that he was demonised for raising them.

Minister, you hinted that, in contrast to your party colleague, some seemed content to shut the issue down. Will you elaborate on that? Is there any suggestion of political involvement or interference in the investigation of Katie's murder?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

First, I thank the Member for being proactively engaged in the matter. The report is there to be read, and there is no suggestion in it that that is a significant concern. However, the Member will be aware that much media attention and much discussion have surrounded the death of Katie Simpson. Many views have been expressed about an unwillingness to confront what was a very serious situation. That is what I was referring to when I spoke about those who seemed unwilling to look.

There is a tendency in all of us, when we take a position on something, to not want to go back and rethink that position. It is much easier to hope that someone else has got it wrong than to accept that perhaps we have got it wrong. If that is the prevailing culture in organisations, particularly hierarchical ones, it can be incredibly dangerous. Just because you are more senior does not mean that you have seen the thing that could be key in an investigation. It is often someone who is more junior and much closer to the issue who might have witnessed, or seen or felt uneasy about, something that really matters.

None of us in any walk of life should be so arrogant as to think that we cannot learn from others and should not listen to and take seriously the complaints when they are raised. One of the lessons from what surrounded Katie Simpson's death is about the number of people who had to raise concerns before their voices were heard. Not every victim will have so many people who are so committed to fighting their case, and people's getting justice cannot be reliant on that.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I also pay tribute to Katie Simpson, and my thoughts are with her family. It is clear that we are, once again, dealing with a PSNI failure when it comes to violence against women and girls. I know that the family, through their solicitor, have raised serious questions about the PSNI. I do not know how thorough its investigation was and whether anything was concealed from it — I hope that it was not — but, Minister, are you happy with the PSNI's investigation of the murder and how its officers, including the senior officer in charge, handled the case? How many members of the PSNI have been subject to disciplinary proceedings because of the investigation of the killing of Katie Simpson, and for what reasons were they disciplined?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

I have already dealt with the fact that so many people who were being investigated for the mishandling of the case were able to retire, and I have set out the changes that I intend to make to ensure that there can be no repeat of that. In addition to the review report, which clearly identifies the misogyny, confirmation biases and victim-blaming narratives that were accepted, I am aware that a recently published independent review confirmed that there was clear evidence of sexism and misogyny in the PSNI. It would be, frankly, ridiculous of me to stand here and say that I am satisfied with how Katie Simpson's murder was investigated from the outset, when a report that is before me highlights many failings, not just by the PSNI but by health trusts and others that were in direct contact with Katie and with Jonathan Creswell over a significant period.

I will not sweep what is in the report under the carpet. Instead, I have asked Dr Melia to take forward the implementation of the report's recommendations, as I said, and I will make sure that what is in the report is learned from and that our systems change and improve. Any system that is made up of human beings will have flaws. That is the reality of the human condition. What we need are systems that can be set in place whenever those flaws or biases are exposed to prevent further harm being done. That is the purpose of the report. It is important that I say that the PSNI, along with all the other agencies that were asked to cooperate with the investigation, cooperated openly and transparently. That is not just my assessment; it is the assessment of Dr Jan Melia, who is better-placed than anyone else to give that assurance.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Like all MLAs who have spoken, my thoughts are with Katie's family, especially her parents, as they listen to the Minister's statement.

Minister, BBC Northern Ireland's 'Spotlight' episode on the Katie Simpson murder reported that someone from a political party contacted the journalist Tanya Fowles to tell her, "Nothing to see here" and that Katie's murder was a suicide. Did the review consider that issue? Was Dr Melia in contact with the journalist or with the BBC to attempt to establish which party was involved?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

The purpose of the review was to look at systemic failures in the public protection system — the PSNI and the other statutory and voluntary agencies that were directly involved. I am aware of the allegations, as are most people in the Chamber, but it was not a criminal investigation and, therefore, it would not have looked into the issue of whether there had been any attempt to pervert the course of justice, which is what such a call may have amounted to. It was not a criminal investigation but was about the systems that are in place to protect people. Those who have information about that call — the alleged conversation and interventions — need to provide that directly to either the PSNI or the ombudsman for thorough investigation. The Member will be aware that, as I said at the outset, there is an ongoing ombudsman investigation. That investigation may or may not lead to criminal proceedings; it is still to be concluded. There will also be a coroner's inquest. Those may be better forums for looking at what are essentially allegations of malfeasance in public office or perverting the course of justice. Either of those could be looked at by the PSNI or the ombudsman at any time.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

One other Member has indicated that they wish to speak. If any other Members wish to speak, they should make their position known now.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Minister for the statement on this most important issue. Of course, our thoughts are with Katie's family. Katie was let down by the system, but the system is made up of individuals who operate within it. We have a complicated tapestry of justice agencies. Some of those agencies are the responsibility of the Minister, some are not, and some are the responsibility of other Ministers who need to step up to the mark. What assurance can the Minister give that all those agencies will be required to carry out the recommendations that are contained in the report, so that we can have confidence that all the agencies and individuals will do everything that they can so that this does not happen again?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

As I said at the outset, the review was not on a statutory footing in the same way that a domestic homicide would be; it was a different kind of review, which I instigated specifically because I believed that the seriousness of the failures were such that we needed a proper, independent investigation of the system.

On the question of what confidence I have in people's willingness, the fact, first of all, is that people cooperated openly, transparently and proactively with the investigation and the report. When the Member gets the opportunity to read the report, he will see that they operated transparently. The report is tough reading. People were not hiding their failures: they were open and honest. That is important for change. I am also reassured because I am sure that Dr Melia would not have agreed to oversee the implementation of the review were she not confident that the people with whom she worked would be serious about implementing it. That does not mean, however, that I will sit back and let this drift. I want to be continually updated on progress and to be assured that real change is being delivered. While some things will have changed between Katie's sad death and now, many have not. I want to be sure that those things that have not yet changed change quickly, so that not just me and the House but the general public, who may call on those services in the future, are reassured.

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

I thank the Minister for her statement. I commend Katie Simpson's family, who are here today, for their bravery and for the dignity that they have shown despite their grief. Although they will, I am sure, welcome today's statement, the gaping chasm of grief and hurt that they are all feeling can never be filled.

Minister, will you provide more information on how you intend to develop and broaden campaigns on coercive control?

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

We will want to address the issue through the ending violence against women and girls programme, in collaboration with the Executive Office, and through the domestic and sexual abuse strategy and action plan, for which Minister Nesbitt and I are jointly responsible in the Department of Health and the Department of Justice respectively.

It is important that people understand the complexities of coercive control. I have recently had some positive meetings with people who have flagged an ever-changing landscape when it comes to the lengths to which people will go to abuse a partner, a former partner, a family member, a parent or a child. People have to be constantly on their guard as to what coercive control looks like. In some cases, it may appear obvious. In other cases, however, it is very subtle. We therefore need people always to be conscious of coercive control.

Raising awareness in the community has already started. We have tried to do that through some of the Department of Justice's advertising campaigns on coercive control. There may be opportunities, depending on finances, for us to rerun some of the campaigns that looked at the different kinds of abuse and control out there. Crucially, we need to do more with first responders, such as those working in our hospitals, in the community and voluntary sector, in GP surgeries and in the PSNI and other justice agencies, to make sure that they recognise what coercive control looks like, because, sadly, many victims do not recognise that they are victims of coercive control, with many living in denial. They may think that their partner is hard to live with or difficult to work with but do not realise that they are a victim of serious coercive control, which often spills over into violence only after a persistent length of time. That is one of the reasons that there is a reasonable person test in our legislation on coercive control. If a reasonable person deems the behaviour to be inappropriate and coercive, that is sufficient for further investigation to take place. It is right that that should be so.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I also pass on my regards to the Simpson family. I thank you very much indeed for coming today. I regret the circumstances in which you have had to listen to the statement, but our thoughts and prayers are with you all.

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

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Executive Committee Business

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I call the Minister for Finance, Mr John O'Dowd, to move the Consideration Stage of the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr O'Dowd (The Minister of Finance).]

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order of consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. If you bear with me, I will explain the amendments. There is a single group of amendments for debate, which contains five amendments. I remind Members who intend to speak during the debate that they should address all the amendments on which they wish to comment. Once the debate is completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each amendment will be put without further debate. Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive. Therefore, if amendment No 2 is made to the Bill, amendment No 3 will not be called. Amendment Nos 4 and 5 are also mutually exclusive. Therefore, if amendment No 4 is made to the Bill, amendment No 5 will not be called. The Questions on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points in the Bill. If that is clear, which I hope that it is, we will proceed.

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 (Budget assessment reports)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We now come to the single group of amendments for debate, which contains all five amendments that I mentioned earlier.

I call Matthew O'Toole to move amendment No 1 and to address the other amendments in the group.

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

I am very pleased to speak today, and because I am in the slightly unusual position of being both the Chair of the Committee and the mover of the majority of the amendments, I will speak first as Chair of the Committee, and then I will move on and give a detailed view of the amendments that are before us today, if that is amenable to the Principal Deputy Speaker and Members. It is very important legislation, and I am pleased to have been the Chair of the Committee that scrutinised the Bill.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Matthew, sorry. I understand the sequence that you have laid out, but you have not moved your amendments, which is the first order of business.

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

I beg to move amendment No 1:

In page 2, line 11, at end insert—

"(bb) consideration of the extent to which the proposed budget is aligned with the most recently agreed Programme for Government required under section 20(3) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.".

