Northern Ireland Assembly, 26 May 2026

438 contributions from 62 members. The official report.

Members' Statements

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I pay tribute to an extraordinary woman from south Armagh who has just made history. Last week, Sarah Armstrong from Crossmaglen stood on the highest point on earth when she successfully summited Mount Everest. For most people, Everest is a dream. For Sarah, it became a goal. Through determination, resilience and hard work, she turned that dream into a reality.

As she grew up in south Armagh, sport has always been at the heart of Sarah's life from representing Ireland at netball and captaining Ireland at the World Youth Cup to building a successful career in dentistry and establishing her practice in Jonesborough. Sarah has always pushed herself to achieve more, but what makes her achievement special is that she has never focused solely on her own success. For years, she has inspired and empowered others through fitness, sport and community leadership. She has encouraged women across south Armagh to step outside their comfort zone, build their confidence and believe in themselves. She has supported women through some of life's toughest challenges and has shown that sport can be a powerful force for resilience, well-being and friendship. Everest may be the highest mountain in the world, but Sarah's greatest achievement has always been lifting others up along the way.

As Sarah makes her way across the skies back to Irish soil, she returns not only as an Everest summiteer but as an inspiration to an entire generation of young people who now know that no dream is too big and no mountain is too high. Sarah, we are proud of you, your community is proud of you, and your friends and family love and support you. We are all immensely proud of everything that you have achieved. Crossmaglen cannot wait to welcome you home.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Over the weekend, Sinn Féin loudly rang the irony klaxon on net zero targets.

Let us take a short walk down memory lane. In 2022, when climate change legislation was making its way through the Assembly, the DUP warned of the consequences of imposing unrealistic and unworkable targets in Northern Ireland. It was not only the DUP that sounded that alarm: experts did too. The UK's independent Climate Change Committee repeatedly warned that a full net zero target for Northern Ireland was not realistically achievable. Its advice was clear: Northern Ireland could credibly achieve around 82% reduction in emissions by 2050 — not absolute net zero. However, Sinn Féin, Alliance and the SDLP decided that they knew better, and now, we are living with the consequences.

The Climate Change Committee also warned that infrastructure, transport and energy policies would have to align with climate legislation, which would mean that major roads and infrastructure projects would face increasing legal and planning challenges unless Ministers could demonstrate compatibility with carbon budgets. And so we come to the A5. While I welcome the First Minister's belated admission that climate legislation may need to be revised, it is a remarkable U-turn from a party that championed that legislation only a few weeks ago in the Chamber. The DUP warned that this would happen. Only last month, the DUP tabled a motion calling for a proper cost-benefit analysis of Northern Ireland's net zero targets while recognising the impact that they could have on strategic infrastructure projects such as the A5. What happened? The Ulster Unionists voted against it; Alliance voted against it; the SDLP voted against it; and Sinn Féin voted against it.

Paying lip service in the media is one thing, but taking action is another. While I welcome the fact that Sinn Féin apparently has come to its senses, the reality is this: legislation must be practical, proportionate and workable. It cannot become so rigid that it paralyses infrastructure investment, undermines regional connectivity and prevents the delivery of projects that save lives. Northern Ireland contributes only a tiny fraction of global emissions, yet we have created a legislative framework that risks blocking Northern Ireland moving forward. The DUP is prepared to work on that. It is time that others showed the same impetus on the issue.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Last week, we saw the Department of Education launch a key report on the level of demand for integrated education and a new integrated education support programme. Those two announcements coming within 24 hours of each other represent a classic case of mixed messaging.

The report on demand for integrated education, which was required in legislation, was, regrettably, full of political spin and seemed at pains to downplay demand for integrated education at every opportunity. The message in the report, however, was clear: regardless of which measure you prefer to use, there remains significant unmet demand for integrated education in NI. The life and times survey sets out that 55% of those surveyed would prefer to send their child to an integrated school or, if you prefer, 31% of parents who have recently been through the admissions process would have preferred to send their child to an integrated school. In a context where only 8·4% of the available school places are integrated, there is clearly a huge unmet demand for integrated education. When the law requires the Minister not just to measure that demand but to aim to meet it, it is clearly time for action, not spin.

A report that sets out demand with the numbers that I have just referenced and then attempts to explain it away as patchy, variable or reflective of a couple of oversubscribed schools and so on is not taking the duty to aim to meet demand seriously. The Minister needs to take the politics out of this. We have seen it before in recent decisions: you cannot, on one hand, acknowledge demand in an area, such as the area that a large part of my Strangford constituency falls into — Ards and North Down — and then, when two schools in that area bring forward proposals to transform, refuse them. That seems to me to be an exercise in gaslighting the public.

It is not all doom and gloom. The launch of the integrated education support fund, which quickly followed the report that I have referenced, is welcome. Alliance has argued for years that schools, often in rural areas, that have different management types should proactively seek to come together to secure sustainable provision in their communities and, where possible, offer that integrated model at the same time. It is welcome that the Department is now proactively offering support for schools to undertake that work and deliver those solutions, and I encourage schools across Northern Ireland to engage with the process. I hope to see creative solutions to bring schools forward in the not-too-distant future. It is vital that the Department does not continue with mixed messages. Either the Department is serious about dealing with this and the Minister will step up and deliver, or it is not. It is time for the political spin to be taken out of the issue and for the statutory duties to be exercised fully and properly.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will highlight the urgent plight of front-line domestic abuse services in my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, particularly Fermanagh and Omagh Women's Aid, which is facing critical pressures to ensure that its services remain viable and available.

Ending violence against women and girls is a key priority that we all share. Organisations like Women's Aid are on the front line dealing with education and prevention and assisting those affected. Those organisations are seeing an unprecedented increase in the need for their services, with Women's Aid having to refocus the organisation towards crisis response and safeguarding to the detriment of increased awareness and preventative activity. Raising awareness of the issues has been successful, but increased disclosure has, in turn, led to an increased demand for support. Unfortunately, there just has not been the corresponding investment to respond to the epidemic adequately. Shockingly, more women and girls are waiting for support than are actively receiving a service. The situation is simply unsustainable. If we are encouraging those affected by domestic abuse to come forward, it is unacceptable that we do not have the capacity to assist them when they make that brave step.

My colleague Mike Nesbitt MLA, as Health Minister, has visited Women's Aid in County Fermanagh and has seen at first hand the issues facing those rural communities. However, the Justice Minister must also now engage to develop a greater understanding of the issues facing Fermanagh and Omagh Women's Aid and its hugely straining operational demands. So many rural services feel forgotten, and, despite the Executive's commitment to ending violence against women and girls, those services are struggling to see how they have been supported locally. I urge the Executive to intervene. Meaningful investment, engagement and support are now paramount to ensure that protection and awareness measures are implemented robustly and that women and girls across Northern Ireland feel that they have somewhere to turn in their darkest hour.

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

Recently, I had an eye-opening meeting with nursery and primary-school principals, special educational needs coordinators (SENCOs) and trade unions from across east Down. Their message was certainly not a form of political spin or exaggeration. It was an absolute warning: a warning that our schools are being pushed to the brink and that children with additional needs are being badly failed by a system that is no longer coping with the pressure that is being placed on it. Those on the front line spoke honestly about classrooms being under enormous strain, support services being stretched beyond capacity and children waiting months, sometimes years, for the help and intervention that they so desperately need.

The children are not looking for special treatment. They are simply looking for a fair chance: a fair chance to learn, communicate, feel included in their classroom and reach their potential like every other child. Our schools want to give them that chance. Nobody enters teaching to watch children fall behind. Teachers care deeply about the young people sitting in front of them every day, and they want to help those children succeed. However, they cannot do that without help. Despite all that pressure, they turn up every morning and hold the system together. That dedication deserves more than warm words from our Executive; it demands support, because, right now, in the middle of all of this, exhausted parents are fighting battle after battle simply to get their child assessed and supported properly. Parents feel that they are ignored and passed from pillar to post. They are worried sick about what the future holds for their son or daughter.

What concerns me most is this: major changes are still being pushed forward without any honest explanation of how schools will be resourced to deliver them. The Children's Commissioner has already warned that the proposals for a graduated response framework are not ready for implementation. That was echoed by the staff whom I met at the meeting. Those warnings cannot be brushed aside. If teachers, principals and specialists are all telling us that the system is not coping, the Education Minister has a duty to listen before things get worse.

The reality is simple: schools cannot absorb endless pressure without consequences. Eventually, something has to give. When that happens, it is not Ministers who will suffer the consequences but children. Today I urge the Education Minister to start to listen to those who are on the front line, as I did at that meeting. He will hear clearly that staff are at the absolute brink. We must do something to support and help them in their work helping our children.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

A chairde

[Translation: Friends]

, May marks Mesh Awareness Month. It is an important opportunity to recognise the experiences of women and families who continue to live with the devastating consequences of pelvic mesh implants. For many women, what was presented as a routine procedure became the beginning of years of chronic pain, trauma and life-changing complications. Women who sought treatment to improve their quality of life instead found themselves facing severe physical pain, loss of mobility, loss of independence and, in many cases, profound impacts on their mental health and well-being. What made those experiences even more distressing is that so many women felt ignored or dismissed when they first raised concerns about the complications that the implants were having in their bodies. Too often, their pain was minimised and dismissed. Clearly, their voices were not listened to. That is not simply inequality but the reality of medical misogyny.

Today, we must acknowledge the courage and determination of all the women who refuse to stay silent. Through tireless campaigning and advocacy, many have helped to bring national attention to the serious risks associated with transvaginal mesh procedures. They have pushed for greater accountability, improved patient safety and better support services. However, while progress has been made, many women still live with the long-term consequences and damage caused by the mesh implants. They continue to struggle to get the specialised support and care that they need. We must ensure that those affected are listened to, treated with dignity and given access to the services and treatments that they need. They deserve financial redress and redress in terms of their surgeries. They deserve all the support that they can get, and they deserve it now. The Julia Cumberlege report was published in 2020 — six years ago. The rate of progress has been very slow for those women. They have spoken out on really difficult personal issues and are still waiting, so many years later, to see proper progress.

I finish by paying special tribute to Mary McLaughlin from Mesh Ireland. I have had the honour and privilege of campaigning alongside that woman for the past 10 years. That is how long the women have been campaigning and shouting about their terrible experiences. I thank Mary for everything that she has done for the mesh-injured community across the island. I sincerely hope that we can see proper progress in the time ahead.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

This morning, there is a sense of seething anger in our communities as they continue to digest the news of the lenient sentence that three boys in England — two were 14 years of age and one was 13 — received for the act of rape. They lured two young girls — a 15-year-old and a 14-year-old — to a location in Hampshire in England and raped them, videoed it, taunted them and put the video on social media for the world to see. In an act of sadistic cruelty that falls so far short of what anybody should expect from our justice system, those three individuals, when they came before the court, were spared jail and given youth rehabilitation orders. What does that say about the British justice system? What does it say to the victims of rape across the country? What does it say when victims go through trials dealing with some of the most hideous crimes, yet the system is lenient on the offenders and puts their needs, cares and wants before those of victims?

Why does that matter in this House? It matters because there is an attempt in the House to raise the level of criminal responsibility from what it currently is — 10 years of age — to the age of 14, which is what some in the Department of Justice propose. Under that proposal, one of those boys would not have faced any form of judgement. It is despicable in the extreme.

What message does that send to the rapist? What punishment, in this case, was there? There was no punishment. It is a prime example of the lenient sentencing that continues to dominate our judicial system. Our prisons are no longer a place to be feared. The punishment no longer fits the crime. It is high time that society got tough on crime and ensured that victims are centred in all of our approach.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Not that long ago, a swim school in my constituency of South Belfast closed down overnight. I was surprised by the number of parents who were impacted on by the closure, and I have been working with them for the past couple of months to get compensation. One constituent who contacted me said that they could not really afford the swimming lessons as it was but recognised that swimming was a life skill for their child. They had been asked to pay cash upfront, but their being out of pocket meant that their child probably would not be able to go to swimming lessons, as they had really had to scrimp for to pay for it.

That started me on a piece of work with Greenwich Leisure Ltd (GLL) on making swimming accessible for every child. We know that swimming is part of the Northern Ireland curriculum, but it is not mandatory, nor is it consistent in the way that it may be in other parts of the UK. There is no minimum standard. GLL told me that the number of children who can swim 25 metres unaided is declining. Right now, 30% of children leave year 7 unable to swim 25 metres. If that number continues to decline, we will reach a stage where we have a whole generation of adults who are unable to be safe in water.

I am really passionate about it: swimming is an essential life skill not just for water safety but for its health benefits. We know what the cost of physical inactivity is to the economy. It is a no-brainer. We need to make sure that every child is able to swim.

Another point made to me is that what happens is that children go swimming maybe for one term of the year. They will get the bus to the swimming lesson. Then they will stop going. It is not consistent. They would be better off going every day for one week, and they would be a much better swimmer.

We can do a lot around policy work that is being done not just with the Education and Communities Departments but with Infrastructure. The key barrier to being able to swim is the cost of transport. Swimming lessons in themselves are a lot cheaper, so it is about access to the swimming lessons. There is a lot more that we can do. It is relatively cheap. Look at what is being done in Manchester: for very little money, they have been able to make a tangible difference. All of us in the Assembly can get behind this and make sure that every child who leaves primary school is able to swim 25 metres.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Tourette's Awareness Month takes place from 15 May to 15 June. Tourette's is a condition that suffers a lot of bad press, mainly down to the fact that it is widely misunderstood. People who live with the condition of Tourette's are often the butt of the joke. They suffer misinformation and are mimicked and mocked at every turn. I am proud and privileged to know personally a number of people in my constituency and across the North who have the condition of Tourette's and are involved in the Tourette's support group. They do amazing work for families, particularly young people and children who suffer with Tourette's. Their stories are heartbreaking. The testimony that I have listened to would bring tears to a stone.

People often make fun of the condition. We see it represented in the media, films and TV shows as something that is humorous and can be mocked, as demonstrated recently in the news story around the awards show in the wake of the amazing film, 'I Swear', which I encourage people to watch, tough as it is to get through. I have been told by people who have Tourette's that their tics, which they cannot control and which are often debilitating, are made worse by the fact that the general public and people who really should know better end up making their condition worse and making life tougher for them. I have heard of young people being admonished in the cinema, in church and in queues in shopping centres for something that they cannot control, which worsens the anxiety that they suffer as a result of their condition.

What is more frustrating than all that is the fact that our statutory services, which should be offering support to our children and young people in particular with Tourette's, end up making life worse for them. The Department of Health and the Department of Education are ill equipped to deal with the condition. There is no specific training service for educational psychologists in the Education Authority regarding Tourette's. In a response to a recent Assembly question, I was told that there is no specific treatment path in the Department of Health for people with the condition. Tourettes Action produced an amazing video to raise awareness of the condition that was not mainstreamed by the Education Authority, despite promises that it would be, and the Department of Health does not hold data on the number of people across the North with the condition.

All that leads to misinformation and people fighting for years to get a diagnosis, and then they cannot access the support that they need because of the lack of awareness and understanding of Tourette's. Therefore, during Tourette's Awareness Month, I ask you all to be kind and remember that people with Tourette's cannot control it.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

We in the Chamber know only too well that Sinn Féin does not govern well. It cannot build infrastructure; it cannot get a Budget that can be agreed; it cannot spend money effectively and efficiently; it cannot get net zero targets right; and, through its intervention, it chases jobs away from Northern Ireland instead of encouraging jobs here. It seems that Sinn Féin is not even good at being in opposition in the Republic of Ireland because it did not win two by-elections that you would have expected it to win, one of which was in Dublin Central, which is in the party leader's back garden.

The BBC quoted a Sinn Féin source saying:

"Some voters in Dublin Central don't care too much about the real issues."

I suggest that Sinn Féin does not care too much about listening to voters and acknowledging the real issues. That is the problem with Sinn Féin. While it has its head in the sand, those results will continue to come in. It is about Sinn Féin getting it right. It is about time that Sinn Féin listened to the people. It is about time Sinn Féin listened to its support base in the Republic and in Northern Ireland. It needs to shape up and get its act together because, when it does not govern well here, it affects us all. It is not in opposition here; it is in government. We need the party to get its act together and get with it.

Sinn Féin has failed countless times on many serious issues, not least immigration and net zero: woke nonsense. It is about time it changed. I hope that, with the battering down South in the Republic in those two by-elections, Sinn Féin will continue to do its U-turns and start governing well.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

May is Coeliac Disease Awareness Month. It is a condition that affects about one in 100 people in the UK, and it is estimated that around 64% of those people remain undiagnosed. It is a serious autoimmune condition in which the body's immune system attacks its own tissues when gluten, which is a protein found in wheat, barley and rye, is eaten. Symptoms can be recurrent, persistent or unexplained. They may include but are not limited to fatigue, stomach pain, nausea, anaemia and neurological issues. The only treatment is a strict, gluten-free diet for life, but that is far easier said than done.

People often think that only bread and pasta contain gluten, but it can turn up in all sorts of places. It can be hidden in soups, sauces, processed meats, soy sauce and snack foods. Some alcoholic drinks also contain gluten, particularly beers and ales.

For many people with coeliac disease, eating out can be stressful rather than enjoyable. Even very small amounts of gluten can cause harm, and cross-contamination from shared utensils, fryers, chopping boards or preparation areas can make food unsafe. Research suggests that consuming more than 10 mg of gluten a day may be enough to damage the small intestine of someone with coeliac disease. Gluten can also appear in products that many people would never think of, including medications, supplements, lip balms and even children's play dough.

