Northern Ireland Assembly, 15 June 2026

889 contributions from 65 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

A number of points of order were made last week on a number of issues. I will write to the relevant Members directly about those, but I will make some general points.

I know that we were dealing with difficult circumstances last week, but the House exists so that issues can be dealt with through the democratic process, rather than on the streets. All Members need to respect the right of other Members to express different views, even if they find them challenging or, in some instances, distasteful. All Members also need to be aware of our standards of debate: good temper, courtesy, moderation and respect. There were occasions last week when the House did not achieve that balance and the debate was not as constructive as it could have been.

Secondly, the House knows my views: Members should come to the Chamber focused on conducting proper debate and scrutiny in here, rather than on what can be used for social media.

Thirdly, I had to intervene on a point of order made by Mr Gaston last week, and Deputy Speaker Blair had to intervene on a point of order made by Mr Buckley. I am concerned about the tendency of Members to abuse points of order. I remind the House that one of the signs that a Member has a genuine point of order to which they want a response is that they give the Chair advance notice, for which our office is always open. Otherwise, other Members may well have the suspicion that points of order are being made purely for political reasons and sometimes for use on social media, rather than having any procedural value. There is a lot of business over the next few weeks. Members who repeatedly abuse points of order to waste the House's time with matters that should be raised during debates may find that the Chair is less likely to call them.

I also take a dim view of Members posting exchanges with Chairs on social media. The Chair, whoever it happens to be, has a job to do, including intervening on Members at times. It is out of order to challenge the Chair in the Chamber, so Members should not take the back-door route of doing so through social media. Again, in those circumstances, Members may find that they are not called.

Over the past two weeks, the House has been considering the Justice Bill. That has been a good example of good-quality Assembly scrutiny with, for the most part, reasoned contributions and constructive exchanges with the Minister to probe issues. I encourage Members to ensure that that is the norm.

Let us move on.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Colm Gildernew has been given leave to make a statement on racially motivated riots that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24.

Although the House will have considerable latitude with this Matter of the Day, I remind Members that a number of people are now in the court system, so be careful about matters that are sub judice.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I raise the issue of the racially motivated riots that we have seen in the past week since we stood here last Tuesday. Communities have been convulsed in an orgy of racist violence. We saw mobs roaming the streets, attacking people simply on the basis of the colour of their skin and making people homeless in the midst of what is already a homelessness crisis. We saw vulnerable communities being attacked and terrorised and families being burnt from their homes. We saw children in their bare feet being escorted into the back of police vehicles for their own safety. Those were absolutely shameful and disgraceful scenes, and everybody in the Chamber should be calling them out for what they are.

I acknowledge the efforts that the community and voluntary sector has made over the past week to deal with the fallout from much of that violence through trying to support families, trying to find them somewhere to stay and trying to remove them from situations in which they were in imminent danger. I also acknowledge the leadership that people have shown in their own communities, where they have rallied around people who have been targeted. They have supported them and, where they could, tried to assist them. Furthermore, I acknowledge the Housing Executive and housing association staff who have been working around the clock to try to address some of the issues. Regrettably, during an emergency meeting of the Committee for Communities that I called last Wednesday, it became clear that the situation has been exacerbated as a result of what happened in Larne last year and that some of the normal measures used to respond have not been available. That is absolutely disgraceful. I also send my solidarity to the Mayor of Belfast, Róis-Máire Donnelly, who has received death threats. She has just come into post as the new mayor and has been the subject of such threats.

We need to speak with one voice, and what we say in the Chamber needs to be heard very clearly, Members. Those were absolutely unacceptable and disgraceful levels of violence. I have referenced communities, homelessness and housing. Gordon Lyons, as the Minister for Communities, whose remit includes homelessness and housing, has been largely invisible and largely silent on those issues. I would like the Minister to come to the House to make clear what steps he is taking to protect those communities, to condemn the fact that people are being made homeless and to give support to people who are desperately trying to provide housing for all those affected.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

The violent scenes that we saw last week, where loyalist paramilitaries and the far right ran amok across our communities, instilling fear in our migrant, asylum seeker and black Irish and black British communities, have to be condemned and called out by everybody as a racist pogrom. Our communities are living in fear, and they have been for some time. At least 200 families have been burnt out of their homes or forced to flee because of that violence. We do not have an immigration problem in this society, but we do have a racism problem.

I extend my solidarity to everyone who has been under pressure and living in fear over the past week. Despite the racist, dangerous and violent actions of a minority, you are welcome here. Migrants and asylum seekers, you are welcome in this community. You belong here. You are very much part of the fabric of our society and make it better. As Suleiman, a Somalian, said on Saturday, he is not part of an alien culture. I commend him and everybody else who turned out at the largest anti-racist demonstration in the history of Belfast, with some 20,000 people in attendance.

Unfortunately, across our society, we do have a problem with violence in our communities. It is wrong to blame that on one particular community or on one particular group of people because of their race or where they may have been born. I note that the same forces that were causing havoc in the past week did not utter a peep when, over the past six years, disgracefully, 30 women were killed in this society.

I also extend my solidarity to the journalists who have been intimidated and threatened over recent days. It is important that the ugly scenes and the ugly face of this society are shown to people who live here and across the world. Journalists have been threatened by people who cannot defend their wanton violence and far-right ideas and who, instead, intimidate. Solidarity to the journalists and crews. The way to deal with racism is not through more violence and hate and especially not by shooting plastic or rubber bullets at working-class kids who are being exploited by loyalist paramilitaries.

There are also huge questions to be asked about how the PSNI handled last week. It refused to intervene to protect the people who were targeted and whose house in multiple occupation (HMO) addresses were being shared for some time. The state was nowhere to be found last week. The people who intervened were the community groups, the solidarity groups, the women's groups, the anti-racism organisations and political reps. That will be the key to protecting our society and communities and to pushing back the far right in the months and weeks ahead.

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

Once again, I extend my and my party's sympathy and solidarity to Stephen Ogilvie, who suffered that appalling attack last week, and his loved ones. That appalling attack was responded to by a number of people in a truly appalling way. Some people have talked about "real people"; other people have talked about "legitimate concerns". That phrase has been used again and again. To be clear, people can have legitimate concerns about any number of policies, and they are entitled to talk about immigration. Even if I do not agree with their views, they are entitled to raise those questions. People are entitled to a political opinion with which I disagree, and they are entitled to ask questions about how the perpetrator of the initial attack, for example, was in this place. I want to talk about legitimate concerns. I want to talk about legitimate concerns over what happened on the streets of this city and in this region last week.

On Tuesday night, I was phoned by my colleague Councillor Dónal Lyons, who was with a number of families who had been put out of an apartment building on Sandy Row. They were standing in the rain. He asked me if I knew any keyholders nearby. I said that the only one I knew was me, so I opened my constituency office. There were about 30 people, including young families, amongst whom was a one-year-old baby who did not have nappies. I had to go home and get my child's nappies to give to that family. They sheltered in my constituency office. They were there for hours. We brought blankets, made them tea and toast and tried to reassure them until we could establish the location of the council's safe place and how it was going to be stood up. There was no bus transportation, so we drove them slowly, in convoy, across Belfast. A nine-year-old boy was in the back of my car. I was trying to talk to him, with his parents. I was trying to imagine how it would feel for my nearly nine-year-old boy to be got up out of his bed at night by people who were trying to burn his house down. I drove past his primary school, and he asked his mum whether he could go to school the next day. He said that he loved school and had been awarded "Pupil of the Week".

We talk in the abstract about people who live in our society. We talk about people who save lives, who work in care homes and who educate our children as if they are abstract. We talk about legitimate concerns and say that communities have legitimate concerns. I have legitimate concerns when I have to drive children in the back of my car to a safe place because someone has tried to burn their house down. That is my legitimate concern. I have legitimate concerns when our entire society is shut down because of AI-generated graphics, when small businesses have to shut, when workers have to lose wages and when schools have to close. Those are my legitimate concerns.

I also have a legitimate concern about the fact that we come here to debate the issue but do not have Ministers here to make a statement about it. The First Minister and deputy First Minister should be here. We should be hearing how those people will be housed, because they are still homeless. Despite the myths, they are people on skilled-worker visas, so they cannot, in many cases, go to the Housing Executive. I want to know how we will deradicalise these communities and protect them over the summer. There is a range of things that I want to hear, but I only have three minutes.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time, Mr O'Toole.