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 2: In page 2, line 11, at end insert—

"(bb) consideration of the impact of the proposed budget on the economy of Northern Ireland;". — [Mr O'Toole.]

No 3: In page 2, line 12, after "assessment" insert ", which may include consideration of the potential impact of the proposed budget on the economy of Northern Ireland". — [Mr O'Toole.]

No 4: In clause 4, page 2, line 25, at end insert—

"(ca) costs of duplicated public service provision,". — [Mr Tennyson.]

No 5: In clause 4, page 2, line 34, at end insert—

"(bb) the Council’s view of the impact of duplication in the delivery of public services on fiscal sustainability, and". — [Mr O'Toole.]

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

If you move your amendments, you need to speak to them. You also need to decide whether the Finance Committee supports the amendments or you are speaking in your capacity as the leader of the Opposition.

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

I will give the Committee's view first. To be clear, the Committee has scrutinised the Bill overall, and it has not given a view on the amendments that are in my name or anyone else's name. The Committee has done other scrutiny that I want to outline to the Assembly for its benefit more generally.

The Bill is unusual not because of its length or complexity but because of its clear importance. It is not every day that we legislate to put a body into law. The Bill places the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council, which has been in operation since 2021, on to a statutory footing following commitments made in the New Decade, New Approach agreement. It is an important piece of legislation, which provides a clear legislative framework for the council's functions.

The Committee undertook very detailed scrutiny of the Bill. It sought written evidence from key stakeholders, carried out online surveys, commissioned research and took extensive oral evidence from a range of organisations, including economists, academics, the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC), the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council (IFAC), the OECD, the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) and the NI Fiscal Council, as well as the Department. I place on record my sincere thanks to all those who contributed. Their evidence was invaluable to our rigorous scrutiny of the Bill. The Committee specifically considered the issues in accordance with the OECD principles for independent fiscal institutions, which are transparency, integrity, accountability and effective governance. I thank the Department's Bill team, who worked very closely with the Committee.

The Bill comprises nine clauses and two schedules, which I will briefly run through and highlight the issues raised by the Committee. Clause 1 establishes the NI Fiscal Council as a statutory body. There has been widespread agreement that they think the council on a statutory footing is an appropriate and necessary step. It supports the council's authority, credibility and permanence and aligns Northern Ireland with established international practice.

Clauses 2 to 6 set out what the council is there to do. They place clear duties on the council to assess the Executive's Budget and examine the sustainability of public finances. That work is particularly important, given current pressures on public finances. Clause 2 sets out the council's main functions to examine and report on public finances, including statutory duties to publish a Budget assessment report and a fiscal sustainability report alongside any other reports that the council considers appropriate. Clauses 3 and 4 provide the detail on those reports, including the purpose of the Budget assessment report and the distinction between that report and its thematic fiscal sustainability reports. In carrying out its scrutiny, the Committee gave careful consideration as to whether the council should have a formal role in forecasting whether an assessment should take place. The Committee has not tabled amendments, but, clearly, members have taken a view on that, and I will move amendments later in a different role.

Clause 5 enables the Department of Finance to confer additional functions on the council. That received particular scrutiny. The Committee sought and received assurances that any such changes would be subject to consultation, including with the Fiscal Council, and would require Assembly approval. The Committee also secured extremely important clarification in the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) that the Committee for Finance will be included in the consultation process. I thank the Department for its willingness to address that question.

The Committee also examined issues relating to independence, transparency and accountability. It welcomed the explicit provision in clause 6 that the council is not subject to direction or control and must act transparently, objectively and impartially, aligning with the OECD principles of independence and non-partisanship. The Committee considered matters relating to reporting, timing and engagement with the Assembly across clauses 2 to 6. It secured a number of assurances and clarifications related to the explanatory and financial memorandum, and I thank the Department for working with us on that. We have had important clarifications to the explanatory and financial memorandum that will strengthen and clarify accountability, when it comes to the Finance Committee — usefully, we had ourselves inserted into the EFM — and to the Assembly more broadly. The Committee is therefore content with clauses 1 to 6.

I will turn to schedule 1. Much of the Committee's scrutiny focused on whether the governance framework provides sufficient assurance of the council's independence in practice. In particular, the Committee examined appointments, access to information, reporting, transparency and funding. The Committee recognised that amendments to the governance arrangements for the Fiscal Council could have wider implications. Such changes may set precedents for other arm's-length bodies, creating an unintended ripple effect, which the Committee was keen to avoid. For that reason, the Committee approached its scrutiny with caution, mindful that amendments specifically related to governance could have unforeseen consequences. For example, had we made substantive amendments to how the governance arrangements work, they could have had unintended consequences for other arm's-length bodies.

However, we investigated in detail the transparency of appointments arrangements, including concerns about perceptions of independence. We sought clear assurances that appointments would be made in line with the Commissioner for Public Appointments code of practice and be subject to a skills audit, as well as securing clarification in the explanatory and financial memorandum that the Committee will be kept abreast of any changes to council membership. It is really important that we get that. It is important that we clarify that the Fiscal Council is not simply reporting to the Executive but, in fact, that it may have difficult things to say about Executive policy. It needs to be able to have the independence to say those things to the public and to this Assembly. The Committee also considered the council's right of access to information and noted the council's evidence that access to information has not been an issue to date. It welcomed provisions underpinning transparency, including the requirement to publish data statements, and secured clarification that those statements will also be provided to the Committee for Finance. That is really about baking in that independence. In addition, the Committee welcomed confirmation that memoranda of understanding are already in place with Departments and the Northern Ireland Office and will be reviewed once the provisions are placed on a statutory footing.

Schedule 1 also makes provision for an annual report and external reviews. The Committee placed emphasis on the importance of strong Assembly engagement and the visibility of the council's work, and the Department agreed explanatory and financial memorandum amendments, confirming that both the annual report and external review reports will be shared with the Committee for Finance in addition to the Department.

Funding arrangements also received significant scrutiny, including the fact that the council's costs are included in the Department's estimates and that accounts are audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Committee explored what those arrangements mean for independence and transparency, including the value of clear Budget lines and the importance of funding stability over the longer term. That is absolutely critical, because the Fiscal Council cannot be genuinely robust and independent if there is any doubt over its funding. We got clarity from the Department on that, but it will be for future Finance Committees and, indeed, all Members of the Assembly and external observers to ensure that the Fiscal Council is funded transparently and in a way that allows it to do its job. Clearly, the Fiscal Council, by the nature of its job, has to say things that are occasionally difficult for an Executive and for the UK Government, and, indeed, for other bodies to hear.

Schedule 2 makes consequential amendments that place the council within existing administrative audit frameworks, enabling it to operate as a statutory body. Throughout our scrutiny, we have sought to ensure that the Bill strikes the right balance between independence, accountability and flexibility, while remaining mindful of potential effects on other arm's-length bodies.

We welcome the Department's engagement, particularly its willingness to provide assurances and amendments to the explanatory and financial memorandum that are particularly important. The Minister may want to touch on those in his winding-up speech, because we need to ensure that the Committee is kept informed, including direct receipt of council reports, membership notifications, data statements, consultations on regulations under clause 5 and copied accounts. Subject to the EFM amendments being made, we are satisfied that those are satisfactory, but obviously we want to see them made. Having completed our scrutiny, the Committee supports and has consistently supported the Fiscal Council Bill. Placing the Fiscal Council on a statutory footing is an important step in strengthening fiscal transparency and independent scrutiny in Northern Ireland.

I will now speak in my personal capacity as mover of all but one of the amendments. I apologise: some of them are in the name of Matthew O'Toole, and some are in the name of the leader of the Opposition. Please do not read anything into that. It does not mean that some are better than others or that I like some of them more than others. It is just a quirk of the timing with which they were submitted.

A lot of what I do as leader of the Opposition is in the spirit of robust political challenge and holding the Executive to account. Often, I do that in a robust way, and sometimes it is not comfortable for parties in the Assembly Chamber. Sometimes it is not that comfortable for me, because I have to stand up and do it by myself and get all the heat. However, today's amendments from me are genuinely about trying to build a consensus around how we improve governance in Northern Ireland. They are not attempts to score party political points nor to embarrass or pressurise a future Executive, because, however future Executives are structured — I hope that we continue to have future Executives, difficult as it is to govern this place, and I recognise that — we should all be looking for ways to improve the way that we do government.

Our amendments to the Fiscal Council Bill will enable us to improve policy outcomes. If done right, they will improve the quality of the policy debate in the North. Whatever your political perspective — whether you are unionist or nationalist; whether you are on the left or the right; whether you, like me and many of us in the Chamber, are geeks about fiscal and economic policy or whether you do not give two hoots and simply want your public services to work better — this is about improving governance with better policy debate, better scrutiny and better accountability. That will seem a bit techie, but it is really important.

I will go through the amendments. I am happy to take questions. I am mindful that we will break at 1.00 pm. I hope that I will have finished by then, but I do want to be generous in taking interventions or clarifying points for people, because I am keen that, hopefully, we can pass at least some of the amendments and build a consensus on improving policy making.

Amendment No 1 inserts in clause 3 the requirement or the opportunity for the Fiscal Council, in its budget assessment report, for:

"consideration of the extent to which the proposed budget"

— that is, Budgets published by the Executive. I will not get into debates about the current Budget situation or where that is, because I am not sure that that is particularly useful for this debate. I want to talk about us doing better budgeting more generally. This amendment would allow:

"consideration of the extent to which the proposed budget is aligned with the most recently agreed Programme for Government required under section 20(3) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998".