Although awareness has improved over recent years and gluten-free options are now widely available, many people still face daily challenges when shopping, eating out or trying to access reliable information. Greater understanding and awareness can make a meaningful difference for those living with coeliac disease and those struggling with symptoms who have not yet been diagnosed or received the support that they need.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Last week, I brought to the public's attention the extraordinary number of physical assaults on our teachers and classroom assistants. There have been 2,500 assaults. What is even more shocking, however, is the sexual harassment, abuse and extreme misogyny to which some young boys are subjecting our female teachers and female pupils. Up and down the country, I have heard shocking evidence, which has been repeated at Committee and in my constituency office, of upskirting, downblousing and cyber-flashing. I have heard of young boys openly telling teachers what they would like to do to them, where, how and when, and of them standing in front of a female teacher saying, "You can't tell me what to do. Only a male teacher can". I have heard about deepfakes and extreme objectivisation. When a teacher raises the issue on behalf of a pupil or themselves, they are often made to feel as though they are the problem. The school asks, "What do you want us to do?", because, too often, their hands are tied when it comes to making decisive interventions.

We need parents to get a grip on what their young people watch, because, at home, they are watching extreme porn and extremely misogynistic influencers. That is polluting their young brains. The extreme outworking of that is what we saw in England, where two 14-year-old boys raped two schoolgirls, videoed it and put it on social media. Followers called the schoolgirls "slags". What signal did the judge send? Not one single day will be spent in prison by those two boys, who were aided and abetted by a 13-year-old. What signal does that send to people about reporting that kind of extreme misogyny? We therefore have to get a grip on the issue in our society.

The case has now been dealt with, so I can comment on the following aspect. The judge laboured over all the mitigating factors but not over the aggravating factors. I see that happen time and time again. I was with Women's Aid last week. The crime of non-fatal strangulation was brought in by this place to great fanfare. It seeks to put men who strangle women behind prison bars. The vast majority of men who commit non-fatal strangulation do not get a custodial sentence, yet that crime is at the far end of the homicide timeline. It is a red flag that a man will murder a woman in the community.

For some reason, the human rights lobby, which has a role to play, has got us into a position in which public authorities focus on the rights of suspects and perpetrators and attach greater weight to them than they do to the rights of the victim. A recalibration is needed. We need parents to step up and make sure that their children are not watching extreme porn online. We need to support decisive interventions being made when boys treat women and girls in our schools like that. It has to end, and we need to address it.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Michelle Guy has sought leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22. The Member will have up to three minutes in which to speak.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am pleased to present this petition on behalf of the residents of Dromara, which is a small, rural village in Lagan Valley. The origin of the petition was a road safety meeting in February, which was attended by residents and local PSNI officers and supported by Sorcha Eastwood MP, my colleague David Honeyford MLA and local councillors Aaron McIntyre and Kurtis Dickson. On that night, the community spoke with real concern about speeding, including racer-type behaviours, in the village and on the roads leading to it. Concerns about parking and the lack of street lighting on roads entering the village were also raised. Almost 400 residents have signed the petition, which calls on the Department for Infrastructure to prioritise road safety for Dromara's residents. In particular, the lack of traffic calming is attracting antisocial, dangerous, racer-type behaviours that create a nuisance and a hazard for residents. On behalf of the residents, I urge DFI to make road safety improvements to the village before we are left with a tragedy.

Mrs Guy moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The petition will be forwarded to the Minister for Infrastructure, and a copy will be sent to the Committee for Infrastructure.

I invite Members to take their ease.

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

Ministerial Statement

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Speaker has received notice from the Minister of Finance that he 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.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Executive set out their vision for the delivery of public services in the Programme for Government (PFG). It is clear that transforming how we deliver our public services is central to meeting many of the challenges that the Executive face now and in the years ahead. 'Reform and Transformation of Public Services' is one of the nine key priorities in the Programme for Government.

At its core, transformation is about changing how we work so that our services become more effective, more resilient and more sustainable. That is increasingly important, given the constrained public finances. That means designing services around citizens, not organisational structures; cutting duplication and unnecessary complexity; planning our workforce better so that skills are used where they add the most value; using data wisely in order to guide decisions and support early action; focusing on prevention, not just managing demand; and making sure that every pound that we spend delivers the greatest possible impact, achieving better outcomes and responding to the changing needs of the community. The transformation fund has a part to play in that.

Last March, I announced £129 million for six transformation projects across healthcare, special educational needs, justice and infrastructure. While those projects are still in the relatively early stages of delivery, it is encouraging to note the progress that has been made. Almost 300,000 more people now have access to a wider range of supports in their GP practice. Some 114 student classroom assistants are availing themselves of new training, which is aimed at supporting children with additional needs in early years settings. Four thousand policing hours have been saved, and court time is already being freed up in order to focus on the most serious criminal cases. The first natural flood management scheme has already commenced, with the potential to reduce flooding, improve water quality and make our urban spaces greener. A digital maturity assessment of the Civil Service has been completed, and work is in train to appoint a chief digital officer. Those are just some of the early successes resulting from the fund.

The 2026-27 year marks a critical expansion phase for the transformation fund and the projects that it is supporting. I am therefore pleased to announce today that, following a second call for proposals from Departments, £102·6 million of public funding from the transformation fund is being provided to a further six projects across the public sector to support the continued transformation of our public services. That £102·6 million represents the funding remaining from the original £235 million.

These projects have significant potential to bring about visible and lasting improvements to the way in which front-line services are delivered, including to some of our most vulnerable people. They will embed prevention and early intervention to ensure that people can access the services that they need where and when they need them; address some of the most pressing public-sector challenges; and lay the foundations for system-wide reforms to improve the sustainability of services in the longer term. I am pleased that additional funding of £30 million from the National Lottery community fund and approximately £5·6 million from the Shared Island Fund has been leveraged to support those transformative projects.

The six proposals for which I am announcing funding today reflect the board's recommendations. They have been agreed by the Executive, and I have secured the release of the funding from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. The successful proposals and funding amounts are as follows.

There will be £42 million for the Department of Health's ePharmacy primary care digital reform programme, which will deliver digitisation of the over 45 million prescription items issued each year, replacing paper prescriptions with a faster, safer, electronic system capable of being available 24/7, including in evenings, at weekends and on bank holidays. The investment will also enable over 500 community pharmacies across the region to provide more clinical services, improving access to care closer to home and reducing reliance on GP appointments. It will deliver reduced waiting and travel time for patients, with no need to collect paper prescriptions from GP practices or out-of-hours centres, improving convenience and patient experience, as well as reduced pressure on GPs, hospitals and emergency services, supporting the shift of care into the community and allowing clinicians to focus on more complex cases. It will also deliver £18 million cash releasing savings over 10 years, with £3·5 million recurring annually, alongside reduced paper use and travel, contributing to more sustainable health services.

There will be £29·2 million, also for the Department of Health, for Together for Families. The investment will deliver earlier, easier help for families at scale, strengthening 29 family support hubs that offer region-wide coverage and adding new, targeted neighbourhood support so that families get timely help before problems escalate. It will also deliver reduced pressure on crisis services and £30 million investment from the National Lottery community fund for a transformative new partnership between the Department of Health, the fund and the voluntary and community sector. Better value for the public purse will be achieved by shifting spend left: investment will focus on prevention and reduce reliance on high-cost interventions at a later stage. There will also be measurable efficiency and savings potential, with a moderate estimate of around £34 million in savings over 10 years.

There will be £16 million for the Department for Communities for its pathways to work and well-being proposal. Together with a contribution from DFC, the investment will deliver a redesigned health and work model delivered in partnership with the Department of Health and the Department for the Economy and offering stronger integration between employability and health services to support more people to find and sustain employment; support for 3,750 people to improve work and well-being outcomes, through working in partnership with local organisations; a commission on work and well-being, bringing together independent experts across health and employability, to set a forward approach to tackling health- and disability-related economic inactivity and shape long-term recommendations for scaling up interventions; a shift to early intervention and prevention, responding to individual needs as early as possible to prevent long-term economic detachment and higher-cost public-service interventions in the long term; and an estimated long-term financial benefit of £103 million, driven by reduced duplication, higher productivity and lower long-term demand on public services.

There will be an allocation of £6 million to the Department of Finance for its digital workplace solution. The investment will deliver modernised records and information management across the Civil Service, replacing an ageing system that is used by 26,900 staff; recurring savings of £400,000 per year from 2029-2030, once legacy support and infrastructure costs are removed; reduced duplication and manual handling, supporting faster access to information and freeing staff time for citizen-facing activity; and the secure foundations required for the future use of AI-enabled tools in government, strengthening transparency and decision-making over the long term.

There will be £5·3 million for the Department of Finance's NISRA data linkage office. The investment will deliver two data pathfinder projects to highlight the power of integrated data for policymaking across key PFG priorities; a stronger data-driven culture to provide better outcomes for citizens; and improved financial sustainability by delivering efficiency gains.

Finally, £4 million has been allocated to the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for a bovine TB pilot for the transformation of disease control delivery. That investment will deliver a first-of-its-kind regionalised research pilot to redesign the control of bovine TB; a preventative, evidence-led approach to target a disease programme that is currently costing over £60 million per year; Shared Island funding of approximately £5·6 million, which equates to roughly €6·4 million; and direct savings of around £275,000 by 2028-29, with substantially larger savings expected as the model scales up. Long-term projections show that a sustained reduction in disease prevalence could deliver annual savings of up to £2·8 million, improving the financial sustainability of a programme that has cost around £750 million over the past 20 years.

Members will know that I am ambitious about what I believe transformation can deliver. The transformation board is, too. In fact, reflecting the strength of applications received, the board has recommended supporting another five projects that it assessed as meeting the criteria for funding but which could not be funded from the £235 million funding envelope that is currently available. As Members will be aware, I have proposed in my draft Budget that additional funding be allocated by the Executive for transformation over the Budget period. Once the multi-year Budget has been agreed, it will therefore be my intention to seek Executive agreement that those proposals be supported, using the additional funding set aside for transformation in the Budget. I will update Members further at that point.

I once again express my thanks to the public-sector transformation board for all its work throughout the process, and to Departments for their engagement with the programme. The board will continue to monitor the delivery of all funded projects. It is supported in that regard by the delivery unit, based in the Executive Office, which will work very closely with my officials. Dependent on the outcome of discussions about the draft Budget, I intend to engage further with the board on determining the best approach for commissioning future bids to enable wider reform and transformation. The transformation fund on its own will not deliver all the reforms required to our public services. It is essential that we look to embed successful approaches in mainstream delivery and that we share learning and good practice. The transformation board is providing an active challenge function, encouraging projects to be innovative and agile and to take managed risks and adopt new ways of doing business. That is critical, given that demand for services is outpacing the funding available.

It is clear that the transformation fund can make, and is making, an important contribution. The projects being announced today will unlock additional funding, encourage cross-sectoral and cross-departmental collaboration, and maximise the impact of transformation funding in driving improvements in service delivery, promoting prevention and early intervention approaches, delivering cost savings and placing public services on a more sustainable footing. Today's announcement therefore represents another important milestone in the transformation journey.

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

Minister, a very important milestone would be setting a Budget. While many of the allocations that you have just announced are welcome and, I am sure, noble in intent, others will ask interrogatory questions about them. You have announced a £100 million allocation today while tens of billions of pounds of public spending is, effectively, irregular because we are operating without a Budget. Will you confirm that, if the Executive do not agree a Budget, notwithstanding the fact that you and I want the UK Government to provide more money, the Executive will be imposing further austerity in public services here because we will be able to spend only a percentage of last year's Budget?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Matthew O'Toole continues in his guise as the glass-half-empty guy in the Assembly. I have just announced hundreds of millions of pounds of investment in public services, following up on transformation and making real, tangible change to people's lives that they are witnessing on a daily basis. I remind him that almost 300,000 more people now have access to a wider range of supports in their GP practices; 4,000 policing hours have been saved; 114 student classroom assistants are availing themselves of new training; the first natural flood management scheme has commenced; and a digital maturity assessment of the Civil Service has been completed. Today's announcement will continue that programme of change across our Civil Service and public services. Citizens whom he and I represent will see a real change in how their public services are delivered. I will continue to engage with the British Government around the Budget to ensure that this place is fairly funded, and I hope that I have his support in that task.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Minister, with the current financial pressures, the Executive are united in calling for extra funding. Therefore, when £235 million of transformation funding has been made available by the UK Government, it is critical that we get it out and show that we can use it well. However, I have sight of correspondence from the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Chair that expresses her concern that funding has been surrendered for both the 2025-26 Estimates and the 2026-27 Estimates. Minister, of the money that has been announced and allocated to date, can you confirm how much has been spent and how much has been given back to the Treasury? Are we guaranteed that we will get back in the future the money that has been handed back or is that lost?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not have in front of me sight of the letter to which the Member refers. The first tranche of projects has taken longer to get off the ground than was first hoped, but I have announced, as I reiterated to Mr O'Toole, where we have seen significant progress. There have been delays in some of the projects, particularly in Education with delivery of the new investment in SEN. I would like to see that increase significantly over time, as I am sure that everybody would, and I believe that it will as time moves forward. There has also been a delay in some of the Justice funding being delivered. I think that that is related to the ongoing industrial action from barristers and so on. I do not have the exact figures in front of me, but no money has been lost to this project. The Treasury has agreed to re-profile all that funding. As I said during my address, the board, the delivery unit in the Executive and individual responsible Ministers have to ensure, as they continue to monitor this, that spend is taking place at the speed that we want.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome the positive announcement from the Minister. Minister, on the announcement around TB, what engagement have you had with the Agriculture Minister?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I commend that project. Not only is it being brought forward through this transformation fund but it has been able to secure Shared Island funding. Where we can lever in further funding from other organisations or other areas, that is vital. I have had engagement with the Minister on that matter. Clearly, it is an important project for animal welfare and for the welfare of farmers because diagnosis of TB in a herd can be quite detrimental to farming families. The cost of this over the past number of years has continued to rise, so we have to get a handle on it, and I think that this project will be a way forward.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Thank you, Minister, for the statement. It is definitely a positive development. You have already outlined some of the benefits of the spending in tranche 1. Are we likely to see any financial savings, and when are we likely to see those as a result of that investment?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I set out in my statement areas where there will be projected savings as part of the transformation. They are of higher scale in some areas than in others. Obviously, the importance of this is to save funds that can be redirected back into public services. The public seeing an improved public service, whether that improvement is in health, education, bovine TB or wherever it may be, is the important element of the transformation fund. It is about where we are improving public services and seeing the public get easier access to those public services and seeing real results for themselves.

Alan Chambers (UUP, North Down)

Minister, thank you for your statement. I especially welcome the allocation of £42 million for the e-pharmacy programme. Will the Minister agree that this will come as an important development to place the pharmacy sector on a sustainable footing and one that, equally importantly, will facilitate service growth?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It is an important development over a wide range of areas. It reduces bureaucracy in GP services and allows easier access for the public to the prescriptions that they need, with those being forwarded to their pharmacist. Obviously, it highlights again the importance of pharmacy in the primary care sector. It is a project of modernisation. In this day and age, GPs should not have to be signing a paper prescription that is then brought or sent to a pharmacist, and then dealt with etc. It is a great project, and I think that it will make a huge difference to GP services, to GPs, to those who use a GP and to those who use a pharmacist.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Minister, last year, when you released tranche 1 of the fund, you said that it would make a real difference to improving health outcomes, supporting children with special educational needs and improving the justice system. Do you believe that tranche 1 has achieved those aims?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do believe that it has achieved those aims. As I said to a previous questioner, there have been delays and maybe not as quick a pace as we would have liked to see in some projects at the start. That is now steadily uplifting and moving forward, however, and I read out the figures. Even with regard to GP services, almost 300,000 more people now have access to a wider range of supports in GP practices as a direct result of the transformation fund. We just talked about the next stage with pharmacies, so this is about real change happening in real time, and the general public seeing the difference.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for what he has announced. My question is whether the transformation fund is delivering quickly enough, particularly when it comes to infrastructure. Just last week, we had another damning report about planning delays. Money was announced over a year ago, yet not a single independent inspector has been appointed. What is the hold-up when planning is so critical to the economic prosperity of Northern Ireland?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The two projects that are on time within the first tranche are in the Department for Infrastructure, namely flood management and the recruitment of independent inspectors. I understand that advertisements have been out for that recruitment process, which may have already closed, and applications are being assessed. With regard to tranche 1, therefore, DFI is on time.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Minister, the announcement refers to £29·2 million for the Department of Health for 'Together for Families' and an additional £30 million from the National Lottery community fund. However, quite often, when budgets are stretched, it is the community and voluntary sector non-statutory funding that is cut first. Will you speak a little more about that new partnership, and what it will do to stabilise a sector that provides a lot of the early intervention work, or have those issues not been explored in detail with the Health Minister?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

That is an innovative new partnership between statutory children's and social care services and the voluntary sector, providing enhanced, targeted and more easily accessed help for families before problems escalate. It will mean fewer children entering care and more returning to their families where it is safe to do so, improving outcomes for children and addressing rising and unsustainable demand. It will also deliver measurable efficiency savings. It seems somewhat crass to talk about efficiency savings when talking about such an important issue but around £34 million over 10 years can be directed back into the service. The details and minutiae of those matters are best discussed with individual sponsoring Ministers on how exactly that will work, how they will work in tandem with the community and voluntary sector, and how they can support each other in delivering better outcomes for children.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement. There is some really good value in those announcements, but will there be a further round of funding, Minister, to build on that momentum?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have set aside around £100 million in the draft Budget for transformation. When we do have a final Budget, I would like to see money set aside for transformation. I have witnessed at first hand not only how that transformation pot has delivered outcomes for the public but how, when the Civil Service is given a bit of space and some money to be innovative and to allow it to plan and to do things differently, it presents projects such as those that have been successful. Therefore, let us give our Civil Service and public servants the space and money to transform, and then we see the changes on the ground.