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

We should be talking about all of that today. The First Minister and deputy First Minister should be here.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Brett.

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

This is an emergency.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr O'Toole, your time is up, please.

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

What happened in Belfast and our region last week was a disgrace.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you. Mr Brett.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

On behalf of myself, my colleagues in North Belfast and my party, I condemn, without reservation, the violence and disorder that occurred in places across Northern Ireland. I am clear, as is my party, that violence has never had and never will have any role to play in society in Northern Ireland.

I say that not from the comfort of an armchair or to speak down to communities from on high, as some people have done, but as someone who spent three nights on the ground in north Belfast — on the Shore Road, in Cloughfern, in Glengormley — working alongside dedicated community volunteers to restore order and support those who were impacted.

I know the difference between peaceful protest and criminality, and what we saw last week was, on many occasions, criminality. However, equally and without hesitation, I will not allow the thousands of people in North Belfast who engaged in peaceful democratic protest, following the grotesque attempted beheading of one of my constituents, and expressed their concern about the immigration system to be smeared as the far right or racist. Peaceful protest is the cornerstone of any free and democratic society. That is what the overwhelming majority of people participated in, and they do not deserve to be condemned or caricatured.

I want to call out the breathtaking and utter hypocrisy on show from some in the House. The party opposite is led by a person who continues to state that there was no alternative to violence in Northern Ireland. You cannot tell a community that there was no alternative to violence and then condemn people for engaging in violence. I will not take lectures from political parties that, only a number of years ago, were willing to donate their money to bail out protesters and criminals in the United States of America but now condemn people in Northern Ireland. I will not take lectures from People Before Profit. When the barbaric attack took place on 7 October, its first reaction was not to mention the men, women and children who were killed but to tweet, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance". I will not take lectures from the SDLP, whose Member of Parliament for Foyle can tweet about Elon Musk and Israel but cannot send out a single tweet about the Protestant community in the Fountain estate, who are being besieged, with five people having been arrested for that. We see your hypocrisy.

I call out violence and intimidation, but my community, who engaged in peaceful and lawful protest, will not be lectured by anyone in the House. Two things can be right at once: our immigration system is wrong, broken and needs to be fixed, but violence is also wrong.

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Last week, a frenzied knife attack left a man fighting for his life and our entire community reeling. I know that I speak for every Member when I say that my thoughts are with Stephen Ogilvie and his family. Despite that family's call for calm, however, their anguish has been exploited and weaponised by far-right and white supremacist elements locally and online. What followed was an outrage: a series of race-based pogroms; masked men marauding the streets kicking in doors, burning down homes and forcing children from their beds and into police Land Rovers; cancelled hospital appointments, closed schools and shuttered businesses; and families too afraid to walk the streets or lie in their own beds at night. I say this clearly to the members of our black and ethnic minority community who have had to listen to chants of, "Go home" from racist thugs this week: you are home; you are right where you belong; your contribution is valued; and you are one of us.

Some have suggested that the violence was the result of people seeking to legitimately express genuine concerns about immigration. However, AI posts urging men to wear masks, dress in dark clothing and prepare to be arrested tell a very different story. They were never protests; they were hate marches. This was racism pure and simple, no ifs and no buts, and we must not fall into a trap of seeking to rationalise or legitimise it after the fact. People in our community are, of course, entitled to their views on immigration, and the system is not perfect. However, what we saw last week was not a debate, a conversation or an exchange of ideas on the way forward.

We never seem to get honesty about the complexities or challenges associated with these issues or well-thought-out proposals on solutions. Instead, we get inflammatory rhetoric and provocateurs in the Chamber whipping up hate and division. It is especially dangerous when we hear Members talk about "alien cultures" or "invasions". Those statements imply that there are people in our community who are somehow less legitimate, less rooted and less deserving of safety than anyone else. Language such as that does not calm tensions; it inflames them. Leadership means lowering the temperature, not fanning the flames.

In Northern Ireland, we know all too well what happens when entire communities are scapegoated for the actions of individuals as part as tit-for-tat violence, but we also know that this place has never been defined by our darkest days. We are defined by the neighbours who opened their doors this week; by the volunteers who showed up; by the communities that stood together and by the thousands who took to the streets of Belfast on Saturday to stand against racism. That is who we are — a tolerant, inclusive, diverse and resilient society — and we will not allow a vocal minority to drown out the very best of us.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

As I have said before, the brutal attack on Stephen Ogilvie shocked not just the people of Northern Ireland but the entire world. It was savage and brutal, and I am glad that someone was swiftly arrested and charged. We must let due process take its course. I spoke this morning to Maitiu Mag Tighearnan, the have-a-go hero with the hurley stick who intervened and, no doubt, saved Stephen Ogilvie's life. What a man he is. His humility on the phone with me was simply inspiring and humbling.

I will address immigration in a moment, but it is important to say first that all violence is wrong today, tomorrow and yesterday. The racist violence that we saw was horrendous. I call "traitors" people who would chase nurses from our hospitals, where they are trying to treat our citizens, because of the colour of their skin. Burning down a Glider bus is just an act of wanton criminality. Forcing people out of their home or burning a home because of the colour of the skin of someone who is in it is an act of unadulterated racism. I support the Police Service in rounding up and bringing to justice everyone who was involved in that.

You have to be consistent in your support for the police and the justice system. Mr Carroll criticises the police for not intervening, but he also criticises them for firing baton rounds. He would not see them have tasers; he would not see them have CS spray. There are many Members who want to disarm the police of every option they have to deal with criminals and then criticise them when they do not intervene in a riot. There are also Members who will vote today to change the age of criminal responsibility. That would stop the police even investigating people up to the age of 14 who might have been involved in serious crime, such as burning down a Glider or burning an immigrant out of their home. That change will mean that, if you are 13 years and 300-odd days old, it is not a crime to burn a migrant out of their home. It is simply not a crime. That sends the wrong signal at the wrong time.

As a body of political leaders, we should be able to talk about immigration in a non-inflammatory way — to separate legal, illegal and asylum — and to say that it is right to deport foreign criminals in the same way as it is right for the authorities in Europe, America or Canada to deport a UK citizen who commits a crime over there. That is not racist. We need to be able to articulate these things. We also need to be able to articulate facts about the speed of our asylum system and the deficiencies in our common travel area and the fact that many migrants contacted me this weekend to say, "Jon, thank you for speaking up for us, because we did this the right way — we went about immigration the right way — and, therefore, people shouldn't take shortcuts and do it illegally".

My party, unlike many others, always stands for the rule of law and order. I condemn the violence, and I wish Stephen Ogilvie well.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Unlike some in the Chamber, my party and I have always been clear about violence: it is wrong; it is counterproductive; and it needs to stop. You will look in vain for any TUV representative who has said that there was no alternative to bombing, shooting, kidnap and murder. Sadly, the same cannot be said of the self-styled First Minister for all. A political class that accepts that — every party that partners Sinn Féin in government has accepted it — cannot lecture others on violence without many people rolling their eyes at its hypocrisy. For many, sadly, when it comes to violence, the existence of this place sends a message of, "It worked for them, so perhaps it will work for us". That mindset is the product of this Stormont.

Another message from the open-border brigade in this place is, "We do not care about the issues that led to the brutal stabbing and attempted beheading a week ago today". Seven days on, where is the statement from the Justice Minister telling us what her Department and her agencies are doing to stop illegal immigrants taking the route that the would-be killer took into Northern Ireland? How many buses from Dublin have PSNI officers stopped to check for illegal immigrants? How many people have been sent back to the Irish Republic because they sought to come here illegally? More tellingly, how many illegal immigrants have come by that route? How many illegal immigrants are living in Northern Ireland today? Does the Justice Minister know? Does she care — that is the question — or is Alliance still on the same page as it has previously articulated in this place, which is that there is no such thing as illegal immigrants? Those are the issues that the House does not want to talk about, and those are the questions that Mrs Long certainly has not answered. It is time that she did.

Throughout our United Kingdom, there is much talk about "Stop the boats". In Northern Ireland, we also need to talk about stopping and checking the buses. We had policing devolved to Stormont. What benefit has it brought? Our Justice Minister needs to come forward and tell us what she is doing about the issue.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

The events that we witnessed across Northern Ireland over the past week were shameful. A man was seriously injured in a horrific attack. The person accused of carrying out that attack has now been arrested and charged. Our focus should remain on the victim, his family and the criminal proceedings that will now follow. Instead, however, we have seen homes attacked, businesses damaged, families intimidated, police officers assaulted and entire communities left fearful. None of those people was responsible for what happened last Monday evening.