The Northern Ireland Act requires a Budget and a Programme for Government of the Executive. We can have debates — I am sure that I will, at some point, have angry debates about the quality of the Budget, the absence of the Budget or the Programme for Government or whatever — but, theoretically, no one can dispute that we need the Budget to be aligned to the Programme for Government. However, I do not think that even the most optimistic observer of this place, going all the way back to 1998 — this is not about one or two specific political parties; this is about all of us, including my party — could claim that every Budget that has been agreed by this place, when we have been up and running and have agreed Budgets, has been aligned to the Programme for Government. We think that giving the Fiscal Council the power or, in fact, the obligation to assess the extent to which a Programme for Government is being delivered or reflected in a Budget is, frankly, a no-brainer.

There was always a legislative question, and the Minister may come on to ask me about it. I am not predicting what he or other Members might say, but one might say that the Fiscal Council can do that anyway. It is true that there is a degree of flexibility in the legislation, but there is not endless flexibility. The Bill drafters make certain choices about what they include and what they do not include. For example, the Budget assessment report has to include:

"consideration of the extent to which public revenue in Northern Ireland is enough to meet planned expenditure".

That seems sensible and obvious, but those words did not have to be included. Bill drafters have included those words so that the Fiscal Council knows that we expect it to report on that and to give the public of Northern Ireland and MLAs a clear sense of whether there is enough money to meet planned expenditure. That is an obvious thing. It is no less reasonable to ask that the Fiscal Council report on whether that is aligned to the Programme for Government and how well that is being delivered.

My amendment does not say that it needs to be an entirely free-standing report; in fact, it simply has to be included in the Budget assessment report. It does not say that it needs to be 50 pages long, five lines long or five words long. It simply says that there should be:

"consideration of the extent to which the proposed budget is aligned".

There is deep frustration among the public around delivery. Again, I will be careful, as I do not want to spend my remarks today scoring points — I will have plenty of other opportunities to do that, and I will take those opportunities — but it is simply about giving the Fiscal Council a clear mandate to report on how well the Executive are delivering. I could go through a range of things and say that they are not delivering on this or not delivering on that: that is not what this is about. This is about giving the Fiscal Council the best possible opportunity or the best possible mandate to do its work and to give the public in Northern Ireland a clear sense that someone is properly scoring and costing what is in the Programme for Government.

Some of that work falls to the official Opposition. Not to challenge the Speaker's decision on amendments taken, but we had hoped to have party political costing, including for the official Opposition and for all parties, as a requirement of the Fiscal Council. That amendment has not made it to the Floor. I am not making any commentary on whether that is the right or wrong decision, but part of the scrutiny role of political parties or the Fiscal Council is about giving us the power to properly assess how well the Programme for Government is being delivered.

It is clear that the public have profound concerns about delivery here. The most recent LucidTalk poll is fairly shocking in respect of the level of trust. Giving the Fiscal Council that power does not mean that it has to devote all its energy to it, but it is a hugely useful addition to its responsibilities. It would improve the work that we do, because those of us who are fortunate enough to be able to form an Executive will, when a Programme for Government is being designed after the election — hopefully, this time next year, in a year and a bit, people will be sitting down to thrash out a Programme for Government with clear, measurable outcomes — be able to say, "We will be measured against this, so we need to be sure that we will be able to deliver the things that we are going to put in the Programme for Government". It is not unreasonable for any party that that stuff is deliverable and can be measured.

I am willing to hear objections as to why that is wrong. I genuinely hope that other parties and Members across the Chamber can support it. It is not about putting anybody on the spot; it is about us doing our job in constructive opposition as constructively as we can.

That is amendment No 1. I suspect that I will probably not get through them all before lunch, but it is not me being loquacious in that regard. I had to go through them in some detail.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Matthew, amendment Nos 1 and 2 have already been passed. You need to address amendment Nos 3, 4 and 5. Thank you.

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

That was about amendment No 1. I am not speaking to clause 1; I am speaking to amendment No 1.

Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive, as you said, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Both of those are on the Marshalled List because I want to have a genuine debate. We had a debate at the Finance Committee, though we did not come to a hard and fast view. There was some scepticism and some interest. I do not want to misrepresent the views of the Finance Committee. I am speaking on my own account; others can speak for themselves. There was a genuinely useful discussion. Critical to our work as representatives in the North, whether you are unionist or nationalist, left or right is the extent to which the things that we do are geared not just towards counting the money that comes in and goes out, though that is critical and a big part of the Finance Minister's job, but towards improving people's prospects and our economy and making sure that economic outcomes are properly part of policy decisions.

One of the frustrations that the Minister clearly has and that probably every previous Finance Minister has had, as well as anybody who observes politics, is that the devolved financial settlement is very much geared towards money in and money out. That means that the debates, including the contributions from people like me in my role as leader of the Opposition, sometimes become about saying, "Why are we not spending money on this?" and, "The UK Government are not funding us to the right level". Both of those debates are critical, but we often miss the third leg of the stool, which is the economic output. "Economic output" does not mean growth in a narrow sense; it can mean living standards, jobs and a range of other issues.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. This is just a short intervention. We had the recent debacle of the Treasury's open-book exercise and its sudden discovery of £3·5 billion of savings that, it reckons, we could have. Does the Member agree that that would not have arisen, had the principle of the Fiscal Council looking at those things in advance been in place, so that we, too, could look at those issues?

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

I do not want to make that promise on behalf of the Fiscal Council. There is a reasonable level of cynicism about the open-book exercise. Frankly, I think that it is a ridiculous document. There was a fairly jaundiced agenda from the Treasury. Certainly, having the Fiscal Council has already improved the debate here in the past five or six years. I hope that my amendments will improve the quality of debate even further.

To be clear, amendments Nos 2 and 3 — am I going to be interrupted for lunch, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

You are, Matthew. On a point of clarity about what I said, clauses 1 and 2 have already been debated. You are, obviously, speaking to amendment No 1, which is to clause 3.

I am going to interrupt you, because, as people will be aware, 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 next item of business will be questions to the Minister of Health, after which Matthew will continue.

On behalf of everyone, I implore you to be specific. Even though the debate is very important and interesting, we need to home in on your amendments.

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

Absolutely, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I appreciate that.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.58 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — Health

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

1. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister of Health for an update on the implementation of a women's health strategy. (AQO 3496/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I may require an extra minute to answer, because this is an important issue of some depth.

Work on a women's health action plan is advancing, with policy and service developments ongoing across many areas. I intend to publish the plan later this year, after we have received and considered the final report of the public listening exercise that my Department helped fund. The exercise is now complete, and I am very grateful to the thousands whose voices are helping shape the final action plan. The final report on the listening exercise is expected by the Department in the coming weeks.

I understand the level of anticipation around the action plan, which is about recognising and responding to the significant disparities that women continue to face in health outcomes and access to care. Much work is already under way within current resources. We are trying to reduce waiting lists and change how we deliver key services to better meet women's needs. Last year, for example, my elective care framework's implementation and funding plan included £3·5 million in recurrent funding to provide over 4,000 additional assessments and 900 treatments in gynaecology. That funding is helping improve patient pathways, enhance diagnostic capacity and provide additional theatre and outpatient sessions. We are also in the process of establishing two regional endometriosis centres, one in the Western Health and Social Care Trust and the other in the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust.

Too many women are still waiting too long, but the position is improving. Compared with the end of September 2025, by the end of December 2025, 3,000 fewer women across Northern Ireland were waiting either for treatment or for their consultant-led first outpatient appointment for gynaecology, and I expect that progress to continue.

When it is published, the action plan will describe the wide range of policy and service developments that are supporting women's health, what has been achieved to date and what is achievable in the years ahead within current resources. The action plan will also aim to encourage positive dialogue on women's health and well-being in our health and social care system and in society more broadly. I look forward to updating the House in due course.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister, for that answer. We await the publication of the action plan. The Secretary of State for Health recently relaunched the UK Government's women's health strategy and is trying to tackle the medical misogyny and disparity that exists. Given that Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK without a dedicated women's health strategy, do you accept that we are falling further behind? Will you commit to ensuring that the funding that is required to deliver actions will be ring-fenced so that we can make improvements?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I regret the fact that we are the only nation or region of the United Kingdom not to have such a strategy. I am very much in favour of having one. It was only time constraints that led me to the position of wanting to have an action plan first. I hope that a strategy will follow during the next mandate. The Member is aware of how tight things are with funding. There is upwards of £800 million of a shortfall in this financial year. As well as publishing the action plan and saying that I very much hope that the next Minister will commit to a women's health strategy, I am in the foothills of developing another initiative, which, I think, will be a real game changer. I look forward to updating the House on that in due course.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I am conscious that there was a massive announcement last week in relation to women's health. I thank the Minister for the announcement on the mother-and-baby unit. There has been plenty of brilliant feedback. So many women and families are delighted with the announcement. On that subject, will any provision be made for interim measures? The Minister covered a bit of that in his statement. If not, why not?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

After the debate, it was clear to me that the mood and will of the House was to look at an interim measure that was good and safe, not necessarily one that was best practice. From the Royal College, we know that best practice means proximity to an adult inpatient centre and obstetric-led maternity services. We looked at a couple of sites and discussed them internally. The five directors of mental health from the five geographic trusts wrote to me as one to say that they would not support the interim solution that we had in mind and that we had to stick to best practice. That is why we are going for the Belfast City Hospital site. As I made clear, I was originally told that, if we started now, we could have it open in 2031. I found that entirely unacceptable, so the deadline is now no later than the financial year 2028-29. I have not finished there, however. Once the design team has finished, I will press for an earlier opening than 2028-29. I may not be successful, but I am going for it.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