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

I thank the Minister for his statement and for the moneys that will be afforded to many people in need.

Minister, on AI's involvement in digital maturity, you mentioned:

"the secure foundations required for the future use of AI-enabled tools in government, strengthening transparency and decision-making over the long term."

How exactly does your Department plan to ensure that those tools are used responsibly? Given that the Epic Encompass digital system, which cost billions, has slowed patient throughput because of its over-cumbersome demands on medics, have you considered the effects of increased digitalisation?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

My Department's project is about enabling the Civil Service and the wider public sector to move forward in an informed way on digitalisation, the use of AI and so on. We have to learn from elsewhere and ensure that, at its heart, the project is people-focused and based on the needs of the community — the public whom we serve — and staff and that there is a human focus at all times. AI can and will be transformative for our public services, but we cannot and should not replace the emotion and connection that only humans can bring to the equation.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I am absolutely delighted about the investment in our family support hubs. There are eight in my trust area and four in the city. I declare an interest, in that I used to manage the ETHOS family support hub. The hubs do amazing work to support our most vulnerable children and families. I am sure that our hubs are listening in today. Has the Department of Health indicated when the investment will become operational?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I cannot provide a time frame for that today. Ongoing engagement will be required between the Department and the hubs, the community and voluntary sector and all the others involved. We want to see the funds make a difference on the ground as quickly as possible. As I said, the delivery unit in TEO, the board, and, indeed, Ministers will monitor the progress of individual projects in the time ahead.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement. There is plenty of positive news in it. Will he provide more detail on the pathways to work and well-being proposal, particularly given its apparent similarity in aim to the employability work that was being carried out by organisations funded by the Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) until the local growth fund fiasco torpedoed that work? The UK Government did that, but there was also a lack of support from the Executive. How does that transformative work differ from what has already been done?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The pathways to work and well-being proposal has been allocated about £16 million, plus there is to be a contribution from DFC. It will be an innovative health and work model to support 3,750 people to find sustainable employment. It will be piloted in two council areas on a cross-departmental basis and in partnership with a range of local organisations. A commission on work and well-being will be established to shape long-term plans to scale up interventions. That work will be carried out over time with DFC and, as I said, with local organisations, which, in many instances, I suspect, will be from the community and voluntary sector. As the Member pointed out, the sector has significant experience in the area. It is up to the sponsor Departments to finalise how the project will proceed.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister's statement allocates £4 million to a new bovine TB pilot. Will the scheme involve a badger cull? Many in the farming community believe that we will simply be throwing good money after bad until we finally address the main cause of the spread of bovine TB.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

That is a matter for the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. It will be for him to decide the best way forward for bovine TB control.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I agree with some of the comments that the Member opposite made about AI and about digitalisation more generally. There is a lot of concern about AI being rapidly rolled out without the associated risks and the costs that are taken up by large companies being fully taken into account.

We need more detail about the family support hubs. Will there be new staff, or will current staff be repurposed? Where will the staff be located? What services will the family support hubs provide?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I understand the detail required by the question, but the detail of the administration of the projects is best placed with the Health Minister, the Communities Minister or the project manager of each project.

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

I welcome Health's ePharmacy programme. Many members of the all-party group on community pharmacy have called for that for a long time, so it is good to see it eventually arrive. The fact that funding is available for organisations and groups is welcome, given that no Budget has been agreed, which is causing a lot of uncertainty.

Does the Finance Minister know whether the £30 million from the National Lottery is for one year, two years or five years? It is great to see that money being invested, but, once it has run out, a void will be left that will have to be filled by the Department.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The investment will be made over a number of years. The principle for all the transformation projects is that they are funded through transformation funding but the Departments will adopt them and bring them into their funding baseline. That is the objective. It is about long-term change, not four or five years of change. It is about Departments doing things differently by embedding the projects by using the seed funding and then making that the way that they do things in the future.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

I do not think that anyone can doubt that this is a good news day, particularly given the investments that you have announced for the Department of Health. While the money is welcome and very much needed, I would warn that, without sustainability in the pharmacy sector, we will have a continuing problem. How do you intend to monitor the programme of delivering e-prescriptions, given that Encompass took many years and there were many problems with it before it was fairly successful?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The transformation board and the delivery unit in the Executive Office will continue to monitor the delivery of the projects. The relevant Minister also has a responsibility, and I have no doubt that the relevant Committees will play their part.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I agree with others in the House that this is a positive day, given the investment into our health services in particular. Investment of £5·6 million has been brought in from the Shared Island Fund. Minister, do you think that Departments are doing enough to leverage funding from the Shared Island Fund? Other Members and I were at a North/South Inter-Parliamentary Association meeting on Friday. During some of the conversations at that meeting, it was mentioned that there is good potential for Shared Island funding, particularly towards transforming how Health is delivered in specific areas such as women's health and children's cancer across the island and that that could be done better if we were to do it together. Shared Island would be a way to get to that place. Is enough work being done to leverage that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

It has to be a two-way street. I encourage my Executive colleagues to look at all areas in which they can achieve additional funding. In this instance, it is Shared Island Fund funding. There has to be alignment between that and our Programme for Government. Better engagement at the level of the Taoiseach's office and the Executive would be beneficial to ensuring that funding coming forward, which, it has to be said, is welcome, will further align with our Programme for Government and therefore fits into the plan for delivery and change that we want to see across the board. Without a doubt, Shared Island funding is making a real difference not only through this project but elsewhere.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I welcome the allocation of the remainder of the £235 million provided by HM Treasury for transformation projects that improve efficiency.

Minister, you said that the public-sector transformation board recommended supporting another five projects that meet the criteria for funding and that you want to see those supported. Have you approached or will you approach Treasury to make the case that, if it can provide further transformation funding, that will be money well spent, as it will deliver ongoing savings on an invest-to-save basis?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The simple answer is yes. We have proven time and time again that we can and will deliver on that funding and that we can deliver real change; indeed, those who work on the front line of public services are making a real change as a result of it. Therefore, I will continue to lobby Treasury on the matter.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

As no other Members have indicated that they wish to ask a question, that concludes questions on the statement.

Executive Committee Business

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

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

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

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

As no amendments have been tabled, there is no opportunity to discuss the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council Bill today. Members will, of course, be able to have a full debate at Final Stage. Further Consideration Stage of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council Bill is, therefore, concluded. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

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

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

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

As no amendments have been selected for debate, there is no opportunity to discuss the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill today. Members will, of course, be able to have a full debate at Final Stage. Further Consideration Stage of the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill is therefore concluded. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That the draft Baby Loss Certificate Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2026 be approved.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Business Committee has agreed that there should be no time limit on the debate. I call the Minister to open the debate on the motion.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

As Members will be aware, the regulations follow from the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Act 2026, which received Royal Assent on 26 February. During Assembly debates on the Bill, I said that a baby loss certificate scheme was needed to close the gap in our registration service, so that we could treat losses that occur early in pregnancy in the same way as we treat births and deaths. I said that I wanted to bring forward a baby loss certificate scheme that is shaped around the needs and experiences of families to provide comfort and support as they navigate their grief. I set out my commitment to establish the scheme as quickly as possible.

Today's debate provides an opportunity for us to make an important step towards delivering on those commitments. Since the passage of the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Act through the Assembly, my officials have worked at pace to finalise the regulations to provide the framework for a baby loss certificate scheme. My motivation, their motivation and, I suspect, the motivation of others who will contribute to today's debate is the same: to progress the scheme so that we can formally recognise losses prior to the end of 24 weeks of pregnancy. We know that a baby loss certificate cannot take away the pain that parents feel following such losses, but it is my hope that, by formally recognising their loss through a certificate that validates the life that was lost, we can provide them with a measure of comfort; help them to start a hard conversation with a friend or family member; or give them a way of reaching out for help in their grief.

The details of the regulations before the Assembly have been shaped around what the public told us during our consultation last summer. They include specific provisions about what a baby loss certificate will contain; the form of the application required for the issue of a baby loss certificate; how the General Register Office (GRO) will maintain records of the baby loss certificate; and how an amendment may be made to a certificate. In short, they provide the formal legal provisions required to support the operation of the scheme and the issue of baby loss certificates from the General Register Office.

Throughout the process, I have repeatedly been impressed and humbled by the candour and honesty of families who have been affected by baby loss. The regulations bear the imprint of more than 1,100 people and organisations who responded to our consultation. I record my gratitude to all those who took the time to share their experiences with us and for their bravery in setting out how deeply their loss impacted on their lives. Their insights into how the scheme should look and work have helped us design a certificate scheme that will meet their needs as fully as possible. I know that, for many, it will have been a difficult process, and I am grateful for their contributions.

I welcome Members' comments and commend the regulations to the House.

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

I will speak to the Finance Committee's scrutiny of the statutory rule. I thank the Minister for moving the motion.

I reassure the House of the Finance Committee's due diligence in scrutiny of the original legislation and the regulations that are before us today. I, too, warmly welcome the regulations as an effective final legislative stage in the evolution of the baby loss certificate scheme.

In many ways, this journey — at least in relation to the Northern Ireland Assembly — began when the Finance Committee urged the Department to include such a scheme in legislation. Today marks the final legislative hurdle. I am confident and, obviously, I hope that the House will affirm the rule, which the Committee has agreed. Today's motion will allow for the formal launch of the scheme and, I hope, make a real and meaningful change that will enable those who have lost a baby prior to the end of the 24th week of pregnancy to have formal acknowledgement and recognition of that loss.

The Committee first considered the policy proposal at SL1 stage on 15 April 2026, noting that the regulations set out how the scheme would operate, who might apply, the form of application, conditions for application and the information that the certificate would contain. The Committee was, as ever, mindful of the need to balance appropriate scrutiny with the swift implementation of the scheme. In line with agreed procedures, the Committee issued a short call for views on the proposal and agreed to schedule an oral briefing with relevant officials. The briefing took place ahead of schedule on 29 April. At that time, members were able to question the Registrar General on a number of important issues, including geographic considerations: where the recipient of the certificate had been living in Northern Ireland when they experienced the loss, but was now living in another part of these islands or, indeed, further afield; whether surrogacy use would preclude eligibility for certificates; and the timeline and anticipated demand for the scheme. Members also considered the layout of the certificates and the contents of template certificates and agreed to send those to the relevant stakeholders, including some of the organisations that the Minister mentioned — people who have experienced this loss themselves and who had given us candid and, at times, moving evidence throughout the scrutiny process. Having satisfied itself with the clarification and detail provided by officials, the Committee was more than content to approve the proposal. It was formally laid as a draft statutory rule on 11 May and, at our meeting of 20 May, the Committee noted the advice of the Examiner of Statutory Rules that the rule did not need to be drawn to the attention of the Assembly. The Committee is content that the rule be affirmed today.

On behalf of the Committee, I also take the opportunity to thank the Registrar General and his team in the GRO for developing the scheme so quickly and for providing ongoing clarification. That is important to note, because often, as MLAs, we hold not just Ministers but officials to account, and, sometimes, hold their feet to the fire, and often, in the Chamber, we criticise or lambast — sometimes in the Opposition, with my other hat on, we do that — but, on this occasion, I genuinely thank officials who worked to design a novel scheme with sensitivity and professionalism, very quickly. I put that on the record on behalf of the Committee. They answered all our questions thoroughly and comprehensively.

As I said, although formal scrutiny of the rule began in April of this year, it would be remiss of me not to point out that our Committee, on a cross-party basis, has been key to the development of the scheme. I acknowledge the constructive work that we have done with the Minister and his officials on this. We have been pushing for the scheme since 2024, when we returned after our absence. The applicable primary legislation — the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill — was introduced to the Assembly on 25 March 2025 and received Royal Assent on 25 February 2026. Throughout the Committee Stage of the Bill, members of the Committee were cognisant of the fact that it was an immensely sensitive topic. We heard directly from parties who had experienced loss, and it was, at times, highly emotive and affecting. With the indulgence of the House, I will give one example. On 4 June 2025, we heard from the Forget-me-not Group — a wonderful group that works alongside the bereavement midwives in the Ulster Hospital. We heard from that group about what the scheme will mean for those personally affected by baby loss and how it will make a real difference for them. They will, for the first time, have formal recognition of the emotional impact of their losses. I am honoured to stand up on behalf of the Committee and say that placing the scheme into law is important for all those who have been touched by baby loss. It matters for all the babies who have been lost, including Rosa, Matilda, Leanora, Eli and Dotty, and Noah and his brothers and sisters. Those are some of the losses we heard about in our Committee. Today marks the culmination of the process, whereby bereaved parents can have recognition of their loss. I am proud to support the passing of the regulations on behalf of the Finance Committee, and I look forward to the scheme's being implemented in the very near future.

In a non-Committee capacity, on behalf of our party, I commend the regulations. I also commend the officials and, indeed, the Minister for working constructively with the Finance Committee to bring the regulations forward. This is a small advance when it comes to what we do in the Assembly, but it will be deeply meaningful for people who are placed in this position. Not everybody will suffer a loss of pregnancy, but there will be a significant number of people for whom this is an important recognition. I thank the Minister for bringing the regulations, and I thank his officials for working on them. I also thank my colleagues on the Finance Committee. We are very pleased to have been able to work constructively to bring the scheme forward and conclude the process today.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Baby loss has a profound and heartbreaking impact on parents. The development of the regulations will enable that loss to now be formally acknowledged and is an example of a positive change that we can make in the Assembly when we work together in partnership.

Last October, I hosted an event here to mark Baby Loss Awareness Week and had the privilege of hearing from many families with lived experience about the effect that such a loss has on their lives. I am honoured to have been part of the Committee that has helped to shape this compassionate legislation. I commend the Finance Minister and his officials for their work in bringing the scheme forward, but, most of all, I thank those who have suffered the loss of their little angels for their bravery and their contributions. I also thank the organisations that support them. While baby loss certificates cannot and will not take away the pain of their loss, I hope that access to those certificates can help people during an extremely challenging time of their lives.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

Today, I remember all those babies who left us too soon. They lived, were precious, were loved and were lost from this earth to heaven. Every single one of their lives mattered, and they should always be remembered and recognised by more than just the memories and hearts of their parents and families. I especially think of the babies who passed away before 24 weeks of pregnancy and currently have no formal record of their life.

I welcome the progression of the baby loss certificate scheme in Northern Ireland, and I am honoured to have played a part in bringing it forward. It has been a true example of the Finance Committee working with the Department and the Minister. That collective work will mean that, in the coming weeks, baby loss certificates will be in law in Northern Ireland. This could easily have passed with a press statement from Ministers about future policy intent with nothing being delivered, but that has not been the case. Joined-up working and support to deliver the scheme has ensured that important and compassionate legislation will be introduced here.

As today's motion will allow for the formal launch of the scheme without delay, we should note, for caution and clarity, that that does not mean that parents can go out and get a certificate immediately this afternoon. There will be a process. I ask the Minister to provide some further detail on that, including the dates, in his closing remarks. Families have suffered loss, heartbreak and trauma, and it is important that, at the final stage of the process, their application and the administration of the scheme to get their certificate happen smoothly and compassionately. Again, I thank the Minister for bringing the regulations forward, and I thank his departmental officials, especially the Registrar General, for being available to the Committee at any time and for bringing the scheme forward at pace.

Throughout the Committee Stage of the Bill, members of our Finance Committee worked carefully and sensitively on the topic. We heard directly from those who have experienced loss. At times, it was emotional, but we took those personal testimonies on board and did our best to ensure that they are reflected in the legislation and the regulations. I thank all those who engaged with the Committee, including the Forget-me-not Group and the bereavement midwives. I also thank the local groups and individuals who reached out to me directly on the issue. This means so much to them all. All their stories have impacted on us, and, today, as the scheme moves into law, we should pause and acknowledge that, in the Assembly today, we are formally recognising those babies. Today really matters, and I am proud to be here to welcome the scheme. One of the first motions that came to the House after I joined the Assembly was on the need for baby loss certificates in Northern Ireland, and, today, we are delivering on that. Every life matters.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

I welcome the progression of the regulations. Back in early 2024, when these institutions got back up and running, the then Finance Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, set out her intention to bring forward legislation and, importantly, create a certificate scheme. I am delighted that, following the legislation that the current Finance Minister, John O'Dowd, introduced in 2025, we now have the regulations that will see that happen. As other Members have mentioned, that was on the back of a motion in the Chamber and engagement with families and lobby organisations out there that are impacted on by the issue. I want to say thanks to them —.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member take an intervention?