Throughout all of that, the victim's family have shown dignity. Despite the unimaginable circumstances in which they find themselves, they have called for calm and for peaceful protest. They have acknowledged the deeply valuable contribution that migrants make to our society, and they have made it clear that the attack should not be used to divide people or fuel hostility. We should be led by their example. Despite their pain, their anger and their concern for their loved one, they have shown more leadership than most. They understand that attacking innocent people will not help the victim; they understand that targeting entire communities will not deliver justice; and they understand that exploiting a tragedy for other purposes helps nobody.

I have heard from constituents who have concerns about immigration, and it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise. People are entitled to hold views on migration policy. They are entitled to question how immigration is managed and to debate pressures on housing, public services and integration. Those conversations are entirely legitimate. However, what is not legitimate is using concerns as an excuse for violence, intimidation or hatred. Many of the people who have been targeted in recent days are our neighbours, our colleagues and our friends. They work in our hospitals, our care homes, our schools, our hospitality sector and businesses across Northern Ireland. The reality is that many of our public services and businesses would struggle enormously without them. Their value, however, is not simply in the work that they do. Their value is in the fact that they are people — individuals — who have chosen to build their lives here, raise their families and contribute to our communities.

What troubles me most is that much of what we are seeing appears to be driven by fear, misinformation and deliberate provocation. Northern Ireland has experienced significant demographic change in recent years. That is the reality. Immigration policy is a matter for the UK Government, and people are entitled to expect leadership on these issues. However, whatever concerns people may have, there is no justification for what we have witnessed on our streets. For too long, politics has been shaped by fear caused by one group or another. Twenty or thirty years ago, that was through a sectarian lens. Today, in some quarters, it is through a racial lens, and we should all know better.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

What we have witnessed over the past week has been abhorrent, as, unfortunately, has been some of what we have heard in the Chamber this afternoon. Families have been terrorised, and people have been forced from and burned out of their homes in the most brutal way. Those scenes take many of us back to the past. Men, women and young, innocent children, for goodness' sake, have gone to bed frightened in the communities that they call home — in their safe place.

At times such as this, leadership matters. Unfortunately, we have not seen leadership from all. The absence of leadership from our Communities Minister has been glaringly obvious. While families were being driven from their homes, Housing Executive staff worked day and night to find emergency accommodation — somewhere for those families to lay their heads for that night — yet there was deafening silence from the Minister who is responsible for that accommodation. While community workers and volunteers were on the front line trying to calm tensions, to support vulnerable families and to keep our young people away from the thuggish behaviour, many were seeking to hear a strong, unequivocal response from the Communities Minister, but they got no such response. People looked to those in positions of leadership for reassurance and direction, but many felt that that response was absent from some.

That silence has been felt deeply. Many of those affected will feel that they have been failed and will ask where that leadership from some was when they needed it the most. The people carrying the burden of the crisis stepped up, Housing Executive staff stepped up, community organisations stepped up and local residents stepped up. Many will ask this very simple question: where was the Communities Minister when families were being forced from their homes? His silence is deafening. We must all stand together against racism. Hatred will not win.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

I join my colleague Mr Brett in saying, without hesitation, that violence is wrong. Our party has always said that. Attacking the police, who have nothing to do with the grievances expressed, is wrong. Burning buses and cars is wrong. Forcing families from their homes is wrong: it is wrong whenever those people are foreign nationals, and it is wrong whenever they are from the local community; sadly, in east Belfast, we had both. People were losing their homes: for what cause? Violence on our streets is wrong, and, unlike some in the Chamber, I have always said so.

I believe that problematic foreign cultures are present in Northern Ireland. Whenever we have that discussion, it is often juxtaposed with Christianity and the idea of this being a Christian nation with some aspiring for it to be more so. I will not take lectures in scripture and Christianity from those who often spend their time opposing Christian values — I have no truck with such lectures. Equally, I say to those who have been involved in the violence that you will not rebuild a Christian nation by torching houses or cars or by attacking the police. The only way to build a Christian nation is by following Christ. You can call whatever it is that you seek to build what you will, but do not call it "Christian". A more Christian example was present in the Ballybeen estate, where the community rallied round a well-liked Romanian family who were forced from their home and raised money. That family has had to return home to Romania, but the community has reached out to make it clear that it wants them back and has received thanks from the family for that. I hope to see that family back in Ballybeen soon.

In condemning all the violence, let me say that there are Members from across the Chamber who want to use this event to quieten or shut down debate on immigration and to silence those of us who wish to speak up for our communities. That will not happen. In the Chamber last week, those Members told us, for the first time, that they are up for conversations on immigration. They said that they recognised the issues and the fact that there are voices to be heard; yet it took a night of trouble on the streets for them to go back to calling pretty much everyone who has concerns about immigration racist and far right. I have said before that the way to fuel racist and far right sentiment is to continue down the path of ignoring working-class communities, which carry more than their fair share of the load in that regard, making them feel unheard and gaslighting them into believing that what they see with their own eyes is not true.

I thank the emergency services that were present in east Belfast last week, particularly in Lendrick Street and McMaster Street. I give voice to some of the residents there, who are sick of the attention that they have been getting from journalists and YouTubers, and —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

— I ask for peace on their behalf.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Last week, we saw scenes on the streets of Belfast and beyond that do not represent who we are or who we should aspire to be. The racist riots that tore through our streets were not just an attack on bricks and mortar but a direct assault on the safety, dignity and belonging of our ethnic minority neighbours. I send my very best wishes to all those people who were displaced over the past week and to the people who were attacked on Donegall Avenue in the early hours of Sunday morning. It is absolutely deplorable that anyone's right to a family life and to privacy would be so grotesquely breached.

We in the Alliance Party are clear that Belfast must be a shared city for everyone, but, right now, for many people, including our healthcare workers, students, business owners and children, that is simply not happening.

Over the past week, we have seen the worst and the best of people here. I place on record my thanks to the Ormeau community and Cooke Centenary Presbyterian Church for their amazing donation drive over the weekend and thank everybody who donated. I also thank organisations such as Anaka Women's Collective for the subsequent dispersal of essential food and toiletries to people living in our city who are cowering in fear. I was at the donation centre yesterday morning, and I heard about the immense pressures, such as the need for formula milk. I saw volunteers go out and buy it out of their own pocket so that terrified new mothers who are staying in their homes can get that essential nutrition for their precious babies. How horrendous.

I also condemn the reckless and malicious targeting of vulnerable people through the online posting of addresses of houses in multiple occupation. It was nothing short of a digital hit list, painting a target on the back of not just migrant workers and people from ethnic minority communities but students and short-term renters. It was not just those from ethnic minority communities who feared that they would be attacked in their home.

The weaponisation of data highlights a critical vulnerability, and I thank Belfast City Council for taking down the list. I have written to the Minister for Communities to ask him urgently to review and amend section 62 of the Houses in Multiple Occupation Act (Northern Ireland) 2016. As it stands, there is a statutory requirement to publish a full, unrestricted public register of HMO addresses, including the names of managers, but that was exploited last week by racist agitators and used as a tool of intimidation. We therefore need to address the imbalance between data transparency and the right to a private life.

I will address one issue that Gerry Carroll raised. Not to be contrary, but when I spoke to the PSNI on Wednesday afternoon, it had deployed 18 police officers just to the Holylands and lower Lisburn Road —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

— area, where those addresses are. I then spoke to the PSNI on Friday —.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Sorry.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

What we saw last week on the streets of Belfast was disgusting. It was racism in all its ugly reality, and it has to be condemned outright by everyone in the Chamber. Unfortunately, as others have touched on, the leadership needed to deal with what happened and to deal with the poor, affected communities came not from the Communities Minister but from people on the ground. It came from activists, from members of the clergy, from the community and voluntary sector and from residents, who showed what the real spirit of Irishness is by welcoming people into their homes and community centres with open arms.

We have heard doublespeak from the DUP and others across the Chamber in recent days and weeks. Careful consideration has to be given to that as we move forward. If we are to deal properly with the scourge of racism that we saw in all its true reality last week, we have to think carefully about the words that we use. It is not acceptable for Members to conflate issues.