We have been talking about a women's health strategy and action plan since devolution was restored, so I am glad to hear that there will be progress, even if it is late in the day. Women's health and the attitude to it are marked by inequalities. There are inequalities in Northern Ireland, but there are also inequalities across the United Kingdom. Will the Minister tell the House when he plans to introduce the new injectable cancer immunotherapy drug — it is called Keytruda, I think — for women and men in Northern Ireland?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question. I have some rather good news in that regard. Keytruda is already used in Health and Social Care (HSC) for many different forms of cancer, in line with recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The manufacturer of Keytruda has recently launched the injectable form that we are hearing about in the news outlets. I recognise the benefits of rolling out such innovations to patients in Northern Ireland in saving precious time for those receiving treatment for cancer as well as in releasing valuable time for clinicians to care for more people. As of today, three of the five trusts have already rolled out injectable Keytruda. That happened in April last year as part of a managed transition involving a substantial programme of work to update existing clinical protocols and minimise waste of the existing infusion product. It is in three of the five; I hope that it will be in all five as soon as possible.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

I want to touch on the women's health action plan. I appreciate how difficult budgets are at the minute, but attitude does not cost money. The way in which women are treated culturally in Northern Ireland can be difficult for many. It comes down to the issue of medical misogyny. Through the women's health action plan, what steps will you commit to taking, Minister, to ensure that there is a mindset and culture shift in our health service, so that women feel that they are validated and listened to and that their concerns are properly taken seriously?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

That is a very important issue. I have to say that the scale of medical misogyny is difficult to quantify. It is essential that women feel listened to, respected and treated fairly when accessing the health and social care system. The action plan will consider the need for improved awareness of, training for and understanding of women's health issues across the full range of healthcare settings.

I do not accept that the health and social care system is failing every woman on every issue, but it is clear that there is a level of misogyny. The Member is correct to identify it as a cultural issue. I think that all of us in the House recognise that cultural change is the highest bar to set for any organisation. However, that is not an obstacle to doing it; it has to be done, and it will be started on my watch. As well as hoping that the next Minister will commit to a strategy that includes dealing with medical misogyny, I will put in place quite a radical reform of how we fund the health and social care service.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Minister, as part of the women's health strategy, are you looking at how your Department records gender identity as distinct from sex to ensure that men are not being offered women's health appointments?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. Our lifespan gender service model is not a new service; rather, existing services are being merged into one. Nothing is changing in the criteria or the parameters from the model of care that has been commissioned for over a decade. However, the new service will take account of the Cass review, which called for multidisciplinary teams to be developed in regional centres. That investment will ensure that that recommended approach is taken in line with other United Kingdom jurisdictions. The creation of two senior psychologist posts will greatly bolster the multidisciplinary team, and I will rely on them to make the right calls.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Does the Minister agree that one of the quickest ways for women's health to be improved and not be left behind is the roll-out of women's health hubs? If he agrees, will he start by rolling one out in West Belfast?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am certainly in favour of women's health hubs, but the Member must be aware — I started Question Time by referring to it — of the £800 million gap in funding. I cannot make a commitment that I cannot fund. I am afraid that, at this stage, I cannot foresee my getting the funds for a women's hub in this financial year, as much as I would like to.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

2. Mr T Buchanan asked the Minister of Health to outline any assessment that has been made of the ‘The State of Emergency Medicine in Northern Ireland’ report published by the Royal College of Emergency Medicine. (AQO 3497/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Royal College of Emergency Medicine for its report entitled 'The State of Emergency Medicine in Northern Ireland'. It reinforces our understanding of what needs to be done to address the pressures in our emergency departments. As is highlighted in the report, despite challenges with improving individual causality, there is clear evidence that extended delays in EDs increase overall clinical risk. My Department continues to act to improve hospital flow and reduce congestion in EDs. We have urgent care centres, minor injury units and phone-first services that are fully operational across the region and help to appropriately divert demand away from EDs.

The continuing expansion of Hospital at Home and same-day emergency care services, alongside additional support for the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service (NIAS) and the strengthening of consultant capacity in EDs, will also help to deliver further improvements. NIAS introduced Release to Rescue on 27 April, with the aim of ensuring that no patient waits for longer than two hours in an ambulance outside an ED. My officials continue to work with the Ambulance Service and the trusts as Release to Rescue is implemented.

Ultimately, improving the outcomes and experiences of emergency departments is about whole-system flow and the timely, appropriate discharge of patients who no longer need hospital care, thus freeing up inpatient beds for those who need them the most. There is no quick or easy fix; achieving the improvements required involves a complex interplay of services in and across the wider HSC system and an investment in hospital and community capacity, which is dependent on funding being made available to me.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. The report conservatively estimates that 1,032 excess deaths were associated with waits of 12 hours or more in Northern Ireland's emergency departments. Minister, that is the equivalent of 20 lives every week, which is catastrophic. Will you outline to the House what you are doing about that? You have mentioned a number of things, but what are you doing to address the issue in order to help to reduce the number of deaths in 2026?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I hope that the Member acknowledges that the problem has not arisen in just the most recent financial year; the numbers are roughly similar for the year before that, and the year before that. I am acutely aware of the impact of those ongoing relentless pressures in what is already a very challenging environment on the physical and mental well-being of not just patients but all clinical staff working in emergency departments.

The first thing that I am doing is Release to Rescue. That started last week, and the results are very favourable. There were, I think, only eight occasions when an ambulance handover took longer than two hours. That is a really concrete and positive deliverable in tackling that very sticky problem.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

One of the key challenges across the totality of our health service is staff shortages. With the Department of Health no longer funding physician associate degrees, can you outline whether the Department will repurpose that funding? Will it be used for other training places?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As the Member is aware, there has been an ongoing problem in the workforce for that particular specialism. What the Member is asking for is not something that I can make up on the hoof, because I have not given consideration to how that money is re-profiled. We have an £800 million shortfall, so I have no doubt that officials will say to me that I have to put all the money that I can towards closing that gap. I would be very reluctant to take a single penny out of the money that is put in for training and workforce.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

The Minister will be aware that the 12-hour target in A&Es is that no patient should ever wait more than 12 hours, but recent statistics show that 12-hour waits have increased by 14% in the past year, from 10,000 to 12,000, whilst the Royal College of Emergency Medicine report referred to by Mr Buchanan showed that excess deaths related to long waits in EDs have more than doubled in the past five years to more than 1,000 a year. Given that stark evidence of the need for reform, what action will the Minister take to advance reconfiguration before the end of the mandate?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

We will do whatever we can. I will not be able to remember this off the top of my head, but a charity looked at hospital waits in emergency departments in England, and those figures were also absolutely shocking. So it is not as if we are doing something or not doing something that is not happening elsewhere. This is a very sticky problem, and I will continue to do what I can in the remaining months of the mandate to address it.

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

Minister, the report lays bare the fact that our emergency departments are in a state of ongoing crisis, with excess deaths and corridor care becoming, sadly, the norm. Staff give their all, but they are often overwhelmed. There are adverse experiences of waiting for ambulances and waiting in ambulances, emergency departments and corridors. What immediate action are you taking to improve patient safety, Minister?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I do recognise the significant challenges that EDs face, and I am acutely aware that the current level of use of non-designated clinical spaces, or corridor care, is too high and has to be reduced. I accept that it is reflective of the current pressures on the wider health system. The impact on patients and staff in that environment is not acceptable to me as a routine matter, nor, I believe, is it sustainable. Therefore, work is already ongoing that will address that, subject to resources as always. For example, there is the diverting of patients to more appropriate pathways, more timely discharge, an increased focus on self-care and the utilisation of pharmacy support and GP services. We are doing all that we can to try to address those unacceptable pressures.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

3. Mrs Dillon asked the Minister of Health to outline any discussions that he has had with Royal Mail in relation to delays in postal deliveries resulting in patients missing urgent hospital appointments. (AQO 3498/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

My Department is committed to working with the health and social care trusts to continually improve communication methods with all patients, ensuring that they have the best possible experience and access to care. The trusts maintain oversight of postal delivery performance through established contractual and supplier arrangements. Where concerns have arisen regarding delays in patient correspondence, those can be raised through appropriate channels, including contract management discussions and engagement with contracted postal service providers such as Postal Sort. Ongoing monitoring is in place to help identify and address delivery issues. The aim is to reduce the risk of missed appointments and ensure timely communication with patients and clients. To help reduce the number of "did not attends" (DNAs), the trusts frequently use text messages as reminders, alongside sending appointment letters to notify patients of upcoming appointments. The My Care app enables patients and service users to securely access a subset of their care record, including information such as appointment letters, with the aim of reducing DNAs. That aims to provide a timely and convenient method of communication, especially when postal services may be delayed, giving patients the opportunity to cancel or reschedule, thereby ensuring that valuable appointment slots can be offered to others.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Minister, I have been contacted by a significant number of constituents, particularly from the area around Pomeroy, who have many issues to do with health because that area straddles two trusts. Appointment letters do not reach them, and some are for serious appointments that they absolutely cannot afford to miss. Mid Ulster District Council met Royal Mail and the trusts about that, and I do not think that it really got the answers that it required. A number of people have been removed from waiting lists because they missed appointments. Can we get an absolute guarantee from you today that no patient will be put off a list because they missed an appointment due to a failure of Royal Mail to deliver that post? The trust has the contract with Royal Mail, and the patient relies on that letter coming to them. I acknowledge that we have the My Care app and the reminder text. Not everybody is able to access and avail themselves of the My Care app.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

[Inaudible.]