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Yes, of course.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Does the Member agree that it was those parents and the organisations that support parents who have lost their babies that really drove the issue, and that that is exactly how politics should work? They told us where the gap was and what they needed. They had a Department and Minister who listened, and delivered, at every point. The Committee also listened. That is really important. It is exactly how politics should work: we identify the gap by listening to people on the ground, and we address it.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

The Member is absolutely right. It reflects that good work. We have heard from all the Members who have spoken so far about the good work that was done between the Minister, the Committee, the organisations and families on the ground and, of course, the Minister's team, who are here today. I want to give my thanks to all of them. It is an important issue, particularly for those parents who want their loss to be recognised. Not everybody does — it is important to say that. For those who do, it is important that they will be treated, and issued with certificates, just like anyone else who loses a loved one. It is an important step. It shows the importance of the Assembly in passing legislation that meets the needs of our communities and society more broadly. We will now see the production of a baby loss certificate coming sooner rather than later. I commend the Minister, his team and, indeed, the Assembly as a whole.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Today is a deeply important and emotional moment for so many families across Northern Ireland. The approval and progression of baby loss certificates is not just a policy decision but an acknowledgement of grief, love and lives that mattered deeply to parents and families. For too long, many people who experienced pregnancy loss or baby loss felt that their heartbreak was invisible or unrecognised. Today's change helps to say clearly: your loss matters, your baby mattered and your grief is real. I am proud to stand alongside friends, family members, dedicated staff and constituents who have campaigned, shared personal stories and pushed for compassion and recognition. Their courage has helped to bring us to this point. The issue has never been about politics alone but about humanity, dignity and giving comfort to those who carry loss every single day. While no certificate can remove pain, it can provide meaningful recognition and reassurance that parents are not forgotten.

I thank everyone who has supported the progress, including advocacy groups, healthcare professionals, bereaved families and colleagues across the Assembly who recognised the importance of that step. Today will bring comfort to many people across our communities. I hope that it also sends a message that Northern Ireland is listening with compassion and acting with care. While there is still more work to do to support bereaved parents, it is an important milestone and one that many families have waited a long time to see. To every parent and family who is affected by baby loss, I say this: we remember, we recognise and we stand with you.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Since I came into the Chamber this morning, we have discussed hundreds of millions of pounds and passed the Further Consideration Stage of two pieces of legislation — one on how we regularise spend and the other on how we monitor spend. None of those is more important than what we are about to do now with the baby loss certificates and the regulations around them. It has been a simple, collective act of the Assembly and the team that we rely on, whether the Registrar General and his team in the GRO or the broader public service and Civil Service, to enact the legislation.

This is a team effort today. We are about to clear the final legislative hurdle to ensure that we can issue certificates to those who have lost a baby before 24 weeks.

As all Members who contributed to the debate said, the certificate will not replace the loss of the baby. What it will do is acknowledge the loss, the baby and the family's grief. Families will reflect on their loss in different ways, but we have allowed baby loss certificates to be issued. Without patting ourselves on the back, we should therefore be collectively proud that we have done that in a collegiate and respectful way.

As Members said, the scheme will go live in mid-June. The Registrar General and his team and I have put the resources in place. We expect there to be significant demand for certificates in the first weeks and months. We will work our way through the applications and respond to families as quickly as possible. The scheme will be widely advertised, and we will hold an event ahead of the launch date to ensure that the public are aware of the scheme and know how to apply to it. We will then get certificates out to families as quickly as possible. The final piece of clunky legislation that we have to produce in this place for the scheme will hopefully pass in the next few minutes, and the next step will be to issue certificates.

Question accordingly agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Baby Loss Certificate Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2026 be approved.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

I ask Members to take their ease while we make a change at the top Table.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

Committee Business

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes the Committee for Communities’ 'Report on Engagement with Local Government on the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy'; and calls on the Minister for Communities and the Executive to implement the recommendations contained therein.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

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

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Since the formation of our Committee, members have maintained a strong and continuing interest in the development of the anti-poverty strategy. We recognise that poverty is one of the most serious and persistent challenges facing communities across the North. It affects children, women, older people, disabled people, carers, workers, families, rural households and urban communities. It is also a challenge that does not sit neatly within the remit of one Department. Poverty is shaped by income, employment, housing costs, childcare costs, transport costs, energy costs, educational opportunity, health inequalities and access to advice and support. Although the Department for Communities leads on the strategy, the Committee believes that the final anti-poverty strategy must genuinely be a whole-of-government strategy and a whole-of-society strategy. The Committee's message is straightforward: local government is already part of the anti-poverty response, and the final strategy must now make it part of the anti-poverty system.

The Committee decided to engage directly with all 11 councils because local government is already delivering services in the heart of our communities and with direct experience of the lived reality of poverty. Councils are not distant from the impact of poverty; they see it at first hand. They see it through advice services, fuel support, food insecurity, social supermarkets, employability programmes, community planning partnerships, hardship schemes, and the community and voluntary organisations that they support.

At a dedicated meeting on 5 March 2026, the Committee for Communities heard evidence from representatives of all 11 councils. The evidence was powerful, practical and, at times, stark. One of the strongest messages that we heard was that local government is often the glue that holds local interventions together. Councils convene partners. They know their communities. They know where need is hidden, and they know which organisations are trusted by local people. They know that, in one place, the urgent need may be debt advice; in another, it may be transport; and in another, it may be help with school uniforms, heating oil or food. However, we also heard that councils can end up leading anti-poverty work by default, without the authority, the formal mandate or the resources to do so properly. That is not sustainable. If the Executive want councils to help deliver the strategy, that role must be defined, resourced and respected.

The first issue, therefore, is not whether local government has a role; it already has one. The question is whether that role will be formally recognised, properly resourced and built into the delivery strategy of the architecture of the final strategy. Therefore, we recommend giving local government a defined role.

The Department should explicitly define the strategic and operational role of local councils in the anti-poverty strategy. The Committee further recommends that community planning partnerships (CPPs) should be formally designated as the primary local delivery vehicles for the strategy. CPPs already bring together councils, statutory bodies, health, housing, and the community and voluntary sector. They are already in place. The task now is to give them the necessary mandate, accountability and shared outcomes to make the delivery real.

Recommendation 2 is about moving away from short-term funding to sustained prevention. Defining the roles of councils is only one part of the answer. The second issue is whether the organisations expected to deliver anti-poverty work have the stability to do so. Therefore, our second recommendation concerns funding.

The Committee heard repeatedly that the current system too often forces councils and community organisations into a cycle of firefighting. Short-term, competitive, late-year funding pots create uncertainty, inefficiency and, in some cases, the loss of highly skilled staff. That is particularly damaging for community advice services, wraparound support services and front-line organisations that deal with people in crisis. The Committee therefore recommends that the Executive align the anti-poverty strategy with a ring-fenced, multi-year funding settlement. No strategy can be transformative if the organisations expected to deliver it are left living hand to mouth from one financial year to the next.

Recommendation 3 is about making poverty reduction a test across government. Funding individual programmes will not be enough if wider public policy continues to create or deepen poverty. That brings me to the need for poverty reduction to become a test right across government. The third recommendation is for the introduction of mandatory, anti-poverty impact assessments across government. Members heard that too many policies are made without sufficiently exploring whether they will reduce poverty, worsen poverty or simply move the pressure from one part of the system to another.

The Committee believes that, similar to rural proofing, all new public policies, structural investments and budgetary decisions across Departments should be rigorously assessed for their impact on poverty before they proceed. If the anti-poverty strategy is to mean anything in practice, poverty reduction must become a test applied across housing, health, education, transport, infrastructure, childcare, skills and economic policy.

Recommendation 4 is about using data to target help before crisis point. If we are serious about prevention, we need to know where need is emerging before households reach crisis point. Our fourth recommendation is for the establishment of a cross-departmental data-sharing framework. We heard a very simple point directly from local representatives, which is that people do not know what they do not know. Councils may know that need exists, but they are often prevented from identifying precisely where it is and who is most at risk. Without appropriate, secure and GDPR-compliant data-sharing, interventions are less targeted and less effective. Councils told us that data on health, housing, education, justice and benefits, as well as local knowledge, must be brought together more effectively and cohesively so that support can be proactive rather than reactive. That is not about data for its own sake; it is about getting the right help to the right people earlier and before problems become crises.

Recommendation 5 is about tackling the structural causes of poverty. Better data and targeting absolutely matter, but they must sit within a wider shift from crisis response to structural prevention. The fifth recommendation is that the final strategy must prioritise structural drivers and prevention. Emergency support is necessary, but it is not enough. Food parcels, fuel vouchers and hardship payments can provide immediate relief but, by themselves, do not provide a route out of poverty. The strategy must, therefore, include measurable and time-bound actions on the structural drivers of poverty. That means a coordinated approach to increasing social and affordable housing supply; robust interventions in the private rented sector; progression of a fully funded regional childcare strategy; and dedicated actions on rural poverty, including a specific, funded focus on protecting and expanding rural and community transport networks. The issue of transport came through strongly in the evidence that we received, especially from rural councils. Poor transport limits access to work, education, health services and advice. The Committee is clear that the strategy must move beyond managing the symptoms of poverty and begin to tackle the conditions that keep people trapped in poverty.

When it comes to embedding lived experience, the Committee was clear that policy must not be designed around people without being shaped by people. Our final recommendation is that lived experience must be embedded permanently in the governance, monitoring and evaluation of the anti-poverty strategy. Co-design cannot mean a one-off consultation.

The Committee welcomes its engagement with the Minister and his officials on that work. At the Committee meeting on 14 May, the Minister indicated that there is a duty to listen, reflect and change course where necessary. The Committee welcomes that approach. Members also heard a commitment to maximise collaboration and share delivery across government, local government and wider partnerships. That is also the right direction. The purpose of the motion is to encourage and strengthen that approach. The final strategy must be more than a statement of ambition; it must be costed, measurable, locally deliverable and accountable. The question for the Assembly, therefore, is whether the final strategy will simply acknowledge work that is already being done or build the structures needed to sustain and strengthen that work and introduce significant new measures.

To close, I will reflect on a phrase that was used in a Committee session: we were asked to be bold, to be compassionate and to be change-makers. That is a fair challenge to this Assembly, the whole Executive and the Minister for Communities. The Committee's report offers the Minister a practical route to improve the final anti-poverty strategy. It asks that local government be given its proper place and voice and that local interventions be supported. Most importantly, it asks that the anti-poverty strategy not simply describes the scale of the problem but creates the structures, resources and accountability to tackle it.

I commend the motion to the House and urge Members to support it.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Committee's 'Report on Engagement with Local Government on the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy'. I thank the Chair for outlining what is contained in the report, including the proposals. The Committee's report makes it clear that councils are already doing significant work on the ground to support people who face poverty. Councils are involved in emergency hardship support, social supermarkets, labour market partnerships and local interventions, which are often delivered closest to the people who are most in need. That local insight is, of course, incredibly valuable, and it should help to shape the final strategy.

I welcome the work of the Communities Minister. The draft strategy is rightly focused on practical outcomes; on work and employment as the best route out of poverty; and on the need to make work pay. If we are serious about tackling poverty, we must also be honest about what works. Sustainable employment remains one of the most effective ways to lift people and families out of poverty, but that must mean decent, stable work that pays and provides dignity, purpose and a genuine route to a better standard of living.

We must also, of course, be clear that tackling poverty cannot simply be about handing out money. Support will always be necessary for those who need it most, but, as a society, we also need to focus on creating wealth, growing opportunity and building an economy where people can provide for themselves and for their families.

The Committee report rightly also highlights child poverty, including evidence that more than 110,000 children across Northern Ireland live in poverty. That should be a concern for every Member of the House. No child should have their life chances limited by the circumstances in which they are born. Of course, that cannot be achieved by the Department for Communities alone. It is not simply a DFC strategy; it must be an Executive strategy. The Department for the Economy has a role in jobs and skills; the Department of Education has a role in attainment and opportunity; the Department of Health has a role in addressing barriers to employment; and the Department for Infrastructure has a role in access to work, training and services. All of those things are reasons why it is important that all Departments are brought fully into the strategy. It also means that the Executive and the Finance Minister must ensure that the appropriate funding is made available to support the delivery of the anti-poverty strategy going forward. At present, no additional funding has been allocated to implement —.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I will.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I agree that work is a crucial part of it, Pam. Does that indicate that the Members opposite will support the 'good jobs' Bill that will, hopefully, come through soon?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Pam, you have an extra minute.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for his contribution. That is another piece of work that needs to be investigated fully. Industry has made its concerns clear that time is needed to investigate that legislation fully before committing to it.

At present, no additional funding has been allocated to implement the strategy, and that is a serious issue. A strategy without the necessary funding risks becoming a statement of intent rather than a plan for delivery. That is why I find the position taken by the Sinn Féin members of the Committee difficult to reconcile with the approach of their Executive ministerial colleagues. At times, they appeared to be completely at odds with those colleagues. People who are in poverty do not need mixed messages; they need delivery.

One area of delivery that is particularly important is fuel poverty. It is especially prevalent in Northern Ireland because of our heavy reliance on home heating oil. That has a particular impact on older people, many of whom are on fixed incomes and are more vulnerable to cold homes. There is a clear link there with the active ageing strategy and ensuring that older people can live safely, warmly and with dignity. That is why the upcoming £100 oil heating intervention by Minister Lyons is important. It is practical help targeted at the real pressures that households in Northern Ireland face. That is being delivered while Sinn Féin Ministers have shirked their responsibilities for that. However, short-term support must sit alongside long-term investment. We all understand the importance of that. The warm healthy homes fund, which was agreed as part of the Executive's fuel poverty strategy, must be properly resourced if it is to improve homes, reduce bills and protect vulnerable households. It is therefore deeply disappointing that that fund did not receive an allocation in Sinn Féin's draft three-year Budget.

The strategy must remain focused on making work pay; creating wealth; tackling child poverty; Executive-wide delivery; and properly addressing the issue of fuel poverty. If we are serious about that delivery, the Executive must ensure that the strategies are properly funded. On that basis, I support the motion.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Communities Committee's report on engagement with local government on the draft anti-poverty strategy. First, I thank the clerking team for all their hard work in taking forward my suggestion to compile the report, once we realised just how valuable the contribution of councils was to the conversation. I support the report and its recommendations. It reflects exactly what all of us have heard from councils, advice workers, community organisations and families, who tell us every day that poverty cannot be tackled from a desk in Stormont alone. It has to be tackled in our towns and villages and our rural communities alongside the people and organisations who understand those communities best.

The report is clear that councils are already delivering vital anti-poverty work from hardship funds through to social supermarkets, labour market partnerships and local advice networks. Right now, however, they are doing that work without clarity, authority, funding or the status that they need and deserve. The draft strategy has to do more to recognise councils and community planning partnerships as central delivery partners. That matters in all constituencies and communities, but, in my council area of Causeway Coast and Glens, where poverty is not hidden, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's (JRF) latest analysis estimates that 23% of people live in poverty — the second-highest rate of any council area in Northern Ireland. That shows why the anti-poverty strategy cannot be generic. It has to recognise regional imbalance, rural poverty and particular pressures facing communities such as Causeway Coast and Glens, where housing, transport, low pay, seasonal work, childcare and skills gaps interact to make people feel trapped in poverty.

The strategy also has to recognise that, while the Minister frequently references getting people into work, work alone is not the route out of poverty. The JRF has shown that the majority of people in poverty now live in working households, including 64% of children in poverty and 60% of working-age adults in poverty. Work is not the only route, although it is one of them. Almost half of workers have experienced low pay in the past five years. Yes, we need jobs, but we do not need just any jobs; we need good jobs. We need secure, fairly paid work with enough hours and flexibility for parents and carers and real accessibility for disabled people and others facing barriers to employment. That is particularly important, again, in my area of Causeway Coast and Glens. The local labour market partnership has identified economic inactivity, unemployment, disability employment and skilled labour supply as key priorities. The economy inactivity rate is 30·1% when the Northern Ireland average is 26·3%, and the area has the lowest employment rate in Northern Ireland. That is why the anti-poverty strategy must be directly linked to good jobs, skills, childcare, disability employment support and regional economic development.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Will the Member give way?

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Yes.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Does the Member agree that the strategy cannot sit in isolation, solely in the Department for Communities?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Sian, you have an extra minute.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Thank you.

Absolutely; it has to be owned across the Executive, by the stakeholders and particularly in partnership with our councils.

Councils cannot be treated as optional consultees or convenient delivery partners. They have to be placed on an equal footing with the Department for Communities in the delivery of the strategy. Councils know where the poverty is. They know which organisations already carry out effective engagement. They know where the transport gaps stop people getting to work, where advice services are under pressure and where local interventions already hold families together. They cannot do that work properly on short-term, competitive, last-minute funding. Poverty is long-term, and the response has to be long-term too.

The Programme for Government aims to have:

"more people working in better jobs",

and that is a right and proper ambition, but, for communities such as mine, it has to be more than just a slogan. It has to be backed by targets, funding, local delivery solutions and structures capable of changing lives and a focus on the life-cycles of individuals, because the experience of poverty is not linear. The final anti-poverty strategy therefore has to be measurable, properly resourced, co-designed with people who are living in and experiencing poverty now and delivered in genuine partnership with local government. It has to put councils and community planning partnerships at the heart of delivery, not just at the margins. People do not live in silos, and they do not simply need help to survive poverty; they need a real and genuine route out of it.