We stood in the Chamber at the same time last Monday to talk about a family of colour that was targeted in Belfast and had their business destroyed, and, rightly, we all condemned that. In the following hours, we did not see an attack on every white person in that community, nor should there have been, because that does not reflect the people of the Shankill Road. We have seen the real spirit of the people of the Shankill Road reflected in their condemnation of the attack and in the welcome for the would-be business owner in their community. Similarly, it is not acceptable that our migrant community and people of colour in Belfast feel threatened in their own homes in the wake of one horrific incident.

We need to think carefully about the language that we use, because we must show the world that we are a welcoming community. Irish people emigrated all around the world, made homes for themselves and helped build countries, and it is our responsibility to show the people who want to come here to make a better life for themselves that they have the right to do so. We need to tread carefully as we go into the summer months and not allow the disgusting racism and sectarianism, which is reminiscent of a time when other people in this country were burnt out of their homes, leading some to feel that the attacks of the past week are the same.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members will notice that the time for the Matter of the Day has passed. Given the significance of the issue being discussed, it is important to allow those who have asked to speak to have the opportunity to do so.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

It has been a long week for everyone in Northern Ireland, and more so for those who have suffered negative life-changing events. We think of Stephen Ogilvie and the barbaric attack on him last Monday night. We continue to pray for Stephen's recovery and for his family. We think of the people whose homes, cars and businesses were attacked and targeted because of their race and others who have suffered violence that was totally wrong. We think of the people who are now living in fear, afraid to go out, afraid to go to work and afraid of what will happen overnight when they go to sleep. I visited many parts of North Belfast where terrible violence occurred last week. I have spoken to residents and others who have felt the impact of it, and I have helped them in any way that I can.

The attack on Stephen Ogilvie has shone a spotlight on the issue of uncontrolled, illegal immigration and the abuse of the asylum system and, in particular, on the lack of security at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland — between the UK and the EU. The Sudanese man who was charged with the attempted murder of Stephen had travelled through Egypt, France and the Republic of Ireland, which are three safe countries, before he claimed asylum in Belfast, which is in the United Kingdom. That is an abuse of the system. He arrived here claiming that he needed a place of safety and our hospitality, but he went on to be charged with attempted murder. If he is convicted, the DUP will demand that he be deported and lose his leave to remain.

Every country must have control of its borders. There are and must be strict conditions on work and study visas in the UK. We greatly value those who come here legally with permission to work in our health service, our public services, our factories and our businesses. It is disgraceful that some of those people and places have been targeted in violent attacks over the past week. We say again that it is utterly wrong and shameful. The DUP has, however, constantly highlighted the problems with uncontrolled illegal immigration. People are outraged at the numbers crossing the English Channel in small boats, without permission and then claiming the right to stay. Our equivalent is the number of people travelling across the open border from the Republic of Ireland without permission and claiming the right to stay.

The UK and Ireland are not part of the Schengen area. The authorities, North and South, must do more to secure our borders, and officials at Dublin Airport must stop exporting illegal immigrants on the bus to Belfast and telling them to claim asylum when they arrive here. There must be greater cooperation between the UK's Border Force and the gardaí in those matters.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

I also appeal for the rejection of violence.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Mr Speaker, I am grateful that you have allowed extra time to have this conversation. Thank you very much.

Some 90% of those seeking international protection in the South came from Northern Ireland, so can we please address that misconception? To blame the Justice Minister for the situation, when she has no role in managing migration, is, frankly, disgusting politicking.

I have spent the last few days with people in my constituency who have been burnt out of their houses, with someone who had their shop burnt down for the second time and with communities who are sheltering in a church. I saw a boy doing a GSCE exam online in a church because he was too afraid to go to school. So many children from minority ethnic backgrounds have not been going into school. A cancer doctor texted me and said, "How do I go into work tomorrow? How do I send my kids into school?". The fear is palpable.

I have said that I am happy to have a conversation about migration, but, when we bring it into those contexts, we conflate the issues and make it seem like there is anything that justifies the violence and hate that is happening in our society. The riots will stop, but the impact on those children will last. We saw what happened in Ballymena. I know kids who just did not go to their swimming lessons for months afterwards. They are feeling it. We can, of course, have a conversation about migration, but it needs to be done sensitively and without adding fuel to a really fraught situation. We also need to remember that we do not have a say over migration; that is for the Home Office.

If we are to talk about anything that needs to be done, let us talk about how we coordinate a response, because this is the third year that it has happened. What happens when people are burnt out of their house? Who leads on that? Which person in the Department for Communities will coordinate the response? Why do 200 people have to be found houses by volunteers from a church? Why did Matthew O'Toole have to drive people to his constituency office? Why are people asking volunteers to do that work? Who is coordinating the response? We need to make sure that we have a clear, actionable plan in place for when such things happen.

I said last week that it was not the time to have a conversation about migration because I was absolutely terrified that there would be riots or some kind of response. We have to be so careful with our language. We need to make sure that we have plans in place. We need to have sensible policy discussions, and we need to stop blaming people for the really awful things that are happening in our society. To blame it on the Justice Minister is absolutely disgusting. We need to be beyond that. A lot of work needs to be done, and I hope that we can have the courage, empathy and capacity to move beyond it, because there are people in our society who are terrified right now and need our leadership.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

First, our thoughts and prayers are with Stephen Ogilvie and his family.

The scenes that we have witnessed on our streets in recent days have been utterly shameful, and I think we can all agree on that. Families have been forced from their homes; businesses have been attacked; communities are living in fear; and people have been targeted simply because of who they are, where they come from and the colour of their skin. There can be no excuses or equivocation: racism has no place in our society.

Many of us have spoken about the need for political leadership, particularly when there are those who stand in the House and spout deliberate lies about immigration policy. I am sorry that Timothy Gaston has left the House. That is disgusting and irresponsible, and not all unionists feel like that. He had only to listen to the words, a few minutes later, of Claire Sugden, who stood up in the House and gave leadership for the unionist community and all our communities. However, political leadership alone will not solve the problem. We also need leadership from our communities, and we have seen the best of it over recent days. I am proud to call them part of all of our communities.

The uncomfortable truth is that, in too many places, individuals and paramilitary organisations continue to exert control over our communities. They thrive on division, suspicion and fear. The vast majority of people want nothing to do with violence or hatred. The vast majority want safe streets, good jobs and opportunities for their children, yet we continue to see young people drawn into disorder and criminality. Those young people have no experience of the conflict. They should be looking to their future but, instead, are being taught to fear and resent their neighbours. That should be a concern for every one of us.

If a generation born after the Good Friday Agreement is still being taught division, serious questions must be asked. We must ask whether enough progress has been made in tackling paramilitarism and whether programmes such as Together: Building a United Community (T:BUC) and Communities in Transition are delivering transformation as promised. They are not. It is plain to see in those communities that there is no delivery of transformation at all. The public are entitled to know what impact those programmes are having and whether they are achieving lasting change, because what we have witnessed this week suggests that many communities remain divided and too many people remain vulnerable to —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

— the influence of those who profit from fear and mistrust.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

My first thoughts are with every innocent human life that has been affected by the past week's events in Northern Ireland, with Stephen Ogilvie and his family following a brutal and savage attack and with every other member of our community who has subsequently been caught up. My party and I have always been clear that violence is never the answer and that there has always been an alternative. However, I have listened as some parties in the House have attempted to put the blame for the violence in the streets in the past week at our door and at the door of political leaders who have been prepared to stand up, not just now but in times past, against an uncontrolled and illegal immigration system that continues to fail our citizens. I have never sensed a more out-of-touch political establishment that accuses people who highlight legitimate concerns. Mr O'Toole may have made light of it, but I can tell you now it is genuine and heartfelt.

Let us be very clear: no political leader caused the violence on the streets over the past week. The attempted beheading of a Belfast citizen by a Sudanese national who travelled across the world to enter our borders is what caused the violence in the streets. It was wrong: there should always be political alternatives. I have listened to Sinn Féin desperately try to rewrite the script on illegal and uncontrolled immigration. It is fooling absolutely nobody. The general public know that the horse has bolted and left the gate wide open. I have been contacted by constituents and people from further afield across Northern Ireland from south Armagh to Tyrone to Belfast who have caught on to the sheer folly of Sinn Féin's position of, "Brits out and everybody else in". It is absolutely on you. You come to the Chamber and say that we have no need to control immigration. You stand beside banners that say, "End deportations" and, "Open borders". It is ridiculous.