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

However, it is a valuable tool.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The text message may come —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Minister.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

— too late for people to organise lifts to hospital appointments.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

There is a protocol. Trusts are required to follow the integrated elective access protocol (IEAP). That has been developed to define the roles and responsibilities of all those involved in the elective care pathway. IEAP outlines good practice to assist staff with the effective management of waiting lists. The protocol aims to ensure that a consistent approach is taken across all trusts. In compliance with the guidelines, patients who do not attend their appointment due to unforeseen or exceptional circumstances, such as postal delivery delays, have a four-week period to contact their health and social care trust to be reinstated on to the waiting list from the original date of their appointment. That will prevent patients from being disadvantaged because of missed appointments. I hope that that reassures the Member.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Minister, I have also been contacted by constituents in North Down, and many of them have missed healthcare appointments at hospitals because of Royal Mail delays. Have you given any direction to the trusts that those people's appointments need to be prioritised urgently because it was not their fault that they did not receive the letter from Royal Mail?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

It is not the fault of the patient that their appointment is missed because Royal Mail did not get the communication to them on time. As I just said to Linda Dillon, we have that integrated elective access protocol, which gives you up to four weeks to get yourself reinstated to where you were on the waiting list. I do not have any vires over Royal Mail or any postal service. I am in charge of the health and social care system in Northern Ireland. However, I would encourage Royal Mail and others to think very carefully about the impact of not delivering HSC literature and communications in a timely manner.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Minister, I had a positive meeting with Royal Mail on Friday regarding this matter. I learned from that meeting that the trusts go to Postal Sort when a communication is written. That is then processed, and it then goes to Royal Mail. Is the problem with Postal Sort or with Royal Mail to do with the type of service that the trusts have asked for? If you do not put a first-class sticker on an envelope, you do not get a first-class service. Is the service being asked of Royal Mail the correct service? Everybody is pointing the finger at Royal Mail, but the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

My Department has not carried out an assessment of the postal service currently utilised by the health and social care trusts, so no assessment has been made on the use of Royal Mail's economy postal services.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

4. Mrs Guy asked the Minister of Health for an update on the provision of children's respite services. (AQO 3499/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The additional regional funding provided for the children with disabilities service is being spent on a range of initiatives to improve family and community support for children with a disability, with the aim of increasing short-break provision and expanding specialist care programmes. The trusts have increased contracts with voluntary and community providers, securing additional support for families through a broad range of service initiatives.

I remain very mindful of the urgent focus on overnight short-break provision for children with disabilities. However, it has to be recognised that the provision of short breaks for children with disability is much more expansive than solely overnight provision. I can confirm that there has been increased service provision across all five geographic trusts that has supported improved access to short breaks, either via day supports or overnight provision. I advise Members that, as a result of the children with disability investment, approximately 869 additional overnight short breaks were provided across the region between January 2025 and the end of January 2026. That is in addition to the development of a variety of valuable community and family support services that further enhanced children with disability services.

Whilst the regional investment is beginning to address key areas, I need to reiterate to Members that short-break services for children with disabilities remain fragile. The longer-term development of a comprehensive continuum of services will take some time. It will be necessary to address the significant gap that exists in residential provision alongside preventative community-based services, in order to protect the availability of short-break services. Further sustained investment, in capital projects and workforce development, will be required over several years.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his response. The documentary 'I am not Okay' laid bare the dire circumstances that so many of our families with children with complex needs are living with. In response to that programme, the Minister announced £13 million to deal with the issues that those families were experiencing. I have to say that that announcement is looking increasingly cynical because those families are still "not Okay". Will the Minister provide a full breakdown of how the £13·1 million investment into children's social care and respite services for the past financial year was spent? Specifically, how much has been spent on delivering beds for respite?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I will ignore the accusation of being cynical and address the fundamental. The five trusts have confirmed final funding for the financial year 2025-26 across a range of proposals. The amount of funding, which is rounded up, is as follows: Belfast Trust, £2·2 million; Northern Trust, £1·4 million; South Eastern Trust, £2·1 million; Southern Trust, £1·4 million; and Western Trust, £2·2 million. That is a total of approximately £9·4 million, so, therefore, there is approximately £3·7 million of slippage against the original funding of £13·1 million. I apologise for that, but I do not apologise for the ambition in securing £13·1 million, and it is recurrent funding.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Obviously, I very much welcome the £2·2 million going to the Western Trust for children's respite care and support. Given the current regional recruitment campaign that will target the recruitment of carers, who, we all know, are the backbone of society, how many is the Minister aiming to recruit and will it be sufficient to meet the current unmet need in respite services?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

As ever, the answer has to be predicated and ring-fenced by the budget, but I thank the Member for welcoming the investment in her area. Recruitment is very challenging in that area, and the Member may well be aware of that. We will press on with trying to get the right workforce in the right place as soon as possible. It is important to say that I am also committed to supporting the parents and carers of young people with disabilities. Let me write to the Member if I have more detail from the Department.

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

Many parents whom I speak with in my constituency say that they are burnt out, overwhelmed, exhausted and injured many days of the week. Many of them say that they feel that they are being failed. Do you think that they are being failed, Minister?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I acknowledge how difficult it is for those parents. What we traditionally call "burn out" is very common, and I get it. I have met many parents and carers and not just those who we now call the "Spotlight mums", whom I have met on a number of occasions. However, it is a rather emotive way to phrase the question. There are a lot of people in the Department and across the health and social care geographic trusts who are trying to do their best. Therefore, I do not agree with the language that the Member has used. I agree with her, and I imagine that she would agree with me, that we can and must do better.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

5. Mr Allen asked the Minister of Health to outline the average waiting time for access to child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) in each of the past five years. (AQO 3500/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Improving access to child and adolescent mental health services remains a key focus for the Department. The information provided by trusts demonstrates that average waiting times have fluctuated over the past five years. The average wait was 49 days in the 2021-22 financial year. It then dropped to 46, increased to 60 and improved again to 47. The data for 2025-26 shows a further reduction, with an average wait of 42 days.

The use of regional averages as a performance metric does not reveal the degree of variation across the trusts. Each trust has encountered challenges in meeting the nine-week target for initial assessment in CAMHS. There have nonetheless been significant improvements in some areas: for example, in the Northern Trust, the average wait time of nine weeks in 2021-22 fell to six weeks in 2025-26.

Despite ongoing pressures associated with workforce, rising demand and rising levels of clinical acuity in the children referred, the data returned by the trusts demonstrates progress in recent years. I remain committed to supporting trusts to reduce waiting times for children and young people across Northern Ireland further.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We have to move on to topical questions.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

T1. Mr McGrath asked the Minister of Health, after noting that Members have heard from Connected Health that, as a result of the Minister's failure to fund the independent care sector properly, domiciliary services in rural areas are at risk of being cut, resulting in a mess, what he is doing as part of his neighbourhood care model to address the gulf between where we are now and delivering the social care sector that people desperately need. (AQT 2301/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Without an additional £800 million, I will struggle in that area, as I will in many others, but I am focused on it. On 2 March, Independent Health and Care Providers (IHCP) issued correspondence to my permanent secretary about its significant concerns about the structure, cost and workforce profile of the Southern Trust's home care model. The correspondence was further to a freedom of information request that IHCP sent to all trusts about their home care services.

The Member is on the Committee for Health, which has a statutory duty to assist and advise. I am all ears.

Colin McGrath (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

The first step towards identifying the solution to a problem is to acknowledge that there is a problem and then to determine who is causing it. I have asked you time and time again who is causing health service problems — you, through a lack of decision-making, or the Executive, through lacking the finance to deal with the problems — yet you have always ducked the question. I will go again: is it your lack of decision-making or the Executive's lack of funding that is causing the problem in domiciliary care?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The fact that we have an £800 million shortfall in our funding for 2026-27 is a clue.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T2. Mrs Erskine asked the Minister of Health what plans, if any, he has to commission emergency general surgery at the South West Acute Hospital (SWAH). (AQT 2302/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Member will be aware of the process. A consultation was under way, but I was not happy with it, so I contacted the Western Trust. I could not instruct the trust to pause the consultation, but I am grateful that it agreed to do so and that it eventually decided to scrap it. I then encouraged the trust to come up with a broader vision for the South West Acute Hospital, because, as I have said in the House, it is a pity that we put an exclusive — I stress the word "exclusive" — focus on one service that is not available in the South West Acute Hospital at the expense of celebrating the many successful processes and procedures that take place there.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

That process has gone quiet. No vision is coming forward from the Department or the trust, and I believe that the clock is ultimately being wound down on decision-making on emergency general surgery. I have heard from campaigners who tell me that the Western Trust is prepared to develop a business case to restore emergency general surgery at the South West Acute Hospital. Any decision, however, on the restoration or suspension of emergency surgery at the SWAH ultimately falls to you, Minister.

If a business case falls on your desk —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Can we have a question?