I support the report, and I urge the Minister and the Executive to act on its recommendations in full.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

The Ulster Unionist Party welcomes the report and the engagement that led to it that was carried out by the Communities Committee with councils from across Northern Ireland. What comes through clearly from the evidence is that councils already deal with the realities of poverty every day. We know that, we see it, and we hear it from our council colleagues throughout Northern Ireland.

As we have heard, poverty is not a nuanced issue. It has been discussed in reports, but it is more than statistics. In reality, it is families struggling with the price of food, and we know about the one-way trajectory of the price of food at the moment, given the geopolitics in the Strait of Hormuz. The price of fuel and oil is an issue that we face almost annually because of our dependence on oil, and there are further escalating housing costs. That predominantly sits with older people, single-parent families and individuals with disabilities who cannot work. Crucially, it really incapacitates parents, who find themselves each summer worrying about how they will get their kids back to school and how they will feed them over the summer. We have had to battle for summer activities for special schools here. The list goes on.

The report is also right to highlight the growing issue of the working poor. Many people experiencing poverty are already in employment but do not have a high enough wage to meet their mounting bills. The reality is that poverty can affect people in a wide range of circumstances. There are people who work hard every day but still struggle to make ends meet. There are others who are not in work due to ill health or disability or, crucially, due to caring responsibilities. We must never overlook the role of our carers, particularly young carers. It is really important that we support them. Difficult life circumstances and personal pressures can place an enormous burden on some individuals and families. That is important, because, too often, commentary can become overly simplistic and political points can be made when, in reality, as the previous debate on baby loss certificates highlighted, poverty pervades every community in Northern Ireland.

It is imperative that those in positions of responsibility be careful in their approach to poverty and hardship and in the language that they use. The issues affect real people, real families and, often, sensitive personal circumstances. Public debate should seek to reduce division and stigma, rather than contribute to it. Good anti-poverty policy should not be about drawing lines between people or suggesting that some forms of hardship matter more than others; it should be about recognising need, reducing poverty and ensuring that people are treated with dignity and supported during difficult periods in their life. One of the strongest themes running through the report is that too much of the current response remains focused on crisis management and firefighting, rather than prevention and tackling root causes. I know that the Minister has stated that tackling those root causes is a priority for him and the Department.

We cannot continue waiting until people reach crisis point. The failure to tackle poverty properly does not result in the problem disappearing; it simply creates greater pressures elsewhere, particularly in our health and social care system. That is a really important point, because there is a direct link between poverty and poor physical health, poor mental health outcomes, social isolation and educational attainment. Fuel poverty, poor housing and financial stress all contribute to worsening outcomes and increase pressure on individual families and already stretched public services. That is why we need an invest-to-save approach that is focused on prevention and early intervention. Investment in housing, childcare, employability, transport and poverty measures should not simply be viewed as expenditure or expensive. It was good to see in the earlier debate about the allocation of moneys that £16 million is being allocated to employability. Preventative investment will improve lives while helping to reduce long-term pressures elsewhere in the system. The debate on holiday hunger reflects that clearly. Whether people view the legislation as workable or not, the issue is there, and it is a valid debate in which we will engage.

The report is also right to call for a genuinely joined-up approach across government. Poverty does not fit neatly into one Department and certainly not the Department for Communities on its own. Housing, health, education, childcare, transport and the economy — to mention a few of the issues — are all interconnected policy needs. We really need to accept that reality. Things need to change.

Ultimately, the report should be utilised to shape a more joined-up, preventative and person-centred anti-poverty strategy that is focused on —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Time is up.

Robbie Butler (UUP, Lagan Valley)

— tackling hardship.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Councils here have become leaders in the fightback against poverty. They provide the services that people have to turn to when they cannot heat their home or afford food or when they are drowning under the pressure of the cost of living. That reality is felt across all council areas, but it is felt differently in different areas. It is felt extremely acutely in Derry and Strabane.

Time and again, we have seen councils step in to provide support, often in the absence of Executive support. Local government is therefore leading the way.

The report lays bare the scale of the challenges facing our communities. There are 110,000 children living in poverty here. The Member who spoke previously shared the statistics. He also pointed out that we have among the highest levels of working poor. Families are working hard and doing everything right, yet they still cannot make ends meet.

The report also rightly highlights the structural drivers of poverty. As usual, housing is high among them. We know that we have a severe shortage of social housing, with families trapped on waiting lists for years while living in worsening conditions. Far too many people continue to be forced into an increasingly unaffordable and largely unregulated — under-regulated, I will say — private rented sector. Since 2006, the number of people living in the private rented sector has more than doubled. The number in that group who are living in poverty has increased by over 60%. Despite that, progress on meaningful reform of the private rented sector has been too slow and too limited. There has been no ban on no-fault evictions, there have been no rent controls of any type and there has been a reduction in supports such as the local housing allowance and the discretionary housing payment.

For many families, it is no longer a temporary hardship but a never-ending battle. Advice services are under severe pressure. Funding for the community and voluntary sector has been slashed. Councils themselves are being pushed to breaking point. That makes it all the more baffling that the Department did not engage adequately — that was councils' view, not just my view or that of the SDLP — on the draft anti-poverty strategy. If councils are expected to be key delivery partners, and they clearly are, why were they not central to the process from day 1? Sadly, that is typical of the silo approach taken to government here that has held this place back for years. While people struggle, councils have been left to try to pick up the pieces, and with fewer and fewer resources to do so.

It is the councils with the biggest problems that are least able to do that. In 2009, the poorer councils, as I call them, availed themselves of over £20 million in rates support grants. That funding now totals just over £3 million. The impact has been devastating for councils' ability to deliver services and devastating for an already, by definition, deprived area, because the pressure ultimately falls back on to local ratepayers, many of whom are themselves struggling. Although there has been a recent review of the rates support grant, it looked at how the pie was cut rather than at the size of the pie itself. The Minister of Finance is not responding to the debate. I know that he is a former chef, so we will be continuing to appeal to him to rustle up an adequate and protected budget for the rates support grant, because this is about equality.

Despite all of that, councils continue to do extraordinary work on the ground. That is leadership. That is local councils stepping up when the Executive have failed people. They are not making excuses about decimated budgets. Instead, they are looking to find solutions and are working with others on the ground to identify and provide those solutions. Perhaps leadership here should take a leaf out of their book. Councils understand their communities, the deprivation locally, where intervention is needed most and what intervention is needed most. They demonstrate repeatedly that, when properly resourced, they can deliver meaningful change. They cannot do it alone, however.

Poverty is not inevitable. It is a political choice, but so is ending it. If the anti-poverty strategy —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Your time is up, Mark.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

— is to mean anything at all, it must come with real Executive investment and through genuine partnership with local councils.

Maolíosa McHugh (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

The recent 'Report on Engagement with Local Government on the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy' is welcome and important. First, I place on record my sincere thanks to councils right across the North, their elected members and officers, community planning partnerships and the wider community and voluntary sector for the extraordinary work that they continue to do every single day to support people and families who are experiencing poverty and hardship.

We all know that councils are already on the front line of that work, whether delivering emergency hardship schemes, supporting social supermarkets, funding breakfast clubs, helping families with cost-of-living pressures, investing in labour market partnerships, supporting rural transport initiatives or coordinating local wrap-around services. Time and again, councils are stepping in to support communities when they need it most.

The report highlights powerful examples. We heard about councils allocating hundreds of thousands of pounds from their own budgets to support vulnerable families. We heard about emergency fuel support schemes being overwhelmed within hours because the level of need is now so severe. We heard about community advice services bringing millions of pounds in unclaimed benefits back into local economies and about local interventions helping to tackle isolation, food insecurity and barriers to employment. That is essential work. The key message from the report, however, is clear: councils cannot continue to be treated as an afterthought in the development and delivery of an anti-poverty strategy. They have to be part of it.

Recommendation 1 is particularly important because it recognises what many of us already know, which is that local government and community planning partnerships must be formally embedded at the heart of delivery. Councils understand their communities. They know where the pressures exist. They know the local organisations delivering real change on the ground, and they have already demonstrated their ability to bring agencies and communities together in practical, effective ways. If we are serious about tackling poverty, councils must be centrally involved in shaping, coordinating and delivering that work, and that must come with proper support and resources. Councils cannot continue to carry additional financial burdens without sustainable funding from central government.

Some 80% of council income is solely from rates collection, and that must pay the bills. Rates collection must pay the wages of our brilliant council staff and the services that they deliver. The report rightly calls for multi-year, ring-fenced funding arrangements that move away from short-term firefighting and allow councils and community organisations to plan ahead properly. That is essential because tackling poverty cannot rely on yearly uncertainty. Late funding allocations are forcing local government to absorb increasing pressures through an already stretched rates base. Properly resourcing councils would allow them to continue to deliver vital support, ease the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on families, strengthen preventative services and build long-term, sustainable interventions that break cycles of poverty rather than simply managing crisis after crisis.

The report provides a clear road map. I want to leave you with its last paragraph:

"The Committee strongly urges the Minister for Communities and Executive colleagues to carefully consider and implement these recommendations, and looks forward to reviewing a robust, fully-costed, and genuinely integrated final Anti-Poverty Strategy that truly delivers for the most vulnerable citizens in our society."

The challenge of the report, therefore, is for the Minister to listen, act and ensure that local government is recognised not simply as a stakeholder in this work but as an essential partner in delivering meaningful change for communities across the North.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

I welcome the motion, and the engagement that was had with local government regarding the anti-poverty strategy. It became clear through the Committee's work that councils across Northern Ireland already carry out critical front-line interventions to support families who face hardship every day. However, councils delivered the clear message that the draft strategy lacks the ambition, clarity and structural integration that are needed to genuinely tackle poverty. During the engagement process, we heard deeply concerning evidence that over 110,000 children in Northern Ireland live in poverty and that many working families are unable to make ends meet despite being in employment. We also heard shocking evidence that, in some rural areas, people die having spent the last years of their life in poverty.

The report recognises that poverty cannot be solved through temporary crisis measures alone. Food parcels and emergency fuel payments may provide short-term relief but do not address the root causes of deprivation. The Committee heard repeatedly that issues such as housing shortages, rising childcare costs, poor rural transport and economic inactivity trap people in cycles of poverty. Those structural problems require coordinated cross-departmental solutions.

One of the strongest recommendations in the report is the proper integration of local government in the delivery of the strategy. Councils' community planning partnerships already bring together health services, housing bodies, voluntary organisations and communities; the partnerships must now be formally recognised and properly empowered.

The report highlights the damaging impact of short-term funding models on the community and voluntary sector. Vital advice services and support organisations spend too much time chasing insecure funding instead of delivering services to those in greatest need. If the strategy is to succeed, it must move beyond managing poverty and begin to prevent it. That means sustained investment, joined-up government, better data-sharing, and meaningful engagement with those who have lived experience of poverty.

The Executive have an opportunity and a responsibility to deliver a strategy that is robust, properly funded and capable of making real, lasting change in people's lives. Economic activity from regionally balanced investment in employment opportunities is a must. We must provide people with the financial means to enable them to rise above the poverty trap. We, therefore, need an integrated strategy that aligns financial help in the cost-of-living crisis; economic investment; education; proper social housing; and training to help those in poverty to escape that trap.

With two district electoral areas (DEAs) in the top 10 areas of deprivation, Causeway Coast and Glens is Northern Ireland's forgotten area. Wedged between Londonderry and Belfast, investment there is piecemeal, higher education provision there is piecemeal, and the effects of regional balance have not yet touched my area. I urge the Executive to ensure that the anti-poverty strategy is properly funded. It is not good enough to talk the talk; we need action and proper funding to initiate the strategy — and to do so with our council partners. I learned just last week that the Causeway Coast and Glens area has the highest level of obesity among young people in Northern Ireland and high levels of economic inactivity.

I welcome the motion.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

I commend the Committee for its important work on the report. The North has waited at least 20 years for an anti-poverty strategy, but all that we have had so far is a vague, unambitious document with no clear targets, no concrete measures and no overarching commitment to eradicating poverty. That is a slap in the face to the working-class communities who have been ground down by poverty and deprivation under the Executive's watch. During the two decades of waiting, poverty has skyrocketed, so much so that, in my constituency of West Belfast, one in three children lives in poverty and, in the past five years, the number of pensioners living in poverty has almost doubled. Those are completely disgraceful and shocking statistics.

The Committee's report paints a stark picture. I will quote from it:

"the overwhelming and unified consensus from local government is that the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy currently lacks the necessary clarity, ambition, and structural integration to be fully transformative."

That is probably the Committee being polite. As the Committee's report states:

"the draft strategy is largely blind to the role of local delivery partners"

on the ground — Committee members have spoken to that — and does not properly define the role of community planning partnerships. The Committee heard about:

"the severe financial fragility of the community and voluntary sector".

That is the same sector that has recently been decimated by cuts resulting from the introduction of the local growth fund. The Minister says that he wants the anti-poverty strategy to support people into work, but he and his Executive colleagues refused to step in with the necessary funding when Westminster cut off access to employability support for some 11,000 people here.

I hope that the Minister's revised strategy will be a dramatic departure from the current draft, which is totally unacceptable and unsuitable.

I also hope that we see it soon and that working-class communities are not strung along further by the Minister.

As the Committee's report makes clear, poverty can be tackled only in a genuinely cross-cutting, cross-departmental way. The structural drivers of housing, childcare, rural transport and sustainable funding for the community and voluntary sector, which Members have mentioned, require coordinated action to be taken across every Department, and I am not convinced that that is happening yet. The answers to tackling poverty are not a mystery; they are in the expert panel's original proposals. The Minister does not need to look far.

The decades-long failure to properly tackle poverty belongs to the entire Stormont Executive. Rather than facing that failure, we have seen cynical sectarianism, the scapegoating of migrants and the mimicking of Trump's anti-woke, pro-war crusades from the Minister and the DUP in general: anything to distract from the housing crisis and the general rise in poverty, healthcare waiting lists and other things that are wreaking havoc on our communities.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Sure.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Member has just read out a long list of point-scoring. If he cares deeply about anti-poverty, surely he should address anti-poverty rather than taking the political attack lines that always seem to come from his direction.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Gerry, you have an extra minute.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.

I do not know whether the Member was listening, but I have two pages of notes that I just spoke about. I urge her, if she wishes to reduce poverty, to put pressure on her Minister to start implementing the rent controls and the no-fault eviction ban to which the Minister and the Member's party are completely opposed. If the Member is interested in tackling poverty, she should put pressure on her Minister in that way.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I appreciate the Member's giving way. He frequently refers to the need for rent controls, yet all the evidence that we have from other cities such as Madrid and Berlin and from the rent control zones in the Republic of Ireland shows that they do not work. The Member previously committed to bringing forward evidence of how they work, but he has failed to do so. Is that because that evidence does not exist?

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

That is not true, Minister. I sent you a detailed document several weeks ago. If you have not read it, that is your fault. Maybe you should go and read it. It details the fact that most European countries and North American cities have a form of rent control. The Minister repeats the myth that rent controls do not work. They do not work for landlords, and maybe that is why the Minister is opposed to them, but they do work in that they reduce rent for renters. Minister, I suggest that you read that report and come back to me on it.

Westminster and Stormont could eradicate poverty if they wanted to. Instead, they hand tax breaks and rate reliefs to corporations that turn over millions and, in some cases, billions of pounds in revenue and profit while funnelling money away from public services and into the profiteering private sector, with no objection from this or any other Minister. Poverty is a political choice, and the Executive have chosen to make ordinary people poor while the rich get richer. Without mass pressure from below, Stormont, in its current form, will never do more than tinker at the edges. That has always been the way. In truth, it is people power that will force change and eradicate the scourge of poverty from our communities.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Minister, you have 15 minutes. That will bring us to after 1.00 pm, but that is fine.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank the Committee for the work that it has done on taking forward and developing the report. I broadly agree with the core finding of the report that local government is essential to tackling the problem of poverty — not just local government but all our delivery partners across society. Work will be required from the voluntary and community sector, churches, faith organisations, businesses and communities to make a real, lasting, long-term change.

I fully recognise the importance of local government in this area. Indeed, my officials have already taken steps to involve local government in the consultation on the anti-poverty strategy. Dedicated engagement sessions were undertaken with the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE) to provide an opportunity for direct discussions between officials and local government representatives. It is important that I put that on record, because some of the comments today, particularly from Mr Durkan, would make you think that there has been no engagement with councils, and that was certainly not the case during the consultation process. As I outlined, we had many events and engaged with representatives from nearly all the councils. We had written responses to the consultation from all the councils, and we have engaged on the report. It is unfair to say that there has been no involvement.

Many organisations, including local government, will be essential to the delivery of the strategy, and it is important to acknowledge that. We have a strong track record of delivery in partnership with councils, and we have well-established relationships with councils through the community planning partnerships so that we can develop housing, regeneration and employability services. We will continue to work in partnership through the community planning partnerships and other fora to deliver the anti-poverty strategy.

Work has also been undertaken with other key partners during and after the consultation, because we know that tackling poverty and its root causes requires system changes that nobody in the world has been able to fully achieve, but it is clear that, if we work together, we can make a lasting difference, and that is what I intend to do. We have already made a start on that. We did not wait for the anti-poverty strategy to be in place before we progressed some of the issues, including some that the co-design group asked us to take forward, and that is what we are doing. I welcome the report, and I will certainly recommend to my Executive colleagues that we take the recommendations forward. I am grateful to the Committee for its work.