Just last week, I challenged the Secretary of State: 1,000 deportations from Northern Ireland in the past year. The Secretary of State told us that we did not have a problem. Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance told us that we did not have a problem. I asked him how many of those people came over the Irish border. He could not answer the question.

There is nowhere to hide. There are questions to answer. Let us be clear that parties cannot come to the House and gaslight any Member who has been highlighting those concerns for years. You must step up. You must do better.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Members' Statements

Philip McGuigan (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

I rise as my party's health spokesperson to condemn in the strongest possible terms the racist attacks, threats and intimidation that have been directed at Health and Social Care workers in the past week. The scenes that we have witnessed have been shameful. Healthcare workers who have dedicated themselves to caring for others have been subjected to fear, abuse and intimidation simply because of where they come from or the colour of their skin. Such behaviour is utterly unacceptable and has no place in our society.

Our Health and Social Care system faces unprecedented challenges. We continue to experience significant workforce pressures across all our hospitals, community services and primary care. Vacancy levels remain high in many professions; recruitment remains difficult; and retaining experienced staff is an ongoing challenge. Against that backdrop, international healthcare workers have become a vital part of our health service. Doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, care workers, support staff and many others come from across the world and make an enormous contribution every day. They care for our loved ones, support our communities and help to sustain services that would otherwise struggle to function. The reality is that our health service depends on their skills, dedication and commitment. Without international recruitment, many services would face even greater staffing shortages, and patients would experience longer waiting list waits and reduced access to care; in fact, our health service would collapse without them.

No healthcare worker wearing a uniform should have to fear travelling to work or providing care in their community. I hope that no healthcare worker feels that they have to leave their job in the North and move away because of racism. To every international healthcare worker who has chosen to make their home in the North, I send a clear message: you are valued; you are respected; and you are welcome. Your contribution to our Health and Social Care service is recognised and deeply appreciated by us all. I stand in solidarity with all who have been affected by the attacks, and I stand with the health service, with healthcare workers from every background and for the principles of equality, inclusion and respect that must define our society. Racism must be challenged wherever it appears, and we must ensure that all our healthcare staff can live and work free of fear, intimidation and hatred.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

Over the weekend, Simon Harris TD boldly announced that Fine Gael would develop a blueprint for a so-called united Ireland by November. That is another grand announcement that we can file alongside the dozens, if not hundreds, of other such announcements over the years. For some nationalists in Northern Ireland and, increasingly, in the Irish Government, if they are looking for a convenient distraction, they can always rely on the old faithful: banging the united Ireland drum. Meanwhile, back in the real world, support for the abolition of Northern Ireland has fallen to a 10-year low.

Despite the predictions that Brexit would usher Northern Ireland out of the Union, we are now just short of 10 years on from the referendum. The most recent University of Liverpool study shows that support is not just not falling but has increased over the past few years, so, when Simon Harris tells us:

"all political parties are duty bound to make a positive, credible contribution"

in preparation for what he calls "unity", that is telling in itself. He is speaking, of course, to a Republic of Ireland audience. He is pitching to voters in the Republic of Ireland because, for Simon Harris, Fine Gael and so many others, it would be much preferable if a so-called united Ireland did not include Northern Ireland. Nowhere is that more evident than in that comment:

"all political parties are duty bound to make a positive, credible contribution"

in preparation for unity — "all political parties". That, apparently, is the framework that the Fine Gael Northern Ireland engagement group facilitated by Professor Deirdre Heenan will be working on. There is certainly no doubt that the group's work would be much easier if it conveniently ignored all of us who will continue to promote the benefits of Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom.

Talking about a border poll is certainly much more attractive than getting on with delivering in government. I reckon that, perhaps, that is the lesson that Fine Gael has learned from Sinn Féin. We have been told that unity is just around the corner for longer than I have been alive. Indeed, if you did your 11-plus in the year in which the Provisional IRA had declared would be its year of victory, you are now just a couple of years off collecting your UK state pension. I will mention that many of my constituents never got to lift their state pension because of the terrorism of the IRA.

The latest grand plans to abolish Northern Ireland will come and go, and the world will move on. Then, as is clearly the case now, the arguments in favour of maintaining Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom will be overwhelming.

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

As work across our government on tackling domestic and sexual violence continues, it is vital that we centre our approach on the needs of victims and on delivering justice for those who face such abuse. Victims need to be heard and treated with respect. Today, I focus my statement on a group that can often feel that it is left behind in the progress that is being made: our older population.

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

Today is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, which is coordinated by the charity Hourglass to raise the visibility of older people in the delivery of work and conversations around domestic abuse.

That organisation calls for a proactive approach to safer ageing across the UK, lobbying to ensure that older people are not a blind spot in work to build a safe society that does not tolerate abuse in any way, shape or form.

That will only become more and more relevant as our population develops, as evidenced by the fact that it is expected that, as soon as mid-2027, there will be more people aged 65 and over than children aged nought to 15 in Northern Ireland. That is already the case in the area of Ards and North Down, where I am from.

We have to take seriously the experiences and treatment of older people. In 2024, Hourglass research revealed that one in five older people in the UK is a victim of abuse. If you project that on to Northern Ireland's population, it means that over 100,000 older people here have experienced abuse. Every victim's experience is different, and forms of violence and abuse can include financial exploitation and coercive control, medical gaslighting, withholding healthcare and, of course, physical and sexual violence. To be clear, it is not just about abuse between partners and those who have been in a relationship for some time. Hourglass data shows that adult children account for around 44% of alleged perpetrators who are known to victims.

Today, we must stand together to ensure that older people are not overlooked when it comes to abuse. To quote Hourglass:

"The next twenty years cannot simply be about better understanding the abuse of older people. They must be about creating real change towards a safer ageing society."

We cannot minimise the experience of those victims. We must work together across the Assembly to drive real progress on that issue.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Last week, we saw the horrific and barbaric attack on Stephen Ogilvie. That attack, no matter the rights and wrongs, was made by a legal asylum seeker in our nation. We also witnessed attacks on our communities that were perpetrated and incited from who really knows where. Those attacks were reinforced and amplified by social media, and they focused on many of the most vulnerable in our society. To what end?

On Thursday, the Health Minister and I visited traumatised citizens in my home town of Ballyclare. Not only were those who were attacked healthcare workers, many of whom keep our care homes open and provide healthcare provision to many of our old and infirm, but they are here legally. Moreover, they could not have got those jobs unless they had passed the Home Office and health service checks, which are a lot more onerous than lots of armchair social media warriors would believe them to be.

A further element of disquiet is caused by the fact that many victims of the attacks whom we visited were British citizens. Anyone who has undertaken the onerous and expensive task of achieving British nationality will attest to how difficult it is. They have spent thousands of pounds and completed difficult exams, many of which some of us would be hard-pressed to pass, in order to be British not as a matter of convenience but because they believe in and want to be part of our nation. They want to contribute. They are contributing, and they have exactly the same rights as every other British citizen because that is exactly what they are. Attacking people because of the colour of their skin or their perceived religion, even though many of them are pillars of the local Christian Churches and evidently British, is beyond ignorant. Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom, not the nation of the 1950s but of now. I think of Liverpool, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Exeter — you name it — as that is how our modern and proud nation looks. For our own future, we must never forget that.

The fact that the young and others from all backgrounds are so easily swayed by false narratives that are pumped out of social media is worrying. Whether it is the endemic antisemitism, anti-Islam views or racial stereotyping, we seem to have lost our critical faculty to challenge the breadth of near incessant fake news. My conversation last week with someone who was being radicalised to go out and riot in order to prevent what they said was the "creeping Islamification of our society" could not get round the paradox that they were being manipulated in large part by a bot in Tehran, Serbia or St Petersburg. That is the sad reality of those AI-induced attacks on democracy. They play on the vulnerability, gullibility and, above all, prejudice of far too many. It is well past time that the question of who benefits from that disorder be asked. Why are those who do that so keen to undermine Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom's image? That is the critical question that we should be asking.

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

I join colleagues across the House today in calling out the hate-filled, racist and violent scenes that reared their ugly head across Belfast and other parts of Northern Ireland last week. It was absolutely appalling and almost unbelievable that such scenes were happening in our communities. What happened needs to be called out. There is no dressing it up. There is no hiding it, nor can we try to explain it away. It was absolute and utter racism. Those who took to the streets, covered their faces, attacked people's homes, burned people out of their homes, attacked healthcare workers and wore masks to stop cars in our towns, villages and cities to check whether there was anyone from an ethnic minority in the vehicle are cowards and thugs. They are racists, racists, racists. That is what they are. We in the House need to be completely united in calling out what happened for what it is.