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— will you press on with the implementation of removal, or will you restore emergency general surgery?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Member seems to think that the Department has some role in drawing up the vision: the Department has no role in drawing up the vision. I have asked the Western Health and Social Care Trust to draw up the vision. If the Member believes that some sort of brake is being applied by the Western Trust, my question to her is this: what discussions has she had with the senior manager of the Western Trust on that?

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

T3. Miss McIlveen asked the Minister of Health, having thanked colleagues who attended a successful myeloma awareness event in Parliament Buildings last month that she held along with her brave and passionate constituent Mel Walker, what progress is being made on improving early detection of blood cancers such as multiple myeloma. (AQT 2303/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for her question. I am not across the detail of that, but I would be more than happy to write to the Member. If she wants to focus her supplementary question on the information that she is seeking, I would be grateful.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his response. I am happy to request a meeting to discuss the matter further. What progress has been made on access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in Northern Ireland? Will the Minister outline any reasons for the delay in the availability of CAR T-cell therapy?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

CAR T-cell therapy has proven to be very successful. It will be introduced once we have the new haematology ward at Belfast City Hospital. Progress is being made on that, but it will be a number of years before the ward is available. The CAR T-cell procedure can operate only in particular clinical conditions. I believe that the respiratory conditions — the air around the procedure — are very important.

Members have called for an all-island approach. I reiterate that we have discussed this with colleagues in Dublin. They have made it clear that they do not have the capacity to offer CAR T-cell therapy to patients in Northern Ireland at this time and that, if they were to set about trying to increase their capacity, it would take longer to do that than is scheduled for the opening of the new haematology ward at Belfast City Hospital.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

T4. Mr Dunne asked the Minister of Health, taking into account the headlines in this afternoon's local media that 37 people have come forward to say that they were abused by Jonathan Creswell and given that the Katie Simpson review found that repeated presentations to hospital with injuries were not recognised as potential indicators of abuse, what specific steps his Department is taking to ensure that, across the health service, patterns of harm are properly identified and, importantly, acted on. (AQT 2304/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Member is referring to information that, as he said, has just come into the public domain. The Department and the trusts will need some time to look at that. I assure the Member that the identification of abuse is a core part of training across the Health and Social Care system.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will the Minister commit to introducing new safeguarding triggers or flagging systems in A&E departments and across GP settings to ensure that no patient who presents repeatedly with injuries ever again falls through the cracks?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am certainly happy to go back to the Department and ask whether a review of current safeguarding procedures is required.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

T5. Mr Gaston asked the Minister of Health, given that, in reply to a recent question for written answer, he said that he is conducting a review of how gender and biological sex are recorded across his Department, when the Health and Social Care data directory began collecting information based on gender as distinct from sex at birth and what issues that has created for the health service. (AQT 2305/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

That is a level of detail that I do not carry in my head, but I am more than happy to write to the Member.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Minister assure the House that his Department has not been sending letters to biological men about smear tests or medical conditions that impact on biological women specifically? Is it not an indictment of his Department that it is so captured by wokery that I have to ask such a question?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I am more than happy to check, but I imagine that, if such letters are being issued, they are being issued by the trusts, not the Department.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

T6. Mr Allen asked the Minister of Health for an update on the Programme for Government elective care targets, given that one of the biggest issues raised with the Member and others is access to timely treatment. (AQT 2306/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his question. I can give him some statistics now. We had 262,773 episodes of delivery to the end of February. That took place over 11 months. There was a 68% reduction from peak endoscopy waits. There was a 98% reduction in patients — in real terms, that is 5,287 people — for named procedures, primarily targeting longest waits and some paediatric services. From March 2025 to March this year, there was a 16% — 15,500 — reduction in patients on an inpatient or day-case list.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his answer. That is welcome progress, and it is welcome that those people got timely treatment. I am sure that the Minister will join me in recognising the staff who are at the front end of that service delivery.

What impact is the lack of budget certainty having on the delivery of the targets?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On the first point, there seems to be a great deal of cynicism about the statistics. There are about 70,000 people working in Health and Social Care, and a significant number of them have been working on the waiting list initiative, which has delivered around three times the Programme for Government target. Being so cynical and sceptical about the statistics, as if the Department is making them up at random, does nothing for the morale of those people. Those people are working long hours, including nights and weekends, and are making a real difference on the waiting list initiative.

On the second point, there is no Budget. We are therefore losing momentum on the waiting list initiative, and that is potentially disastrous, having done so well in the 2025-26 financial year. It takes up to six weeks to schedule additional work. You have to book a theatre. You have to rota staff. You have to persuade staff to give up an evening or maybe a Saturday morning when they have other pressures on their life, not least family life and work-life balance. The lack of a budget is doing real damage and putting very much at risk the progress that we have made to date. The history of such things says that, when you ring-fence money for waiting list initiatives, the waiting lists come down, and, when you stop spending the money, they go back up. That is what will happen without the reform that I am trying to bring forward and embed in the remaining months of the mandate.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

T7. Mr Beattie asked the Minister of Health, after stating that he was pleased to join the Minister on a visit to Knitted Knockers in Lurgan in the Member's constituency, where they met the irrepressible Joanne Harris, a Pride of Britain winner, whether he agrees that the local community and voluntary sector plays an essential role in the support and delivery of healthcare across Northern Ireland. (AQT 2307/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

It was an absolute privilege to visit Knitted Knockers, and it was energising to see the enthusiasm in the room. I agree with the Member. In fact, before my role as a politician, I was a commissioner at the Commission for Victims and Survivors. Early on in that tenure, it became clear to me that the only people who were making a difference to victims and survivors on a practical, day-to-day basis were those in the voluntary and community sector who looked after the ordinary, day-to-day needs such as getting children to and from school, doing a bit of shopping or trying to find some resource for them. I cannot speak more highly of the community and voluntary sector. As we move to a neighbourhood model, I hope to reward and embed it in the new system.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

Given the known benefits of that relationship, such as satisfaction and value for money, does the Minister hope to expand it through the neighbourhood model that he has just mentioned?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Absolutely. It has a key role to play. We look to GPs, community pharmacists and everybody delivering primary care. We look to local councils and everybody who has a stake in community development. On the collaborative issue, the community, voluntary and charity sector will be prime and central to that group of people.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

T8. Mr Chambers asked the Minister of Health whether he will join him in welcoming the recent issuing of a new contract for the Silverbirch Medical Practice in Bangor. (AQT 2308/22-27)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I absolutely will. I believe that it was a one-handed practice, and the GP decided to retire. I am pleased that the Department was able to work with partners at pace to provide a replacement service. The paperwork is being processed as we speak, at which point the strategic planning and performance group will write out to the patients who use the Silverbirch Medical Practice in Bangor to let them know about the new arrangements.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

I welcome the Minister's remarks. The news was particularly welcome for the almost 2,700 patients. How does the Minister hope to bring GPs in North Down along with him on the move to his new neighbourhood model?

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I hope that the GPs are getting a sense of the potential offered by shift left to give them the rewards, resources and funding that they have been calling for over a number of years. I am proud to report on one initiative, and it is a shameless replication of my decision to ask Professor Mark Taylor to lead the waiting lists initiative. We can all agree that that has been an outstanding success. I have decided to replicate that, and I am pleased to say that Dr David Ross, who is a well-known and respected general practitioner, has agreed to replicate that role in the roll-out of the neighbourhood model.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

That ends questions to the Minister for Health.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I believe that Mr Gaston made a point of order earlier in which he questioned whether I had misled the House with regard to dental amalgam. Hansard records that, on Tuesday 28 April, Mr Gaston said:

"We have changes relating to dental amalgam driven by EU alignment rules that will create further complexity in supply and cost. That is happening here in Northern Ireland in a way that does not apply across the rest of our United Kingdom."

He went on to say:

"That is because of the Irish Sea border". — [Official Report (Hansard), 28 April 2026, p59, col 1].

Principal Deputy Speaker, the dental amalgam changes that were discussed in that debate arise from an international meeting held in November 2025 called a Minamata Convention conference of parties. It agreed to set 2034 as the global date for phasing out dental amalgam, and that is an international commitment that applies UK-wide. It is not a product of the Irish Sea border, as the Member claimed. I am happy to put his record straight.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Minister will be aware that I cannot make a decision on the point of order that was raised earlier, but I am happy that he was able to put his response on the record.

Executive Committee Business

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We now continue the Consideration Stage of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council Bill. Matthew O'Toole was on his feet, and I invite him to be on his feet again and to be concise.

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

These are very important amendments. We spend a lot of time debating non-binding motions, and it is important that the House considers actual legislation and amendments to legislation in detail. That is not to say that non-binding motions are not important — we are moving one later today — but it is important that we discuss these matters, and I intend to give them proper consideration, as the House would expect, given both the roles that I hold.

I talked about amendment No 1 and the logic in aligning a Programme for Government (PFG) with a Budget and ensuring that the Fiscal Council is mandated to properly test and tell the public whether the Programme for Government aligns with the Budget. The Bill has the flexibility to give the Fiscal Council the power to do whatever it likes, within reason, but the Bill also makes a specific choice to mandate the Fiscal Council to do specific things. The amendments create a specific obligation or expectation that the Fiscal Council will do specific things, but they are designed to be flexible, and they do not create onerous additional burdens. I want to be clear about that. However, the alignment between the PFG and the Budget is critical, and specifically asking the Fiscal Council to ensure that there is a commentary on how well those two things are aligned is a natural and essential step forward for scrutiny. If we were not to pass that today, people in the outside world would rightly wonder why not. They would ask what the Assembly or the Executive have to fear from the Fiscal Council simply being asked to reflect on this in relation to the legislation. That is amendment No 1.

Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are connected. They are mutually exclusive, but I tabled both for a reason. I did so because it is important that we debate properly in the Chamber. A lot of time is spent on non-binding motions, but this is an opportunity to talk about amendments and, in a sense, offer the Assembly a choice. I am of the view — I said it earlier — that we do not discuss economic impacts enough in this place. It is one reason why the public are frustrated and why some of our political debate touches on only half the point. Due to the nature of the devolved spending settlement, we, of course, focus on how much money we have and on the fact that we might want more money from the UK Government. Those are legitimate questions. We have had a lot of debate about the calculation of relative need here in Northern Ireland. That is an essential debate, but it is also important that we debate the economic impact of policies.

Economic impact does not straightforwardly mean growth, albeit the Assembly will note that, today, we have had a rather concerning forecast from Ernst and Young (EY), one of the few bodies that does a Northern Ireland-specific economic forecast, which suggests that our economy will grow by 0·7% this year. That is due to a range of things, including our particular exposure to the crisis in the Middle East, which, we all know, was prompted by Donald Trump, and the pressures that it has created, and, possibly, to some extent, the constrained public spending situation. That will have an economic impact in Northern Ireland. The lower economic growth in Northern Ireland will have a range of impacts. It will mean that there will be fewer jobs created in our constituencies and less money to spend on our high streets. All of that will feed through to the Finance Minister and the Executive through other pressures that will be created. They will not necessarily be direct fiscal pressures, but, in some cases, they will be fiscal because rates revenue and the amount of rates that goes unpaid is, in part, driven by economic activity or lack of economic activity on the high street. The fact that growth is going to be at just 0·7% in the North, this year, also means that more people than would normally be the case will be in receipt of benefits, seeking assistance or under pressure in some form or other. We know that lots of people are under pressure because of the huge increase in the cost of diesel and home heating oil.

Every policy that we pursue will have an economic consequence, but we rarely debate them properly; we sometimes touch on them or allude to them. Amendment Nos 2 and 3 offer a choice. They offer the Fiscal Council the opportunity to give us, and the public, commentary on the economic consequences of decisions that are made or not made. I will give a few examples, because I do not want people to think that it is about one perspective. The Minister has talked a lot about external commentators in relation to Executive choices. There are external commentators who have a particular view about decisions that are made or not made by the Executive, but every one of those decisions would have economic consequences — potential upsides and downsides — that would need to be understood. Take, for example, decisions on Northern Ireland Water and funding it, albeit I do not think that there is any appetite for introducing water charges. If we were to think about increasing borrowing — the Minister has done a little bit of that — to pay for investment in Northern Ireland Water, one would imagine that that would have economic consequences and impacts, amongst which would be the building of more houses, more economic growth and, therefore, more jobs for people in Northern Ireland. Therefore that is a legitimate thing to discuss.

People from a different political perspective have talked a lot about public-sector wages — I do not agree with those people. Historically, public-sector workers in the North have struggled with the lack of pay parity and have had to strike and take industrial action. It is also true to say that, if they do not receive pay parity, there is less money for them to spend in the shops, small businesses, pubs etc.

To be clear, my suggested amendments do not mandate, nor should they be understood to mandate, the Fiscal Council to produce a macroeconomic forecast. That would be a big deal, and we heard in evidence at the Committee that it would not be something for which the Fiscal Council would have capacity. I was curious about that as a potential measure. Having taken and heard the evidence and having thought about and considered it, I do not think that it would be practical to ask the Fiscal Council to produce the kind of things that the Office for Budgetary Responsibility in London produces, such as a twice-yearly updated forecast of growth, unemployment, inflation and a range of other things. I do not think that that would be a responsible expectation for the Fiscal Council, but I do think that it is potentially reasonable to ask the council to do that when, as the Bill says, it is considering its Budget assessment reports and considering the impact of the Budget on the economy of Northern Ireland. That does not require a forecast and would not require huge additional resource; it would simply require the council to do some level of macroeconomic analysis of the impact. That would genuinely improve our policy debate.

It is worth saying that there is, as it were, a parallel precedent for there being an economic context to the Budget, because every Budget, certainly since I have been in this place, that has been produced by the Department of Finance includes an economic chapter at the very beginning and says, "This is the context for the local economy. This is where growth is. This is where we think the economy is". There is then a whole series of chapters on individual Departments. There is a legitimate question about how connected that economic analysis is to the judgements or decisions made latterly on Budget allocations. All I am saying is this: let us join that up a bit more, and let us have more of a conversation about economic impacts. There is no particular left/right or unionist/nationalist persuasion to this; it is simply about us doing policy better.

Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive, and I will explain why that is the case. Both amendments amend clause 3, but amendment No 2 places an equality of consideration of economic impacts alongside the various other requirements on the council under clause 3. Therefore, it is giving, in a sense, equality, as in it is saying, "This is one of the things that is closer to the level of consideration that has to be given to clauses 3(2)(a), 3(2)(b) and 3(2)(c)".

Amendment No 3 is a little bit more muted in that it says — I will not go through the text and where it falls — that the council:

"may include consideration of the potential impact of the proposed budget ... of Northern Ireland".

That gives the Fiscal Council more flexibility, and it is designed to give the Fiscal Council more flexibility. We discussed some of this in the Committee. It cannot be said that we are putting an onerous or unacceptable burden on the council's resources. The amendment gives the council the power and specifies that we think that it may want to use that power to analyse proposed potential impacts.

I would rather that we pass amendment No 2, but I am also content with amendment No 3, if there is a majority for it in the House. I am genuinely intrigued to hear what other parties, including Executive and non-Executive parties, think about that, because I genuinely do not understand why we would not do this. I put down both amendments because I am keen to hear debate and hear what objection or support Members have for either of those amendments. Hopefully, there will be some response, and I am more than content not to move one of the amendments if there is a preference for the other.

I am really clear that one of the most consistent frustrations that I have had, not just since I have been leader of the Opposition but since I have been an MLA, is that we do not talk often enough about economic impacts. If the Minister has announced an aspiration to devolve more fiscal powers to him here, he and I share that aspiration. Others in the Chamber do not, and I respect that, too. This is without prejudice to whether we do that or not, but, whether we do that or not, we need to have a much richer debate about economic impacts. That would serve not just the business community but workers and families in this society and would add to the quality of debate.

Amendment Nos 2 and 3 are mutually exclusive, and I hope that Members are able to support at least one of them. Obviously, if they support one, the other one will be defeated. I am happy to hear from Members, and I am also happy to take interventions and answer questions as the debate goes on.

Amendment No 5 is also in my name and is similar to an amendment put down by Mr Tennyson. We know, here in Northern Ireland, that there have been lots of reports about the pernicious effect of what is often called the "cost of division". It is not called the cost of division in either of the two amendments that we are debating today; it is called the duplication of public services.

There have been various reports from Ulster University, Deloitte — in relation to policing — and various other sources that have talked about the fiscal consequences.

There may be economic consequences, but we are not asking that the council look at them. They are fiscal consequences, which are the consequences for public spending from having to duplicate public services and therefore create additional pressure at a time when there is already real pressure. The Minister tells us all the time how much pressure there is. We know the constraints that there are on other Ministers' budgets. It is reasonable for us to get a proper estimate of those costs from the Fiscal Council. To be clear, I cannot speak for Mr Tennyson, so I will not, but we are talking about broadly the same thing and are probably in broad sympathy with each other's amendments.

My amendment No 5 relates to clause 4, which deals with fiscal sustainability reports. They are the more thematic, longer-term reports that the Fiscal Council produces, not the annual Budget report. It would not be practical to go through every annual Budget and say, "There is duplication of services here, there and everywhere". Fiscal sustainability reports are thematic. They allow the Fiscal Council to look at an issue. It has produced several of them in the past few years. It is not unreasonable for us to make a specific request of the council that it look at the cost of duplicating services; in fact, it would be a healthy thing for it to do. It may well throw more light on the issue. It may be that some of the numbers that have been quoted — the hundreds of millions of pounds a year — are either not borne out or are borne out in ways that surprise us. The council would not be making policy decisions. It would not be making decisions for the Minister of Finance or, indeed, any other Minister. This would simply help improve the data on which we make policy decisions.

Those are our four amendments, two of which are mutually exclusive. They are, I hope, reasonable and sensible. To repeat, they do not place a significant additional burden on the Fiscal Council. I hope, as the proposer of the amendments, that my words will reassure Members that it is not my expectation or intention that they will create significant additional burdens on the Fiscal Council. It is, however, my contention that the quality of our policy debate is not good enough. I do not think that anybody could argue that the quality of government overall — something for which we are collectively responsible — has been good enough. As the Opposition, we are relentlessly focused on improving our accountability and scrutiny. Sometimes, that involves moments of robust challenge and even theatrical display. Today, however, is about creating in law more power for that really important watchdog, the Fiscal Council, to report and give clarity to us as MLAs, to the public more generally and to the media and the people who report on such things, so that we can have robust and better policy outcomes. The amendments are reasonable. They would improve scrutiny when it comes to delivery of the Programme for Government, the economic impact of our policies in the Budget and understanding the cost of division.