I will refer to some of the comments that were made during the debate that are worthy of note. Pam Cameron rightly acknowledged that councils do significant work. She also highlighted an important issue that Sian Mulholland mentioned as well, and that is the importance of employment and ensuring that employability programmes are in place. Sian said that we needed to make sure that we help those who are in work, and I absolutely agree with her. One of my most pressing concerns is that we have people who are in employment and are going out to work and doing their best but feel penalised. They feel that they are not getting the support that they require. Not for one second have I said that work will be the silver bullet that fixes everything, although it is a very important step. The evidence shows that work can help, but it is also important because getting people off welfare and into work frees up huge sums of money for the targeted interventions that we need.

Many in the House are fed up with hearing me talk about the importance of getting people into work and dealing with our welfare system. There has been opposition to my approaches to tackling fraud and error in the welfare system. I make no apology for focusing on that and on the huge numbers of people in Northern Ireland who are economically inactive. Ten years ago, the working-age welfare bill in the UK was £75 billion in today's money. Today, that has gone up to £136 billion, which is an 80% increase. If we get people into work, it frees up billions of pounds that we can use in more targeted ways to help those who are most in need.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I will give way.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I regularly challenge the term "economic inactivity", because it is often actually economic disadvantage or, potentially, discrimination. People are disadvantaged as a result of living in rural communities with limited access to transport or because of disability, and women are often carers.

Minister, do you agree that all the issues that we have raised today need to be addressed? Do you also agree that good jobs and the 'good jobs' Bill are part of the overall pattern?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Of course it is the case that all those issues need to be addressed. There is a myriad of reasons why we have so many people who are economically inactive. For some, it is by choice because of caring responsibilities or other issues; for some, it is because barriers are in place. Why are we not spending some money to tackle those barriers?

One of my biggest concerns is the fact that we have the highest welfare bill of any part of the UK and the highest disability rate of anywhere in the UK. We spend huge sums of money, and have done so for decades, and guess what? There has been no noticeable change or difference. We have to ask ourselves whether it is really working: are the billions and billions of pounds that we are spending actually making a difference? Are we paying people to stay unwell rather than investing in making them well? That is one of the big issues that we should be grappling with. That is the real scandal. It does not take up time on the airwaves or space in the pages of our newspapers, but it is a train that is coming down the track at us. It has been a problem for a long time, and we need to address it if we want to address all the other issues that come from it.

Absolutely, let us invest and make sure that we spend money on getting people better; getting people into a fit state to get into employment; and breaking down barriers, be they in childcare or access to jobs because of rurality or whatever else. We need good jobs. We will have the opportunity to talk about the 'good jobs' Bill. We need to make sure that that is fully investigated and that we achieve what we set out to do, because there are a lot of concerns in the business community as to whether the Bill will make that happen or make things worse.

That brings me on to another comment that Sian made. She is absolutely right that this cannot only be tackled from a desk in Stormont. I am glad that that message is starting to get across — I have heard it from a few Members today. As Sian said in response to an intervention from Mr McMurray, it requires a cross-departmental strategy. I have said that repeatedly, but not because I am trying to share this around or share the blame or criticism. If we want this to be effective, we have to have everybody buying into it. It is right that that is realised and that all the things that need to be in place are in place.

Issues about targets and outcomes were also raised. It is critical that we have in place measurable and effective actions and targets to measure them against, because we need to show that we are making progress. There is further debate and discussion to be had about the usefulness of an overall poverty target when we have limited levers to deal with it in the Assembly and through the work of the Executive. The UK Government, local government, the voluntary and community sector and businesses have a role to play, and individuals have a big role to play. I am more than happy to be held to account for the things that we have promised, and for the things that we can deliver on. There is a wider discussion to be had on an overarching anti-poverty target, but I am more than happy to explore that and to take the views of Executive colleagues on it.

What are the next steps? We have taken on board what has been said by partners in local government. Late last year, I shared the results of the consultation with all Ministers so that they could consider further actions that they could undertake to push the strategy forward. Officials in my Department have been engaging with their counterparts on how best to reflect consultation results in light of departmental priorities and available budgets. I was pleased to see that a number of stakeholders in the sector welcomed the report that we produced as being honest and open, and I take seriously the views of everyone who responded to the strategy. I have been clear from the outset that the strategy will change. I briefed the Communities Committee earlier this month, and I was clear that there will be substantive and substantial change. For example, the strategy needs to better reflect the fact that well-planned routes to employment can be a route out of poverty. We are taking forward significant new work to tackle economic inactivity. That work is core to reducing poverty.

The draft strategy does not fully reflect the scale of our intent and ambition on fuel poverty reduction. As Members know, officials in my Department have been working on the development of a new warm healthy homes strategy, which will modernise and, I hope, expand on the work of the affordable warmth programme. Given the exposure of the poorest households in Northern Ireland to a highly volatile energy market and, in particular, the cost of home heating oil, I believe that the final version of the strategy can be more ambitious in setting out the interventions that we will take in relation to fuel poverty.

I have therefore requested urgent and ambitious action to maximise all opportunities for collaboration and shared delivery across government, local government and broader partnerships; to exploit fully effective measures to prevent entry into and support exit from poverty; to deliver refreshed funding approaches in order to explore opportunities to achieve greater value from public money for existing programmes in my Department, with a view to releasing capacity to fund new anti-poverty measures; to put in place targets and indicators that are within our ability to deliver and that will measure progress and keep us accountable; and to deliver and develop a costed, detailed delivery plan in due course.

We share an ambition to alleviate poverty in our society and an understanding of the complexity of the challenge, which is increased by our highly constrained funding environment. I genuinely believe that this is among the most important work that we can do, but we will succeed only by working in partnership. To that end, I had a meeting with the Chair of the Communities Committee to set out the way forward and to make him an offer to have genuine engagement, which I have now extended to other parties in the House. I am happy to engage. I want to hear ideas and to put in place something that is affordable, can be delivered, is costed and can make a real change to people's lives. I am committed to doing that, and I look forward to working with others in the Chamber and outside it in the interests of people across our communities who require our focus and hard work on the issue the most.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The Business Committee is meeting now. I therefore propose, by leave of the Assembly, to suspend the sitting until 2.00 pm. The debate will continue at 2.45 pm, after Question Time, when Cathy Mason will be called to make a winding-up speech on the motion.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 1.02 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions — The Executive Office

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 12 has been withdrawn.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

1. Mr Kingston asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the potential for future Urban Villages initiatives. (AQO 3599/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Executive Office's Urban Villages initiative has had a transformative impact in local communities in Belfast and Derry. To date, a total of £83 million has been invested in Urban Villages areas. Of that, £65·4 million has been invested in the capital programme, with 61 schemes completed, and £17·6 million in revenue funding has been awarded to help build community capacity. That work has provided much-needed physical regeneration, creating thriving places and safer communities and making a real, positive difference to people's lives.

To build on that success, we are determined that the benefits of the scheme reach even more communities. Our efforts are focused on identifying areas that would gain most from the support and investment that is offered through the Urban Villages initiative. We are working to finalise the details of phase 2 of the programme. Once it is complete, Members will receive a comprehensive update to outline the next steps and opportunities that it will present.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the First Minister for the update that the Department is actively looking towards a phase 2 of the Urban Villages initiative. It has made a great difference in areas of North Belfast, which Phillip Brett and I represent. We look forward to further information about phase 2.

Can the First Minister confirm whether the Department remains committed to ensuring that phase 1 projects that are outstanding — I am thinking, in particular, of the new Westland and Sunningdale community centres — will be delivered?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We can all agree, having seen it at first hand, how beneficial many of those projects have been to our communities. It is something that has worked really well and can be built upon in the time ahead. You have asked about Westland, in particular, on a number of occasions. Obviously, the planning application that was submitted in April 2026 is a positive development. The project will benefit very much the group who will operate the building when it is completed. It has also received capacity-building support from Urban Villages via the Community Academy.

On the Sunningdale community centre, our officials continue to work with the community association there, to ensure that it has the proper capacity-building training and support that will allow it to get into a state of operational readiness for future potential opportunities that arise, whether that is through this programme or any others.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

First Minister, I know that, recently, you were in Ardoyne for the sod cutting of the new £3·4 million purpose-built youth facility for Ardoyne Youth Enterprise. Further to your response to Brian Kingston, can you give us an update on that project and, indeed, any others?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. It really was a pleasure to visit the Ardoyne Youth Enterprise site to see that work being developed on the Crumlin Road, where that state-of-the-art building will be an addition for the local community as part of our Urban Villages work. That hub will really transform the physical landscape, and it will also support creative and digital learning training, youth development opportunities, counselling and capacity building — so many really positive initiatives.

Since 2018, we have invested a total of £35 million in 18 capital projects through Urban Villages, including driving regeneration and community development, whether that is in Ardoyne or Ballysillan. You have only to look at how successful the programme has been and how it has created a real environment for collaborative working that allows projects to work across different communities and villages. That is really important. I want us to see and build upon what has been achieved thus far. I look forward to the new phase of the programme so that we can support even more community development and capacity building in our communities.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Can you update the House on the plans to redevelop the former school of music in Donegall Pass? I want to pick up on a phrase that you used: "capacity building". Is any financial support going to the programme sponsors to ensure that they get the right mix in that building?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not have the detail in front of me of where the school of music redevelopment currently sits. However, I know that a lot of good work was done there to try to progress that even further, so I will not misspeak on exactly where we are. I will ensure that you get that information.

As for capacity-building, it is really important that we help communities to access funding, whether that is through this programme or any other programme that we have out there. The work that I referred to across projects, whether in Ardoyne or anywhere else across north Belfast, has been very much about lifting the capacity. We should build on that in the new programme, because we have to equip communities with opportunities to reach for any funding pots that become available to them.

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

First Minister, how will local communities be directly involved in designing any future Urban Villages initiatives, rather than their simply being consulted after decisions have already been made about them without them?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is not even the case. Those projects come from the communities organically. The programme is designed in such a way that we work with communities, identify their needs and deliver on those needs. You can see that through some of the examples that I have cited. The scale and the breadth of all the projects has been powerful, as has the partnership working and communities coming together to, as I said, identify their needs and our being able to respond. I look forward to the next stage of the programme creating and delivering better outcomes for communities. It is a really successful programme that we can commend as a method of supporting communities.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

2. Mrs Dillon asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for their assessment of how the findings from the Katie Simpson review will inform their Department's actions to tackle violence against women and girls. (AQO 3600/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The murder of Katie Simpson was a profound tragedy, and our thoughts are very much with her family, who continue to bear the impact of that loss.

The review underscores the work that all of us — as the Executive, as wider society and as individuals — are required to do collectively to end violence against women and girls (EVAWG). The Katie Simpson review provides an important and sobering assessment of systemic failures in the identification and management of risk, particularly in relation to coercive control and multi-agency working. Its findings reinforce the need for a whole-system, preventative approach to tackling violence against women and girls.

While the review was commissioned by the Justice Minister and sits within the remit of the Department of Justice, the conclusions very much align with the outcomes of our ending violence against women and girls strategic framework. Indeed, some of the issues identified, including the need for information-sharing and improved understanding of coercive control, are areas that we are progressing through its second delivery plan. Those include the forthcoming campaign on coercive control, developed in partnership with the Ulster University and a range of cross-sector stakeholders including, vitally, women with lived experience. That campaign will be launched in the coming weeks. Work is also ongoing to develop arrangements to support related training for front-line professionals. The Executive Office will continue to work closely with the Department of Justice and other partners to consider the review’s recommendations and to ensure that, where appropriate, learning is reflected in delivery of the EVAWG programme.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the First Minister for her answer, particularly her reference to the need for training, because that is very important. Does the First Minister agree that, whilst the Katie Simpson review identified institutional misogyny in the PSNI, that institutional misogyny goes much wider in the justice system? Training is really important, because I can guarantee that, if one man did to another man in the street what men are doing to women in their homes every day of the week, they would get a prison sentence. The questions that those women are asked, the victim-blaming and the absolutely ridiculous sentences that follow need to be addressed. We need to see our judiciary really take that on.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Nobody in the Chamber would disagree with that. We need to have a justice system that responds to women, particularly in those times of crisis. The review highlights the depth and extent of the work that needs to be done across all the different avenues, and that it needs to be undertaken at pace. I, therefore, welcome the fact that there is an action plan.

A sad thing about the report — much has been said about this over past weeks — is that you would be hard-pushed to find a woman who was surprised to hear that there is institutionalised misogyny across a raft of the public sector, including the PSNI. Jonathan Creswell was a known abuser, and he was known to the criminal justice system. It is the responsibility of all of us to work collectively so that serious lessons are learned in both the PSNI — we raised that directly with the Chief Constable — and the wider justice system. We must have a system that protects women and girls, properly sanctions perpetrators and commands the confidence of wider society. We want to ensure that no other family goes through what Katie's family have gone through. If we are going to be successful in ending violence against women and girls, that starts with challenging the attitudes, cultures and prejudices that exist that enable it to happen in our society.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

As the First Minister will be aware, women and girls in rural communities can be at risk due to isolation and lack of access to services and support. What are the Executive doing to ensure that women and girls living in rural areas are included in the EVAWG strategy?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Again, it comes back to the underlying point that, if we are going to be successful, we have to ensure that everybody is included in the strategy, particularly women in rural areas. In partnership with the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, we commissioned a community-led review of rural women and girls that launched on 15 October for International Day of Rural Women. The review is being led by the Rural Community Network and the Northern Ireland Rural Women's Network. The aim is to understand the experiences, the barriers and the service provision for rural women and to develop practical, rural-sensitive recommendations to help shape and improve future policy and practice. That will be a pivotal part of the work that we will do. The publication date for the final report will be agreed in consultation with the organisations doing the research, and I hope that it will be very soon.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

3. Mr McGuigan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on discussions with the British Government on securing an adequate Budget to deliver public services. (AQO 3601/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

While we welcome the prospect of a multi-year Budget, current funding simply does not match the scale of the challenges facing our public services. We wrote to the Prime Minister on 17 April outlining the scale of the financial pressures and seeking further engagement. The Secretary of State responded on 28 April on the Prime Minister’s behalf, reaffirming their view that sufficient funding is there, which we obviously do not agree with. We invited the Secretary of State to meet to discuss the issues and challenges in agreeing a 2026-2030 Budget, but that meeting has not yet taken place. The Finance Minister, however, continues to engage with Treasury to underline the scale of the Executive’s financial challenges and to seek additional support to help stabilise public finances and to support our local economy. The Executive have consistently highlighted the fact that the current funding does not reflect the pressures on our public services, as also noted by the Fiscal Council, and that Wales and Scotland receive comparatively higher funding relative to need.

In the absence of an agreed Budget, our Departments are operating within contingency planning envelopes set by the Department of Finance, constraining decisions and increasing financial and delivery risks. We remain committed to protecting front-line services, prioritising our Programme for Government commitments and restoring financial stability, while pressing for a fair and sustainable funding settlement. The Executive recognise that ongoing cost-of-living pressures are real and that people are feeling it really tight right now. We have taken action to support our households, including with energy costs, and will continue to consider those in future spending plans.

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

First Minister, given how you have responded, do you believe that the British Government have failed in their responsibility to adequately fund the Executive to protect our public services, support working families and help local businesses? Further to that, can you outline exactly what more, you believe, Westminster should do?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The people here have been failed. That is why we collectively make the case for a proper and adequate funding model. We are asking for fairness. The people here pay their taxes, and they are entitled to good public services. The Fiscal Council backs up our assertion that, comparatively speaking with regard to Scotland and Wales, we do not get our fair share. Therefore, we continue to make that case.

In the times that we live in, people really struggle with the cost of living. They are worried about rising food prices, soaring home energy bills and increased housing costs — everything that people are getting really tight on right now. They know that the levers for raising funds sit very much with Westminster, and I believe that people here are being failed by Westminster again and again. It shows a complete disregard for us that, thus far, Keir Starmer has chosen not to meet me and the deputy First Minister, but we make that case again today. We need fairness for the people whom we represent. We need investment in public services and support through the cost-of-living crisis, and we will not give up until we get what we need for people here.

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

First Minister, I am slightly in shock that we are relying on Keir Starmer, a man whose Government are in shambles and a man who does not know whether he will be in the job by the summer, to guarantee public services for the people of Northern Ireland. I agree with you and your colleagues that we want as much money as possible and a better financial settlement, but here is the problem: if the Executive do not agree a Budget, you, in addition to the British Government settlement, will impose an austerity cut on the public of the North. We will be able to spend only a percentage of last year's Budget. That will be a cut created by the Executive. Do you accept that? When will a Budget be agreed?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, we are determined to get to a point where we have a multi-year Budget. That is exactly where we all need to get to, and I want us to get there. However, I am not shocked. The Member asserts that we should just accept our lot and move on: I will not do that. I have far more ambition for the people here. We should not be shocked by the mess that is happening in Westminster. We should not be shocked that, at every turn, they let the people here down. We should not be shocked that it was a Westminster scenario that brought us Brexit and austerity and that crashed the economy. We should not be shocked by any of that.