There are legitimate concerns about illegal immigration, where it occurs. This is the forum, to which we are elected, in which to have those conversations, not in the streets, and not by burning public transport or by attacking people because of the colour of their skin. Such scenes have haunted our communities and set them back, and they have traumatised people. They also send a signal to the rest of the world that people cannot visit this place. The cheek of it. The world opened its doors to Irish and British people in very difficult times. They put their arms around us, welcomed us in and gave us opportunities and a life.

There is not mass illegal immigration in Northern Ireland. Anyone who dresses it up as being an issue needs to have a good, hard look at themselves or at least go and look at the facts. What we have Northern Ireland is a health service that has been built and is protected and sustained by people from ethnic minorities who care for our citizens daily. Last week's scenes were utterly disgusting. Should anyone want a bit of clarification on how to identify racism, let us remember that 30 women have been murdered in Northern Ireland, often in their own home, by white men. Where was the mass outrage then? Where were the protests in the streets? Where were the attacks on our emergency services? They did not happen. Members, ask yourselves why that was so. Those who were responsible for what we saw last week should face the full consequences of the law and should realise, very painfully, that what they did was unforgivable and is not acceptable.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I express my serious concerns following the publication of a Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) inspection report on emergency general surgery pathways in the Western Health and Social Care Trust. Along with the majority of people in Fermanagh, I have long-held concerns about the temporary removal of emergency general surgery from the South West Acute Hospital. The RQIA report confirms that the temporary solution has been in place for far too long. Such arrangements have now been going on for almost three years, and patients and staff continue to bear the consequences.

Although the report highlights progress in some areas, including improved patient transfers and positive clinical outcomes, it also identifies significant concerns about communication, governance, staffing pressures and the monitoring of patient outcomes. Crucially, the RQIA report has highlighted the need for better information on outcomes across the entire patient pathway. Until that work is completed, important questions remain unanswered about the overall impact of the temporary arrangements.

Front-line healthcare workers deserve enormous credit for the professionalism and commitment that they continue to show in extremely challenging circumstances. For many people across Fermanagh and the wider south-west, however, the reality remains longer journeys for treatment, additional pressure on families and continued uncertainty over the future of services. Temporary measures cannot continue indefinitely. Patients and staff deserve certainty and confidence that services are planned around safety, need and equality of access.

The Western Trust must now fully implement the RQIA report's recommendations. I have contacted the Minister of Health to ask him to ensure that resources, workforce planning and infrastructure are in place to deliver a sustainable, long-term solution for emergency general surgery in Fermanagh and in west Tyrone. There must now be a clear pathway towards the return of emergency general surgery at the South West Acute Hospital, delivering safe, high-quality care while ensuring that people in Fermanagh and west Tyrone have fair and equitable access to the hospital services that they need and deserve.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Last week, as was her right, Sian Mulholland raised in her Member's statement the issue of using petitions of concern. As is our right, we have tabled a petition of concern on something that we feel very concerned about. Like the DUP, the Ulster Unionist Party states how important justice and the rule of law are, and its party policy is that the age of criminal responsibility should stay at 10. Its leader, Jon Burrows, claims that a change in that age would be dangerous, and we agree with him. He and his deputy leader, Diana Armstrong, have signed the petition of concern, and I thank them for that, as I thank our colleague from North Antrim Timothy Gaston who has signed it also. However, Jon is either the leader of the UUP or he is not. I ask the other Members to my left and those who are listening in their offices to please sign the petition of concern. Go along with your party policy and ensure that we do not see a change in the law today that will be detrimental to our people, to the victims of crime and to young people out there who may be targeted by criminal gangs.

We do not use the petition of concern lightly, nor should you, but nor should UUP Members use it as a wedge against their leader. I ask the UUP to put its dysfunction to one side and sign the petition of concern, which is consistent with its party policy. Let us ensure that we retain the age at 10. If that is changed in the Justice Bill today, I will blame the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin, but the public should know that it happened because of the dysfunction of the UUP. I ask its Members to think carefully over the next couple of hours.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

I will speak today about the attacks on our international healthcare staff. I begin by saying that my thoughts are with the victim of the brutal attack in north Belfast and his family. I hope that he recovers well.

Violence has no place in our society. Over the past week, Northern Ireland has made headlines around the world for all the wrong reasons. Images of families fleeing their homes, of homes and businesses being attacked and of buses and our infrastructure burning have travelled far beyond these shores. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has rightly expressed alarm at the violence, racial hatred and divisive narratives that have fuelled the attacks.

As a nurse, I condemn the attacks in the strongest possible terms and highlight the specific impact that they have had on people who care for us when we are at our most vulnerable. Over recent days, we have heard deeply troubling accounts from international healthcare workers in Northern Ireland: nurses who are afraid to travel to work, healthcare staff who are fearful of being identified in public and people who have dedicated themselves to caring for others who now question whether they have a future here.

Without international healthcare workers, our health and social care system would not function. The overwhelming majority of staff have come here from other countries to build a life, contribute to our communities and care for our loved ones. Every day, they treat patients with skill, compassion and professionalism. Let us be absolutely clear: when a nurse is intimidated on her way to work and chased by masked men into the Ulster Hospital, that is an attack on our health service. When a care worker is made to fear for their family's safety at racial checkpoints that have been set up outside our hospitals, that is an attack on our health service. When talented and dedicated professionals begin to consider leaving Northern Ireland because they no longer feel welcome, that is an attack on our health service.

The overwhelming majority of people in Northern Ireland reject racism, hatred and violence. We value those who have chosen to make their lives here. We value those who have chosen to care for our communities, and we recognise that our health service would collapse without them. To every international doctor, nurse, care worker, healthcare assistant, porter and allied health professional working across Northern Ireland today, or anyone else who feels frightened or intimidated by the events of the past week, the Assembly should send a simple message: you are welcome here, you are valued here and you belong here.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

Simon Harris's so-called blueprint for Irish unity and his claim that there is a duty on all parties to work towards Irish unity is a stunning example of tone-deaf statecraft. Under the Belfast Agreement, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom until a majority says otherwise. Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution were amended so that the people of Northern Ireland could get on with making this place work and making it peaceful and prosperous without a third country making claims again on Northern Ireland. We can dress it up as the Irish Government seeking a united Ireland, but let us call it what it is: one sovereign country seeking to break up another sovereign country. The Irish Republic is not simply saying, "We respect your right to have a vote, and, if that comes, we will have a vote down south"; no, it is actively attempting to change the constitution. Those on the nationalist and republican side have chastised UK Governments and Prime Ministers if they have dared to say that they are pro-unionist. Once again, we see double standards.

I have no fear of Mr Harris's blueprint, and nor do I fear anyone who seeks to make the case for a united Ireland. The reality is that the people of Northern Ireland withstood a murderous bombing and shooting campaign from republicans and an equally bad one from loyalists. That did not change their mind. Every opinion poll shows that there is no increase in support for a united Ireland. What the political class and the media commentariat elites do not get is that most people in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland just want things done. They want access to a GP. They want access to a scan when they need it. They want a good place for their child at school. They need jobs, opportunities and skills. Those are the things that make people tick. Unfortunately, however, the bubble that some people live in leads them to think that people spring out of bed in the morning and think of constitutional change.

Northern Ireland is at its most peaceful in 50 years. Bombings, shootings and public disorder are at their lowest level for 50 years. Economically, we are part of the fifth- or six-largest country on earth, which gives us economic security. We are part of the fifth- or sixth-largest country in terms of military might, which provides our national security. I give Mr Harris this advice: instead of a blueprint for Irish unity, you should produce a blueprint for national security for the Irish Republic, because it still relies on the United Kingdom's military prowess to keep it safe.

I believe in Northern Ireland. I believe in its people. They are a great people. This is a great place that has a great future in the United Kingdom. We can make it a prosperous place for all.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

"We were watching TV when I noticed the barrel of a gun coming through the front door."