I commend the amendments to the House. I very much hope that colleagues in the Executive parties, in the spirit of constructive engagement and improving how we do government here, will be able to support them. I am happy to answer any further questions about them. I genuinely do not understand why colleagues would not support the amendments, but I hope that they will. Thank you all for listening to me.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

After several years of operating and helping to provide scrutiny and transparency in public finances, the legislation will put the Fiscal Council on a statutory footing, bringing it into line with best practice in other jurisdictions, safeguarding its independence and protecting its scrutiny role. I am sure that others in the Chamber will agree that the Fiscal Council has had a positive impact since its formation four years ago, having published over 20 reports ranging from Budget assessments to reports on the sustainability of our public finances and health system.

I turn to the amendments. Evidence provided by similar bodies from neighbouring jurisdictions during Committee Stage has been useful in informing us and helping us understand how such institutions can evolve. Amendment Nos 2 and 3 seek to expand the Fiscal Council's remit to include economic and fiscal forecasting. While I recognise the intention behind the amendments, Members should be mindful that our context differs significantly from that of other jurisdictions. For example, the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) provides forecasts to support the Scottish Government's Budget process, but that reflects a different set of fiscal powers, particularly on taxation, that we do not currently possess.

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

Will the Member give way?

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

No, sorry.

Indeed, as the Chair of the Fiscal Council has stated, its current role is more reflective of our financial framework, where most Executive revenue comes from the block grant. While I obviously support the broader principle of enhanced financial powers and acknowledge that such amendments point to a possible future direction, I do not believe that it is necessary or appropriate to legislate for that change at this time.

A Member

Will the Member give way?

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

No, thank you.

Amendment Nos 4 and 5 relate to expanding the council's scope to examine issues such as the cost of duplication of services. While the intention behind the amendments is clear, the existing flexibility in the Bill already allows the council to explore such areas where it deems it appropriate without the need for explicit provision.

The fundamental purpose of the Bill is to maintain and strengthen the Fiscal Council's independence in assessing the sustainability of our public finances, and the council itself has supported the legislation as achieving that aim. The OECD has also stated that the Bill has been developed in line with principles for independent fiscal institutions.

I thank the Minister and the Department for their engagement with the Committee, particularly for bringing forward amendments to the explanatory and financial memorandum for consideration.

While I have considered the amendments and understand the rationale behind them, I do not believe that they are necessary. I therefore welcome the Bill as a positive step forward in placing the Fiscal Council on a statutory footing but will not support the amendments.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on another piece of substantive legislation from the Department of Finance, and thank the departmental officials, Finance Committee staff and all who gave evidence in Committee as we worked hard on the Bill. We welcome the Bill, which underpins the Fiscal Council's work with a statutory basis, following its operation since 2021, and the way in which it clearly emphasises its independence in governance as key. The statutory foundation of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council will further bolster its ability to carry out independent scrutiny of our financial situation at a time of economic uncertainty and unprecedented pressures facing our public service delivery, and establishing, through this legislation, a legally binding oversight body should help our efforts.

There is nothing more important to our taxpayers than to see transparency and accountability when it comes to public money. To date, our Fiscal Council has demonstrated the positive impact that it has had in improving transparency, scrutiny and understanding of our public finances. Its wide range of reports far exceeds what it is required to do, including, quite recently, its assessment of Northern Ireland Water's funding model, and shows the council's ability to scrutinise across many departmental remits and address some uncomfortable truths that hamper our ability to deliver, as well as issues coming from our public finances.

As others have outlined, the clauses set out what the council would do, the required reports and some of the details of those. It is important to point to the mission of the Fiscal Council, which is:

"to bring greater transparency and independent scrutiny to the current and future condition of Northern Ireland’s public finances, to inform public debate and policy decisions".

For me, that last point is critical: it is independent assessment of Northern Ireland finances to inform policy decisions, to inform public debate, not to be a part of those. It is not for the Fiscal Council to perform as economists, pass political opinion or to be prescribed in legislation to undertake work with any potentially politically defined objectives. The Fiscal Council's independence and professional discretion is essential to protect all the things that are proposed in the amendments.

All of the amendments raise sensible conversations that we all want to be a part of and debates that we all should be engaged in. However, we do not believe that they are best placed in the legislation, prescribing things as "essential duties" of the Fiscal Council. The amendments call on the Fiscal Council to do more than report on the public finances; they call on the council to give opinions, to perform as policy analysts and, potentially, economists. That is not its current role, and it could change the dynamic of how it operates.

In amendment No 1, there is a call for a consideration as to the extent to which the proposed Budget aligns with the most recently agreed Programme for Government. Under its professional discretion, the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council is free to make any comment on that as it sees fit. It has done in the past, and I have every confidence that it will in the future. That is a varying opinion and part of the public debate, as Executive Ministers and those critiquing them have different views. The leader of the Opposition said in this debate that that would give the Fiscal Council:

"a clear mandate to comment on how well the Executive are delivering".

That comment is quite politically motivated, and it led to comments on his other amendments that did not make it through, including one that proposed that the Fiscal Council would make costings from Opposition proposals. That would err on the side of doing the Opposition's job for it and put the Fiscal Council into the middle of the political operation of how the Opposition and the Executive work.

Passing amendment No 1 would introduce a requirement for how the alignment would be measured as well as assessed reports. The detail on how that would operate is unclear. We feel that the current application of the Fiscal Council's professional discretion, as necessary, is appropriate to inform public debate without injecting a new statutory duty.

Regarding amendment Nos 2 and 3, we see the role of the Fiscal Council as being to report on public finances in order to feed economists in their work of making assessments. It is not the role of the Fiscal Council to act as an economist. There are economists in place across the Northern Ireland Civil Service whose job is to assess the output of bodies such as the Fiscal Council, and the wider impacts on each Department. In the Department for the Economy, the economists' role is also to assess the impact of public financial activities on the Northern Ireland economy. We recognise the need for and the importance of that role, and we acknowledge that it may be somewhat lacking. That brings back into question the Northern Ireland Audit Office report into some of the capacity and capability in the Northern Ireland Civil Service. That report highlights the need to enhance skill sets and roles around how reform and the work of economists may be delivered, but we do not believe that that is the role of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council, and we do not support its being added to the legislation.

Amendment Nos 4 and 5 bring in a somewhat political interpretation of what may be considered by some to be the cost of duplication. It is unclear how the proposers of those amendments intend to define that. If the Fiscal Council was so minded to undertake that work, it could do so under its current discretionary powers. However, that seems more like a potential report for a body like the Northern Ireland Audit Office or an exercise that, if it had added value, should be undertaken by each Department or arm's-length body to interrogate their data and pull out evidence on which services are genuinely being duplicated, rather than having a high-level helicopter view, as has been the case with some previous reports that are in the public domain.

There is a genuine need for work to identify inefficiencies in how we deliver our public services, and it goes alongside the need for transformation of our public services. It cannot and should not be a generic piece. It needs to be reviewed properly and operationally. For example, in the health service, we have multiple arm's-length bodies, with duplication of many back-office functions, including form-filling, administration and transfer of data. That needs to be interrogated by management, internal audit, external audit and reformed. Those are operational and meaningful tasks.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. The Member will be aware that the recent Fiscal Council report quoted that, based on an analysis of like-for-like delivery of public services, there were 1·88 civil servants here for every one in England and Wales. The Ulster Unionist Party will support amendment No 5 because the real issue that we seem to have here is that the Northern Ireland Civil Service, in all its years, has never identified that internally as being a problem. In one report, the Fiscal Council brought that issue to the fore. Therefore, does she not see that there is merit in amendment No 5?

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I completely agree with the point that he made about the quantification of public-sector workers, but I do not necessarily think that addressing the impact of duplication in the delivery of public services, as set out in the amendment, is the answer. I believe that there is a piece of work there. It is really important, and there are wider issues around that, but my concern about adding the line into the legislation is that it is not clearly enough defined. For example, if that one piece of work were done, what other pieces of work would come under that, and how would they be resourced by the Fiscal Council? Therefore, I do not believe that it is concise enough, but I totally agree with him about the piece of work that he is suggesting needs to happen. On that, it is worth pointing out that, currently, the Fiscal Council is quite modestly staffed, with limited resources, so prescribing things in legislation would mean that some things would be prioritised over others.

To us, the critical value of the Fiscal Council is its independence. The financial reviews, opinions, presentations or bids that come from within Government are often shaped by a particular perspective. In our consideration, we reviewed and had concerns about the Department of Finance's role and how that sat in the legislation. It is important that the view of the Minister or whoever sits in the Department cannot persuade the actions of the Fiscal Council. Throughout our scrutiny, we considered the operation of that at length and received assurances that the independence of the Fiscal Council will be maintained.

The Bill also mentions that there may be additional funding requirements. We believe that it is important that the Assembly is consulted when it comes to any additional funding that is needed, because, as we set up this body in legislation, we should not write a blank cheque for it or any other public body that would allow them to grow without submitting formal proposals or business cases. We must always work together to ensure that we achieve the best value for money for Northern Ireland taxpayers.

We have spoken at length in the Chamber —.

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

Will the Member give way?

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Yes.

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

I appreciate that the Member's party has taken a position on that. Obviously, I will wind up on the amendments later. Does the Member accept that we are entitled to legislate for any public body to do specific things? One would not expect a business case for a specific thing to appear in primary legislation.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I completely agree, but it is important to make the point that, as multiple new bodies and quangos are being set up, we must, at the outset, keep a close eye on them and not write blank cheques that allow them to grow unchecked.

To us, the role that the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council plays is important, and we welcome the Bill, which will underpin the Fiscal Council's work on a statutory basis. We believe that maintaining the independence of that body is paramount and essential.