People here are alert to where the powers lie, particularly when it comes to helping people through the cost-of-living crisis and having a meaningful package in place. We have played and will continue to play our part. We will continue to have people's backs, and we will continue to do whatever we can to get people through this and to get to the stage where we have a Budget. As things stand, however, the Budget does not cut it; it is not good enough for the people here. My ambition is, obviously, much larger than the Member's.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

I thank the First Minister, the deputy First Minister and all their Executive colleagues for continuing to make the case for fair funding for Northern Ireland. Does the First Minister agree that there are simple things that the UK Government could do to help, including making changes to borrowing so that the Northern Ireland Housing Executive can start to build homes? What discussions has she and the deputy First Minister had with the Prime Minister or Treasury about that?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I assure the Member that that is one of the issues that we have raised continually from day 1, and we will continue to do so. Giving us that flexibility would allow us to reach and even exceed our housebuilding target. We have raised the matter directly, and I know that all parties have probably raised it with the Secretary of State and the British Treasury. It has been raised at Finance Minister level, as well as directly with the Prime Minister, when the deputy First Minister and I made that case.

Thus far, the Treasury has accepted that it will consider it as part of the final fiscal framework, but we do not want to wait until that juncture; we want it now. We think that, if we had that power now, we would be able to move forward with more housebuilding. That adds to the long line of frustrations with the Treasury, which basically is turning a blind eye to what people here need. We will have to keep fighting that case, and I assure the Member that the deputy First Minister and I, the Finance Minister and the housing Minister will continue to raise the matter at every turn.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

4. Mr Sheehan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on progress made through the Communities in Transition programme in West Belfast. (AQO 3602/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, junior Minister Reilly will answer the question.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Since 2019, the Communities in Transition (CIT) project has been delivering targeted support in West Belfast through a range of interventions to help increase community resilience to paramilitarism and organised crime. With £5·5 million in investment to date, CIT has supported the community to tackle the real, hard-hitting issues caused by organised crime. That includes helping people affected by poor mental health and addiction; raising awareness of exploitation; working with young people to raise their aspirations and hope for the future; and addressing the impact of paramilitarism on the physical environment. Funding has also supported the transition of ex-prisoners through advocacy, access to employment and education and restorative community practices.

Over the past year, CIT activity delivered by our delivery partners Extern, Community Restorative Justice (CRJ) Ireland and the Upper Springfield Development Trust in West Belfast has shown real progress through strong partnership working with local residents, the PSNI, the Housing Executive and other statutory agencies. During that period, approximately 1,500 people have engaged in CIT activities, including one-to-one and group interventions, community forums and other targeted activities. The evidence from the programme is now showing a real change in attitudes. There has been a 70% increase in people in the community feeling that they can influence decisions in their area and have their voices heard.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire shóisearach as ucht a freagra.

[Translation: I thank the junior Minister for her answer.]

I acknowledge the work of the Communities in Transition delivery partners alongside the energetic and vibrant community groups, as well as Féile, which work 365 days a year to build a West Belfast that is inclusive, welcoming, confident and safe. Does the Minister agree that building strong and resilient communities is the key to tackling criminality?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin.

[Translation: Thank you for that question.]

I absolutely agree. I am of the strong view that, in order to tackle criminality and create safer neighbourhoods, we have to build stronger, more resilient and inclusive communities. There are many vibrant community organisations across West Belfast from Twinbrook to the Shankill. A few that come to mind are St Comgall's, Black Mountain Shared Space and the Shankill Women's Centre. We also have our youth groups, sporting organisations, interface and cultural initiatives and local leaders who work tirelessly every day of the year to support people, particularly young people, by providing positive opportunities and pathways. Initiatives that have been delivered through CIT alongside the incredible work of Féile an Phobail and many other grassroots organisations build confidence, strengthen community relationships and create a sense of pride and belonging in our communities.

Tackling criminality is not just about enforcement; it also has to be about prevention. It is about early intervention and making sure that people, particularly young people, have access to opportunities and support and have hope for the future. That is why partnership working between Departments, statutory agencies and the community and voluntary sector is so important. When communities are empowered, connected and properly supported, they are so much better and safer for everyone.

Maurice Bradley (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister update the Assembly on future funding for the Communities in Transition programme, including any plans to expand support to new areas?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for that question. Discussions are taking place on funding for CIT, which will be linked to the next stage of planning discussions for the Executive programme on paramilitarism and organised crime (EPPOC). Discussions are ongoing at official level on a future programme. That will have to go to the Executive for approval, but I will, of course, update the Assembly on it at the appropriate time.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

Junior Minister, my constituency of North Down has two areas in the Communities in Transition programme. What assessment has your Department made of the effectiveness of the programme in eradicating paramilitarism in the target areas?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for her question. It is fair and true to say that there has been important progress to date, particularly in CIT. It has evolved. As I mentioned, the programme is moving from the thematic approach to focus more on the real issues that affect people in our communities every day. They include growing challenges around mental health; addiction; exploitation, including criminal, sexual and financial exploitation, and its impact on our young people; and the continuing influence of paramilitarism on the physical and social landscape of our communities.

We have to adapt our response to the legacy and ongoing impact of the conflict. For me, that means recognising and addressing the real issues of mental health, addiction and intergenerational trauma that continue to affect families and communities across the North. Do we still have more to do? Absolutely, but we are travelling along the path. The CIT programme has shown that, with the right partnerships and the right community-led approaches, we can make progress.

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

To follow up on the previous question, in the past seven years, the same eight areas have received Communities in Transition funding. The work is, of course, welcome, but at what point will communities have transitioned?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for his question. CIT came about in 2016, and the Executive Office has taken a refreshed approach. The Member is right to say that communities have changed greatly in recent years, particularly in the 28 years since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Many people have worked extremely hard to move forward, build safer areas, create opportunities for young people and give families hope for a better future. There is real strength and resilience in our communities, and that progress should never be underestimated. That is why we need to keep investing in programmes such as CIT. We have to keep working directly with communities, local leaders and grassroots organisations, and we have to support them. We have to give hope, open up opportunities and support people to realise their potential so that they can have a chance to thrive.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

As we have heard, since the creation of the Communities in Transition programme in 2016, the same eight areas have received approximately £26 million between them. Time after time, TEO officials have been unable to tell me, and, junior Minister, you did not answer Mr McGrath, so can you tell me when a community in transition becomes transitioned? When will we see the money and the focus move away from those eight areas to other areas that need an injection of money and regeneration investment?

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

As I said, the CIT programme came about in 2016. A refreshed approach was taken on the basis of the evidence. The same eight areas came up when the refresh was done. I go back to the point that a real difference has been made, particularly in areas that have faced social and economic challenges as well as the ongoing impact of paramilitarism.

We remain fully committed to working with communities and local organisations to build on the progress that has been made in order to make sure that, as I have said, people continue to get the support and opportunities that they deserve.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

5. Ms Flynn asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to outline the key targets in the Programme for Government 2024-27 that have been met. (AQO 3603/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Executive remain committed to the delivery of the Programme for Government (PFG). We have made significant progress across a range of key priorities. Substantial investment has supported thousands of people to upskill and reskill. Hundreds of thousands of additional patients have been treated, thus reducing our health waiting lists. Funding for early learning and childcare has resulted in the expansion of preschool provision, with over 50% of all funded placed now being full-time. Investment in the childcare subsidy scheme has created millions of pounds of savings for families. Some £27·5 million of transformation funding was secured to provide better support for children and young people with special educational needs. Local and regional initiatives to tackle violence against women and girls have been boosted by £5 million from the change fund. Supported by £20·5 million of transformation funding, work is under way to reduce delays in the justice system. Steady progress is being made on the Lough Neagh action plan. A new Office of AI and Digital has been established to drive innovation. Improvements to waste water infrastructure continue to support housing development.

Tomorrow, we will publish the PFG annual report for 2025-26, which sets out in detail the progress that has been made against all our commitments in the Programme for Government. The report will demonstrate the tangible progress that has been made through collective Executive action and cross-departmental working, despite the very challenging financial context in which we find ourselves operating. That work is delivering real benefits for people, families and communities here.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the First Minister for her response. Earlier today, the Minister of Finance, John O'Dowd, announced £103 million for a second tranche of transformation projects for healthcare, special educational needs, justice and infrastructure. Does the First Minister agree that that is not only welcome investment in public services to transform them but clear evidence of Executive delivery and of what can be achieved when the Executive are properly resourced to deliver for workers and families?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I agree. The second phase of the transformation fund, which the Finance Minister launched today, is another important step towards improving public services and delivering reforms. We have said that we need to come at the issue from a number of different avenues. We need proper, fair funding for our citizens here. We want to do the work on transformation, but we need to have upfront investment in order to do so. The £103 million announced for the next phase of that work has come from Executive funding, National Lottery funding and the Shared Island Fund and will deliver real, meaningful and positive change in a number of critical areas, because we are talking about strengthening healthcare provision, providing earlier support for families and children, improving employability and well-being services, providing support for our farmers and agri-food sector and modernising how government delivers services. The projects are a key component of the long-term reform that the Executive are focused on to ensure that our public services work in a way that is meaningful and makes a difference to people's lives. As the Member will know, the projects in the second phases extend across a number of key services. That underscores the work that the Executive are committed to doing collectively on the reform agenda.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Key Programme for Government targets have not been met as a result of climate change legislation that you, as First Minister, supported. On Saturday, I welcomed your apparent forthcoming U-turn on climate change targets to try to deliver the A5 and other infrastructure projects. Do you now regret voting for targets that you were warned would have detrimental impacts for Northern Ireland?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Of course, it will not be lost on people that it was your Minister who introduced the climate change legislation, but —

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

You voted for the amendments to it.

A Member

Running way.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order, Members.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

— let us ignore the reality. Let us ignore the facts.

I have said from day 1 that I want to see the A5 built. It is a priority for all of us in the Executive. Too many lives have been lost on that stretch of road. The project has, however, been marred by legal challenge after legal challenge, going back well over a decade. We know that there is a legal challenge currently under way.

There is nothing new in what I have said. I said, as did the Minister for Infrastructure, that we will leave no stone unturned in order to ensure that the A5 gets built. Of course, it is not just the A5 that is affected. The same is being felt across this island and across these islands. We therefore need to come at the project in a constructive way, instead of talking nonsense and ignoring the point about who introduced the legislation in the first place.

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

First Minister, the well-being dashboard shows that life satisfaction among our young people is continuing to worsen. Mental health is a huge issue, as is a lack of opportunities and overall happiness. If that dashboard is meant to drive the Programme for Government, what action is it triggering, and how is it used?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We will be saying a lot more about that tomorrow because we said that the dashboard would be one way in which people can see how lives are being improved. Tomorrow, when we launch our Programme for Government plan, we will talk about the key achievements, the indicators that show where things have stayed the same, where, in some cases, they have even got worse and where they have improved. We have to have a holistic approach to those things. It is only one measure, of course, of the areas that we are focused on. We will be launching our annual report tomorrow, and we will be able to say an awful lot more about that then.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr O'Toole asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, having pointed out that, after last year's riots in Ballymena and Larne, she was clear that politicians needed to stand against racism and be careful about their language and even said that the Communities Minister should consider his position, which the Member agreed with, whether the First Minister has reflected on the remarks of one Gerry Hutch, an unsuccessful candidate for Dáil Éireann in Dublin Central, who said that illegal immigrants, specifically Somalians, should be rounded up and interned in Curragh Camp, and whether she agrees that those are appalling racist remarks. (AQT 2371/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. Who in their right mind would not agree? I say no to racism, sectarianism and every form of discrimination in our society regardless of whose mouth it comes out of.

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

The reason I ask, First Minister, is that, when those specific remarks were put to your party leader, Mary Lou McDonald, she said:

"We can’t comment on other people’s comments".

She refused, at that point, to condemn the words of Gerry Hutch. I do not want to get into political commentary on every remark that is made, but I see that some of your Members are laughing at this. This is extremely serious. Racism has to be stood against in this society, and, all too often, people see parties playing it both ways when it suits them. Do you agree that it is really important that your party, all over this island, is absolutely four-square and clear about these issues?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I have said it in the House, and I said it in answer to your original question: I abhor racism, and I say no to racism, sectarianism and every form of discrimination in our community. Mary Lou McDonald is a political leader, not a commentator, so I think that she can stand over her own expression. However, when it comes to creating an inclusive and welcoming society for everybody, we all have work to do. We all have work to do to ensure that our legislation is up to date, and we are continuing to work on bringing in up-to-date racial equality legislation. It is important that we ensure that everybody in our community feels that they are part of and live in a place that is welcoming. I am certainly determined to achieve that, and I have never shied away from that and never will.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

T2. Mrs Mason asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, having pointed out that the 'good jobs' employment rights Bill is essential and hugely important legislation that all Members will want to see and engage with and that it could be agreed by the Executive this Thursday, to indicate to the House the huge significance of that progressive and modernising legislation. (AQT 2372/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thank you for that. You are right. The Economy Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, is bringing forward a new package of workers' rights, which will be the most significant in a generation. At a time when the cost of living is continuing to have an impact on workers and families here, the 'good jobs' Bill is a significant initiative through which we can improve workers' rights and conditions across society. I listened earlier to some of the debate on an anti-poverty strategy and heard that work must pay and that people need to be protected in their employment. That Bill ticks those boxes.

At a time of increased instability in employment and when people need stability, job security and their rights protected, workers on zero-hours contracts will have the option to move on to a fixed-hours contract. Tips, gratuities and service charges will be passed on in full to the workers. Neonatal care leave and pay will be fully implemented. There will be a new entitlement to unpaid carer's leave. The Bill is also about fathers being entitled to paternity leave from day 1 of a new job and paternity leave being used in a more flexible way. There will be redundancy protection for pregnant employees and those returning from family-related leave will also have their rights strengthened.

Our economy can be very much strengthened by supporting workers in these times, and the strength of our economy is based around our workers. It is based around their talent and their skills, and that is what the 'good jobs' Bill is about. It is about supporting them, and I hope that we get that Bill published and get it into the Committee and into the Chamber for full-on debate. If we want to help people through the cost-of-living crisis, let us protect their rights.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the First Minister for her answer. I, too, was really glad to hear the DUP recognise in an earlier debate that employment sustainability is a good first step in tackling poverty. The First Minister said that the 'good jobs' Bill will be the most significant legislation in a generation. Does the First Minister agree with me, therefore, that it is critical that that much-anticipated Bill be brought before the Assembly without further delay?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I agree. I appeal to all parties to get behind the Bill and move it to the next stage so that we can have a fulsome debate on what it means for workers, and so that people can understand exactly what it means for them as individual workers. I genuinely believe that those laws will be transformative for wider society. I also believe that there is a demand in wider society for the legislation to be brought forward. As I said, at a time when people are struggling just to get by day-to-day, there has, arguably, never been greater need for that modernising legislation. The Executive will have the opportunity in a few days' time to agree that the 'good jobs' Bill should come to the Floor of the Assembly. We need to move to the next stage. There is no reason for any more delays. Let us get it into the Assembly and the Committee for the due diligence and scrutiny. That legislation will be so transformative for workers that I really want to see it coming forward.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

T3. Mr K Buchanan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what conversations have been had with the Economy Minister about the potential for 300 jobs at Cantor Fitzgerald that was let go, adding that the talk about a 'good jobs' Bill after 300 jobs were turned down has left him confused. (AQT 2373/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I answered that question before in the House. That is entirely a commercial matter for Cantor Fitzgerald.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Thank you for that non-answer, First Minister. Over the weekend, we watched, in the Dublin Central and Galway West by-elections, the catastrophic failure of your party and its pipe dream down there. Will you now bring your focus back to the six counties of Northern Ireland and let Mary Lou go ahead with whatever she is doing down there, or maybe you are biting at her ankles for her job?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very glad that you are following national politics. Well done.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

T4. Ms Ní Chuilín asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, having thanked the First Minister for her response to her colleague Cathy Mason on the 'good jobs' Bill, to outline the benefits of the policy content of that Bill for women in particular. (AQT 2374/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Bill will have tremendous benefits to all workers, as I said to Cathy, but there are measures in it that will really benefit women in particular. I commend our colleague Caoimhe Archibald, the Economy Minister, for already introducing paid miscarriage leave. People have stopped me on the street to welcome that because it means so much to them. Things like that can make a huge difference to people's lives, and people will benefit further from the 'good jobs' Bill in a number of practical ways.

As you know, many women struggle with the work-life balance and to manage everything. The Bill will do a number of things, including creating more flexible conditions for workers. That will really help people to strike a work-life balance. That can be only good for the economy. It will encourage more women back into the workforce as they juggle to manage both things at once. At the moment, workers have to wait 26 weeks before they can request flexible working arrangements. The Bill will allow people to request flexible working from day 1 of their employment. That is a huge step forward for women in the workplace and for all workers. Many women manage work while caring for a loved one. The Bill will introduce five days of unpaid carer's leave. We hope to be able to get to a position when that will be paid carer's leave. The Bill will introduce paid neonatal care leave. Parents whose newborn requires medical care can then focus on caring for their new wee baby and not have to worry about the financial stress of being out of pocket in their wages. The Bill will also extend redundancy protections for pregnant employees and those returning from family leave.

Just look at that picture for women in the workforce alone: it is a much better and more attractive picture. The Bill will create more flexibility, particularly for women in the workplace

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat,

[Translation: Thank you,]

First Minister, for that response. Stronger workers' rights are essential.