Those were the words of 17-year-old Anthony Reavey as he recalled the night on which his family were slaughtered by the notorious Glenanne gang. Within moments, Anthony and his brothers John Martin and Brian were caught in a hail of gunfire as masked men burst into their home in Whitecross on 4 January 1976. John Martin and Brian were killed, and Anthony, having witnessed the horror unfold before his eyes, would later succumb to his injuries. Three innocent lives were stolen because they were Irish and Catholic. From listening to Anthony's account, you could be forgiven for thinking that he was speaking about the hatred and violence that we have witnessed on our streets in recent days. The targets may be different, but the actors are the same. There is the same sectarian mindset and the same belief that fear and violence can be used to terrorise communities. The difference in the Reaveys' case is that those responsible were not only loyalist gunmen but individuals linked to the very state forces supposedly charged with protecting the public.

Fifty years later, the Reavey family are still fighting for the truth. What has emerged in court is nothing short of scandalous. The court heard that crucial documents relating to the Glenanne gang and the weapons used in those murders were withheld from previous investigations, including those of the Historical Enquiries Team and Operation Denton. Information that should have been available to investigators was kept hidden for decades. The court heard how a British Army-issued Sterling sub-machine gun — the British Army said that it was stolen from a UDR base — was used in the murders of the Reavey brothers and linked to a series of other killings. It also heard evidence pointing once again to the involvement of serving members of the UDR and the RUC alongside loyalist paramilitaries. Perhaps most shocking of all is that the Ministry of Defence held information relating to the disappearance of that weapon and failed to disclose it in previous investigations. Families were told that investigations had been completed, reports were written and conclusions were reached, yet vital evidence remained buried in state files. That was not administrative oversight; it was information held by the state and withheld from those seeking the truth.

The courage, dignity and determination shown by Eugene Reavey and his family over the past five decades has been extraordinary. They have never given up, and they have never stopped demanding the truth about who murdered their loved ones and why crucial information was concealed. Last week, the British Prime Minister said that the state must hold itself to the highest standards. The evidence heard in court last week shows just how badly the British state failed that test. The Reavey family deserves truth —.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

The family deserves accountability.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Sorry, time is up.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

After 50 years of obstruction, concealment and —

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

OK, Member.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

— delay, they deserve justice.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up, and I think that I have made that clear.

I call Alan Robinson. You have two minutes.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I welcome the announcement by the Prime Minister this morning that the Government intend to introduce a ban on social media access for those under the age of 16. The DUP supports efforts to better protect children and young people online. We have all seen growing evidence of the negative impact that social media can have on mental health, well-being and childhood. Research has highlighted links between excessive social media use and increased levels of anxiety, depression, sleep deprivation and exposure to cyberbullying. While social media can provide opportunities and connections, we cannot ignore the risks that many young people encounter online.

Of course, many young people use social media responsibly and benefit from it. Equally, many parents work hard to supervise their children's online activity and set appropriate boundaries. However, the reality is that parents increasingly find themselves in a battle against sophisticated algorithms designed to maximise engagement and screen time. That is an incredibly difficult challenge for any family to face alone. For that reason, it is right that the Government consider whether greater safeguards are required. At the same time, any restrictions must be accompanied by continued education. We cannot simply legislate and assume that the problem is solved. Children and young people must be equipped with the knowledge and skills to navigate the online world safely. Online safety, digital literacy and awareness of online harms must remain a key priority in our schools, homes and wider areas.

That said, we need to see the detail. Announcements make headlines, but legislation must be practical, enforceable and effective. Questions remain about age verification, enforcement mechanisms and how any restrictions would operate in practice. We should also learn from the experience of Australia, where concerns have been raised about loopholes, the ability of young people to circumvent restrictions and the challenges associated with age-verification technology. Those lessons should be carefully examined so that any UK-wide system —

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Time is up.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

— is robust and commands public confidence.

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

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I had been hoping to get back in to make a Member's statement, in part because I had requested an urgent oral statement. I am not challenging the Chair's decision, but I am asking for the Speaker's Office to look at guidance after the request for a statement from the First Minister and deputy First Minister was turned down.

I have real concerns about the lack of accountability over the response to the riots. I wanted to address some of that in a Member's statement, but, despite my role as leader of the Opposition under Standing Orders, I was prevented from getting in with a Member's statement. I ask the Speaker's Office to look at the privileges offered to the official Opposition at moments like this. Frankly, it is not a defensible position that the First Minister and deputy First Minister have not come here to give a statement. The Communities Minister is facing questions, but he has not come to make a statement proactively, and the leader of the Opposition has been prevented from making a follow-up statement, so I ask the Speaker's Office to look at those rights and privileges, given the seriousness of the situation.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

That, Mr O'Toole, will be looked at, I assure you. I also assure you that I should be able to make a robust enough defence of how I selected the Members to speak.

Executive Committee Business

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I beg to introduce the Charities (Amendment) Bill [NIA 36/22-27], which is a Bill to amend the Charities Act (Northern Ireland) 2008 in various respects.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Liz Kimmins (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I beg to introduce the Harbours Bill [NIA 37/22-27], which is a Bill to amend the law relating to harbours and harbour authorities.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, take your ease for a moment before we move to the next item in the Order Paper.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call the Minister of Finance to move the Final Stage.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. There are not 10 of us here.

Notice taken that 10 Members were not present. House counted, and, there being fewer than 10 Members present, the Deputy Speaker ordered the Division Bells to be rung. Upon 10 Members being present —

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I call the Minister of Finance to move the Final Stage of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council Bill.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council Bill [NIA Bill 18/22-27] do now pass.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

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

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.]

Today's Final Stage debate concludes this part of the legislative process for the Fiscal Council Bill. Members will be aware that the legislation is necessary to place the council on a statutory footing and to secure its independence. I begin by thanking all members of the Finance Committee, who have scrutinised and continue to debate this important legislation. During Consideration Stage, Members agreed that the Fiscal Council had already made a significant impact on improving the transparency, scrutiny and understanding of our public finances since it was established in March 2021. The Bill will enable the council to continue its work, operating independently from ministerial, Executive, Committee or departmental interference, and to access all government information that it requires to deliver on its functions.

During Consideration Stage, it was determined that we must ensure that the council's independence remained paramount. I wanted to ensure that we did not set up an independent fiscal body and, at the same time, legislate on a long list of asks that it must do. Where would that leave us when it came to that body having the discretion, flexibility and independence to determine its own work programme free from political interference and in line with OECD principles and best practice? However, I again emphasise that the Bill allows the council, should it consider it worthwhile, to consider the issues raised in the amendments at Consideration Stage around the Programme for Government (PFG), the impact of the Budget on the economy and the cost of duplication as part of its assessments.

During evidence from the Fiscal Council, the council chair confirmed that he was content with the Bill. I am assured that that is the case given his extensive experience within the fiscal context.

The legislation provides the council with a broad and flexible remit to assess and comment on our public finances and their sustainability. The Bill stipulates that the council must take forward two reports annually: a Budget assessment report and a fiscal sustainability report. It is then for the council to determine its work programme in its professional opinion with the resources available to it for other reports that it considers impactful regarding public finances. That means that the council can flex and change its focus on important issues as required over the years.

I look forward to hearing Members' thoughts and comments in the Final Stage debate.

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

I am pleased to speak in the debate on the Final Stage of the Fiscal Council Bill, which we paid significant attention to in the Committee; indeed, it is something that I and other Members have been talking about for several years.

The Bill is not extensive in size, but it is significant in what it seeks to achieve. By placing the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council on a statutory footing, it completes an important commitment born out of the New Decade, New Approach (NDNA) agreement and provides a clear legislative framework for the council's functions, independence and governance.

The Committee undertook detailed and extensive scrutiny of the Bill. It sought written evidence from key stakeholders, carried out an online public survey, commissioned research and took extensive oral evidence from economists and academics and a wide range of organisations including the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, the OECD, the NI Audit Office and the Fiscal Council itself, as well as from relevant departmental officials. I record the Committee's sincere thanks to all who contributed to our scrutiny. Their input enabled the Committee to scrutinise the Bill thoroughly, including from a comparative perspective, and with reference to principles of transparency, integrity, accountability and effective governance. I thank the departmental Bill team for constructive input throughout the process.

Throughout the scrutiny, the Committee's focus was not on whether there should be independent fiscal oversight — there was broad support for that principle — but on ensuring that the framework established by the Bill achieved the correct balance between independence, accountability, transparency and practical operation. Members considered carefully the council's statutory functions and the arrangements governing how it will assess Executive Budgets and examine the sustainability of Northern Ireland's public finances. The Committee examined closely the provisions relating to governance and independence. Members explored issues regarding appointments, access to information, reporting arrangements, accountability mechanisms and funding structures.