You mentioned some of the issues that are important: trade union representation, the banning of zero-hours contracts and employees being able to have their tips and service charges. Anyone who cannot get behind these proposals needs to be clear — concerns for some, and hiding behind the industry for others. If this is not supported, it will ensure that women's rights and other workers' rights in the workforce are not respected or, indeed, protected. Does the First Minister agree that it is essential to introduce the 'good jobs' Bill at the earliest opportunity?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. I agree with what you said, because many women do jobs that rely on tips, and the Bill will ensure that workers receive their tips in full. It is unbelievable that, in this day and age, that does not happen, but that is something that we can change. It can make a real, positive difference to a worker's life to go home at the end of their shift with their tips. Many women do temporary work, so they will benefit from the right to move from a zero-hours contract to a banded-hours contract. That could be a game changer for a woman who is deciding to come back into the workforce or to remain in the workforce. We know that a lot of women are forced to leave work because of the challenges of managing everything, as I said, and their work-life balance. Trade union access to workplaces to talk to potential members can benefit women, because trade unions play a critical role in raising people's awareness of their rights and entitlements: they can stand up for a woman in the workforce. I should add that the Minister for Communities has the option of using the Bill as a vehicle to take forward gender pay gap reporting and action plans. I hope that that option is taken up; I know that Caoimhe Archibald has offered it.

There are huge opportunities for us to improve people's lives, and I hope that we can get the legislation over the line as quickly as possible.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T5. Ms Ferguson asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, after thanking the First Minister for highlighting the benefits to workers of the 'good jobs' employment rights Bill and the positive difference that it will make to women in particular, whether she agrees that its provisions to strengthen trade unions will help create an economy that works for everyone. (AQT 2375/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do. Trade unions play an enormously important part in a modern and progressive economy. We have seen how the decline in trade union membership has coincided with the growth of inequality and the rise of low-paid and insecure work, so we want to get to a place where trade unions and employers work together. It is not either/or. We can ensure that we have successful businesses — we want to create an environment where businesses flourish — and that workers get their share of that growing prosperity.

The 'good jobs' Bill will make it easier for trade unions to operate and to recruit members. It introduces electronic balloting and gives recognised trade unions the right to access workplaces so that they can speak to existing and potential members. All that will be underpinned by a statutory code of conduct that will require trade unions to act reasonably, constructively and in good faith. Of course, whether people want to join a union is ultimately up to them, but, under this Bill, more people will be aware of the benefits of joining a trade union to their access to support and advice, and they will be able to make more informed decisions for themselves.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the First Minister for her answer. Does she believe that a phased approach to the trade union right of access will help ensure that it leads to more constructive relationships between workers and employers?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. It is important for the Bill to move to the next stage so that people can see for themselves what is in the text, what will come in and when it will come in. For example, as I said, the right of access for trade unions will be underpinned by a statutory code. That will very much be developed in a co-designed way. It will set out the rights and responsibilities of the trade union and of the employer. It will be co-designed with employer representatives, trade unions and the Labour Relations Agency. The intention is that the code will come into effect for companies with more than 50 employees in 2028, so there is a run-in time for the first element. It will then apply to companies with more than 21 employees the following year before opening to all companies the year after that. The lead-in time will allow businesses to plan and to build relationships with the trade unions and the Labour Relations Agency, which is really important. That gives us plenty of time to get the rules right and to ensure a smooth transition to where we want to be, which is a place where trade unions and employers work together to ensure that we have successful businesses and that workers get their fair share of that growing prosperity.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

In response to an earlier question, the First Minister implied that it was the DUP Minister who imposed severe climate targets on Northern Ireland when that was not the case. The Minister tabled legislation and, like the UK Climate Change Committee, warned against the targets. As a party, we warned about what would happen to our agriculture and our infrastructure.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

T7. Ms Forsythe asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, following the signals given by the First Minister at the weekend, whether they agree that now is the time to make changes to legislation to remove the unachievable targets. (AQT 2377/22-27)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The factual position is still that it was the Member's Minister who brought forward the legislation. There is no disputing that fact.

There is a difference between the approach of those of us who want to be pragmatic and reasonable and do our best to protect our environment while allowing investment in our public infrastructure — I think that we can do both those things at one time — and the approach of the Member's party. It is a very different position.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

That concludes questions to the Executive Office.

Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mrs Mason, you have up to 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker.]

I thank the Chairperson for moving the motion and Members from across the House for their contributions. I thank the Clerk and her team for their extensive work on this very important report.

The motion asks that the Assembly note the Committee's 'Report on Engagement with Local Government on the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy' and calls on the Minister for Communities and the Executive to implement the recommendations in the report. In many ways, today's debate has focused on a practical question: how do we ensure that the final strategy is capable of making a real difference in people's lives? That means moving beyond a document that just sets out ambition and towards a framework that supports delivery in our communities. It also means recognising that local government has knowledge. It has real experience that must be built into the strategy from the outset.

A number of contributions from Members across the House were really important. I will raise a few of them. Pam Cameron mentioned that councils already do so much work through social supermarkets and community transport and have so many local insights, which is important. She also mentioned sustainable employment and the fact that having good jobs is a good starting place. I hope that that is an indication that the DUP will put its money where its mouth is and support Minister Archibald's 'good jobs' Bill, which, clearly, could be a really good first step in trying to tackle poverty.

Sian Mulholland mentioned councils being a key delivery partner. She mentioned her council area of Causeway Coast and Glens, where, I think, 23% of people live in poverty. That shows why it is so important that we recognise the role of local government. All the councils have so many different issues and so much detailed information on hand, which is really important.

Robbie Butler mentioned that councils deal with poverty every day. He mentioned a key issue: parents who are already in the phase of worrying about the summer coming up, the return to school and issues with school uniform costs. We had hoped to see strong legislation on that. It remains to be seen what impact that will have.

Mark Durkan mentioned councils being leaders in the fightback against poverty. He raised a really good point: when the Committee heard evidence from councils, those councils expressed real confusion as to why they had not been central to the draft strategy.

Maolíosa McHugh did something that we failed to do: he thanked councils for the work that they do and urged the Minister to act on that.

Maurice Bradley said that the current draft strategy lacked ambition and clarity. That is what we heard that day. He said that the focus needs to move away from short-term funding measures to more sustainable measures and to have less of the sticking-plaster approach of temporary measures.

Gerry Carroll raised the important issue that poverty levels are skyrocketing, and it has doubled in his area. I raised that with the Communities Minister, and he said that the trend is showing a downward trajectory, but that is not what we hear from the experts, and Gerry Carroll mentioned that as well.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. We are not complacent about poverty levels, but it is worth noting that there has been a statistically significant decrease in child poverty from 21% to 16%. It is still too high, but it shows some of the progress that has been made. It is a much better figure than that for other parts of the UK, but there is much more still to do.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I appreciate the figures that the Minister has mentioned, but we need to explore them further because there was a concern that the criteria had changed when they were being calculated. I appreciate the figures, but it is something that we need to look at.

It came through clearly that poverty is not experienced in neat, departmental categories. The pressures overlap for families and individuals: housing, income, transport, childcare, employment, health and debt can all interact, and that is why a narrow or fragmented response will not be enough. The anti-poverty strategy must be much more than a Department for Communities document; it must be cross-cutting, supported by local delivery and informed by lived experience. The Minister mentioned that the British Government had a role, and I was glad to hear that, because delivery would be much easier if we were funded to need.

I thank the Minister for his response to the debate, and there are issues that I want to point out. Language is important, and it goes back to something the Minister said about those who are economically inactive. Some people are in that situation by choice because of caring responsibilities, and it is important for us to be careful about the language that we use. I am sure that those who are caring for a sick child, sick parent or sick partner do not think it is a choice; it is the lack of choice. They do not want to sacrifice their career to take up those caring responsibilities, but they have no choice in the matter because they are the only person who can provide the care.

I am also slightly disappointed that we went down a rabbit hole about fraud and error, rather than following the essence of the motion and the report that we brought forward today. We have to look at everything in the round, but the motion was about the involvement of local government in the anti-poverty strategy.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I appreciate the Member's generosity in giving way. The reason why those matters are important and pertinent to today’s debate is that, if we want to put the interventions in place through local government and the Department, we need the funding. Tackling fraud and moving people into work are the ways we can do that because it provides the funding. It is important, pertinent and worth discussing.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I am glad to hear the Minister mention getting people back into work, and good jobs are central to that. I am also glad that the Minister has recognised the need to take views on board and that the next draft of the strategy will be substantially different, and we look forward to seeing that. I have no doubt that the Committee will want to reflect carefully on the Minister's remarks, and I urge him to view the report as a practical contribution to strengthening the strategy before it is finalised. The Committee does not want to add unnecessary complexity; in fact, much of the report is about avoiding duplication and missed opportunities.

An important theme of today's debate is the need to move beyond a crisis response, and immediate support will always matter. For a household with no heating oil, a fuel payment can be essential; for a parent who cannot afford a school uniform, practical help can reduce the pressure; and, for someone facing debt or benefit issues, advice services can prevent a bad situation from getting worse. I have no doubt that all our constituency offices will deal with an increase in cases, such as parents skipping meals so their children do not have to and workers taking on extra shifts just to stay afloat. We have heard that they all feel let down. They feel abandoned by the lack of action on an anti-poverty strategy and that they have been left to fend for themselves again. Interventions can prevent serious harm, and the Committee recognises the value of the councils, community organisations, advice workers and volunteers who deliver those services. If the system responds only when it is at the point of crisis, however, we will always be chasing the problem rather than reducing it.

The final strategy must also deal with the reasons that people fall into poverty and the reasons that they cannot get out of it. That requires paying serious attention to housing, childcare, low-paid and insecure work, transport, rural isolation, health inequalities and access to advice.

The report comes at an important moment, because the anti-poverty strategy is still in draft form. An opportunity has been created to strengthen the strategy before it is finalised. The test will not simply be whether the final strategy says the right things but whether it changes how government and public services work together. Will support become easier to access? Will councils and partners be able to target help more effectively? Will duplication be reduced? Will people be reached before the crisis deepens? Will communities see evidence that government is joined up? Those are the practical tests by which the strategy will be judged.

In closing, I thank Members for their contributions and the Minister for his response. The Committee's report reflects evidence from all 11 councils. It is a serious piece of work over which the Committee took time. It recognises the vital place and voice of local government in tackling poverty across the North.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes the Committee for Communities’ 'Report on Engagement with Local Government on the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy'; and calls on the Minister for Communities and the Executive to implement the recommendations contained therein.

Private Members' Business

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Hunting with Dogs Bill [NIA Bill 33/22-27] be agreed.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

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

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am grateful for the opportunity to open the Second Stage debate on my Hunting with Dogs Bill. As Members will be aware, the purpose of the Bill is to end the practice of hunting wild mammals with dogs for sport in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland is the only part of the United Kingdom without such a ban. England and Wales banned hunting with dogs more than 20 years ago, while Scotland not only introduced a ban but strengthened its legislation through the Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Act 2023, which created the most robust framework anywhere in the UK.

In Northern Ireland, however, mammals can still be chased until they are exhausted and then attacked and killed by packs of dogs for sport. Neither I nor my party, Alliance, has ever been anything other than honest about our intention to ban the cruel practice of hunting wild mammals with dogs in the circumstances in which Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK not to have already done so. The terms of the Bill have been tried and tested in the rest of the UK. The only people who need to worry about it are those who enjoy the cruelty of encouraging dogs to chase a wild mammal for the kill. I am all too aware of the use of diversions and distractions from the core issue before us, which is animal cruelty, pure and simple.

I introduced legislation on the issue in the previous mandate. This Bill reflects changes that were made after engagement, consultation and further consideration, but what has not changed is the fact at the heart of the debate, which is that hunting wild mammals with dogs is cruel and unnecessary and a ban is long overdue. The Bill also differs from previous proposals in that it has been drafted to fit within the existing legal framework established by the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. That means that, rather than creating an entirely separate framework, the proposal is grounded in established wildlife protection law.

At its core, this is a matter of animal welfare. I am about to paint a graphic picture for Members, and I make no apology for doing so.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Not at this point.

I make no apology because, in the debate, we need to confront the facts about the cruelty involved and be truthful about what the practice of hunting with dogs truly entails. A wild mammal, such as a fox, is pursued over a long distance by a pack of dogs to the point of exhaustion. If caught, it will be torn apart by the hounds. If it manages to escape, it may still be left severely injured, traumatised and bleeding to death. In some cases, if it goes to ground, terriers are sent underground after the animal to flush it out, further prolonging its suffering.

I give way to Mr Buckley.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for giving way. The Member said that the objective is animal welfare. In keeping with that theme, can he point to any demonstrable facts and evidence that substantiate that argument when it comes to wildlife management in the countryside?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I have just outlined to the Member some of the most serious animal welfare issues that have been witnessed across the countryside in every county of this region. I will go into more detail later. If Members wish to raise points in their speeches, I will respond as best I can in the time allowed.

What I have described is not humane wildlife management. It is not pest control. It is not a tradition worthy of protection. It is cruelty and nothing else.

Importantly, a fact that is often overlooked is that the cruelty does not end with the hunted animal. Dogs can suffer significant injury during hunts, particularly when an animal fights back or during terrier work underground. I have also heard repeated concerns about the welfare of hounds used by hunting groups, such as reports of malnutrition, and there is filmed evidence of healthy hounds being shot in the head when they are no longer considered useful for hunting. I have also heard that a hound is generally considered past its prime at six years old. On one hand, we are told that those dogs are beloved members of the family, but on the other, we are told that, if the Bill passes, there will somehow be no place for them and that hundreds or thousands of hounds will be euthanised. The inconsistency in those two arguments reveals the wider truth.

The Burns report, the GB parliamentary report of the inquiry into hunting with dogs, concluded that it was satisfied that:

"being closely pursued, caught and killed ... by hounds ... seriously compromises the welfare of the fox."

That was one of the reasons why hunting with dogs for sport was banned in Great Britain more than two decades ago. The Bill recognises that Northern Ireland should no longer lag behind, but it also seeks to incorporate lessons from other jurisdictions to ensure that the Bill is as robust as possible from the outset. It is for that reason that the Bill also seeks to ban trail hunting and terrier work.

It will come as no surprise to Members when I say that trail hunting is used as a smokescreen for illegal hunting. I have said that here before. Scotland banned trail hunting in 2023, and the Labour Government are now working towards fulfilling their manifesto promise by holding a public consultation on banning that practice in England and Wales. Northern Ireland should not repeat the mistakes seen elsewhere by leaving obvious loopholes open from the outset.

I will give way to Mrs Cameron.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. It is a very important subject, and I will support the legislation going through to the next stage for further scrutiny. Does the Member recognise the fear among people who, like me, are pet owners that, if a dog is off a lead and takes off after a squirrel or a rabbit, that could lead to prosecution? If the Member does recognise that, will he look to amend the legislation during to ensure that that is not the case?

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for the intervention and, of course, for her expressed support. The point raised is, in some ways, a technical one and, in other ways, a very general one. Of course I understand the point about dog walkers. However, it should be pointed out at this juncture that, in 20-plus years of similar legislation in other jurisdictions, there has never been a single prosecution or attempted prosecution of a dog walker, nor has there been a prosecution or attempted prosecution of someone hunting with dogs. I have a feeling that we will come back to this later, but, in direct answer to the intervention, I say this: yes, I am of course happy to look at that. However, for the Member's information, I discussed that with drafters and the Assembly legal team as we went through the process to get to this stage. The advice is general: you do not include in a Bill that which is not covered by the Bill. Therefore, as dog walking is not covered by the Bill, it will not be listed in it. However, I made efforts to have that issue included in the Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) just to provide additional information for Members, and I am more than happy to continue conversations about that.

Terrier work is another deeply troubling element of hunting. Sending dogs underground to flush out a fox or to make it easier to dig that animal out is cruel, both to the wild mammal and to the dogs involved. Reports of severe injuries to terriers and of makeshift or inadequate treatment afterwards are, unfortunately, all too common. For example, I have heard reports from veterinarians of terriers with their faces stapled together. There is no place for that type of activity in a modern society.

All that having been said, the Bill, in no way, takes an absolutist approach. It includes a number of exemptions, as laid out in clauses 6 to 10, which allow for up to two dogs to search for, stalk or flush from cover a wild mammal for the purpose of preventing damage to crops, preventing the spread of disease, protecting human health, protecting livestock and protecting biological diversity. There are also provisions for training service dogs, relieving the suffering of injured animals and retrieving dead animals. That shows that the Bill distinguishes between the organised pursuit of a wild mammal for sport and a genuinely necessary controlled activity that is undertaken for a lawful purpose.

It is important to be clear about what the Bill does not do. The Bill is aimed only at addressing the killing of wild mammals using dogs. There is no impact on hunting with guns, so long as the dogs that are involved are not actively being used to kill wild mammals. In the case of shooting ducks or pheasants, those are simply not wild mammals — they are birds — so the Bill is not relevant. It is the same when it comes to falconry. That has not been included in my Bill, because birds are an entirely separate species from dogs.

Nevertheless, I suspect that there will still be Members here — I am seeing the public commentary — who will rise and try to defend the barbaric practice. They will claim that fox hunting is necessary for pest control despite the Bill's exemptions, which I have just laid out, and the numerous other more humane methods that are available. They will claim that hunting is a way of life — a tradition, indeed. I am not seeking to ban drag hunting, which is a viable alternative. They will claim that the Bill will criminalise innocent dog walkers, ignoring the fact that I have built in provisions to prevent that, which I will come to in a moment. They may also seek to confuse the issue by drawing in forms of shooting to which the Bill simply does not apply.