A recurring theme throughout the scrutiny was ensuring that the Fiscal Council remained operationally independent. The Committee welcomed the explicit protections in the Bill that provide that the council is not subject to the direction or control of Ministers and must operate transparently, objectively and impartially.

The Committee will continue to engage. It will regularly take evidence from the Fiscal Council, including, hopefully, in the not-too-distant future. We will be able to ask the Fiscal Council for its view on whether provisions and promises in the Bill, including interpretations in the explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM), some of which were altered after engagement with the Committee, were and are being upheld. The Committee secured important assurances and clarifications, including commitments that reports, accounts, data statements and relevant notifications would be shared directly with the Committee for Finance and laid before the Assembly where appropriate.

The Committee gave careful consideration to whether amendments should be made to the Bill. I will talk about that in my remarks in a party capacity. Members were mindful that changes to governance arrangements in this context could have wider implications across other arm's-length bodies (ALBs) and therefore approached potential amendments with caution. Ultimately, the Committee as a whole concluded that the Bill, alongside the clarifications and amendments to the explanatory and financial memorandum, provided an appropriate framework for the Fiscal Council to carry out its role effectively and independently. It is important to put it on the record that those changes to the EFM came as a result of engagement by the Committee.

The Committee completed its detailed scrutiny of the legislation ahead of schedule — I think that I am right in saying that — and is content that the Bill provides a strong basis for improved fiscal transparency, strengthened accountability and better-informed debate on Northern Ireland's public finances. I again thank everyone who contributed to the scrutiny process and acknowledge the constructive engagement shown throughout.

I will now make a few remarks with my other hat on. The legislation that we are passing today is important. It is legislation that the Finance Committee, in its current iteration and in previous iterations, has been talking about for an awfully long time. A commitment to setting up a Fiscal Council was made in 'New Decade, New Approach'. The council was established around 2021 and has become a vital part of the policy and scrutiny debate in Northern Ireland. The Fiscal Council has proven that it can improve scrutiny. As someone who has participated in probably every debate on Budgets since becoming a Member, I can say that its work has provided an additional source of scrutiny and clarity for Members, the media and the public at large. Putting it on a statutory footing and ensuring that it will continue to exist is therefore really important.

I welcome the fact that the Minister, after prodding from the Committee, introduced the legislation. In fact, I think that it was his predecessor who introduced it, and he is completing its legislative stages. I am not trying to take credit away from you, Minister. I am just not sure whether it was you or Caoimhe Archibald who introduced the Bill, as I do not have that information at my fingertips. You both did well to get the Bill through. There you go: I have said something nice. The legislation is welcome.

I will make a few points about amendments that were not made, because they would have improved the Bill. The public are seeing at this moment that there is a real crisis in how we do Budget-making here. That crisis is not simply the product of poor decision-making, bad politics and a dysfunctional Executive, although that it is a large part of it; it is also the product of a cynical and dysfunctional attitude from London. That attitude reinforces and contributes to the Executive's dysfunctional and chaotic approach. Having an independent fiscal watchdog gives the public clarity about the choices that are being made and not being made. It also provides some degree of clarity when it comes to the claims and counterclaims that are made about, for example, Northern Ireland's funding position.

We had something called an "open-book exercise", the report of which was published recently. The numbers may not have been wrong, but some of them were clearly stacked and written up in a way that was designed to provide a jaundiced and slightly deceptive view of public finances here. One might wonder why the exercise was agreed to in the first place. It was the product of a devolved fiscal settlement that requires constant, dysfunctional bartering back and forward between London and Stormont and of an Executive who cannot sing from the same hymn sheet and agree a Budget. We now face the risk of a 5% cut on last year's Budget this year, because the Executive do not appear willing or able to pass a Budget in time for the summer recess. We have a better grasp of all those things, however, even if we do not necessarily want to, because there is now an independent fiscal council that is able to provide clear analysis, evidence and numbers.

I had hoped that the Opposition's amendments on providing additional economic analysis to clarify the impact of certain policies, be they on employment, productivity or whatever, would be supported, but they were not. I had hoped that our amendments to give the public certainty that the Fiscal Council would look at the Programme for Government as a priority and at the Budget that was delivered would be agreed, but they were not. An amendment on the cost of division or the cost of duplicating public services was also rejected. I deeply regret that parties — not the Alliance Party or the Ulster Unionist Party but the two big parties — voted against those amendments. As a gentle rebuke to the Minister's statement that it was political interference to try to amend the Bill in the first place, I will say that we are legislators. We come here to scrutinise, and I make no apology for that. We are debating dozens upon dozens of amendments to the Justice Bill. That is not political interference in the Justice Bill but legislators passing primary legislation. That is our job, so I make no apology for that.

We tried to get an amendment accepted asking the Fiscal Council to provide the same kind of independent costing of Opposition policies. The Minister is keen that the Opposition provide fully costed policies. I tried to do that via the Bill, but we did not get the amendment on the Marshalled List. I will not complain about that, lest I be accused of questioning the decision of the Chair and slapped on the wrist.

In total, despite modest lost opportunities to improve the Bill, I welcome that, after this, the Bill will become an Act. I thank the officials for their work on it. Our job now is to keep working with the Fiscal Council. I encourage all Members to engage with its strong work. The Finance Committee will continue to engage with the Fiscal Council to ensure that all the promises that were made about its governance are kept following implementation. Although we wanted to improve the Fiscal Council Bill, we are pleased that it will pass its Final Stage. I have been talking about it for five or six years, so I am pleased that it will pass its Final Stage.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The establishment of the Fiscal Council four years ago was a positive development in improving the scrutiny of our public finances. I am pleased that the Bill has reached its Final Stage, following a year of debate and engagement on the shape of the legislation that will put the Fiscal Council on a statutory footing. It will bring the Fiscal Council into line with best practice in other jurisdictions, safeguard its independence and protect its scrutiny role.

Evidence provided by similar bodies from neighbouring jurisdictions during the Committee Stage was helpful in providing us with an understanding of how they operate and what we can learn from them. At the same time, however, we must be conscious of the differences between this region and others in terms of the economic and financial powers of the respective legislatures and therefore the role of various fiscal bodies.

The Bill reflects our financial framework and how the Fiscal Council currently operates, while enabling flexibility for the future, should we receive additional financial powers. It is important, therefore, that the Bill allows the Fiscal Council to evolve, should more decision-making powers be devolved. I know that the Finance Minister is keen to pursue that, because, like me, he believes that the interests of all our people are best served by those whom they elect. The OECD stated that the legislation had been developed with the principles for independent fiscal institutions in mind, which was the foundation for the Fiscal Council.

The Bill will maintain and, indeed, strengthen the Fiscal Council's independence, providing it with the basis to assess the sustainability of our public finances.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

At Final Stage, we in the DUP once again welcome the Bill, which gives formal legal status to the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council as an independent body scrutinising Northern Ireland's finances. The Bill delivers on a commitment made in the New Decade, New Approach agreement by providing a clear legislative framework for the council's functions, independence and governance. I thank the Minister, the Department of Finance officials, the Finance Committee staff, my Finance Committee colleagues and all who gave evidence to the Committee throughout our scrutiny of the Bill in order to see it here today.

The DUP has been a consistent voice on the need to transform Northern Ireland's public finances. We continue to lead the calls for a fair fiscal framework in particular, one that is underpinned by Treasury funding so that it meets the objective needs of our vital front-line services. That need has never been more evident. I welcome the Executive's combined work on that and the united messaging on the need to continue to make the case to Treasury for funding here. The leader of the Opposition has once again set out his stall in criticising the position with the Budget, yet he has offered no constructive solutions. If the SDLP were in the Executive, would it impose and sign up to a Budget of catastrophic cuts?

The statutory grounding of the Northern Ireland Fiscal Council will further bolster its ability to carry out independent scrutiny of our financial situation, continuing the excellent work that it has been doing. At this time of economic uncertainty, public-service delivery faces unprecedented pressures. Having that legally binding oversight body in place should help the efforts to place our finances on a steady footing, and, looking forward, it should spearhead the transformation that we need here.

As public representatives, we all know that nothing is more important to our taxpayers and constituents than transparency and accountability when it comes to public money. We need to take steps together to restore public confidence. To date, the Fiscal Council has demonstrated its positive impact in improving transparency, scrutiny and understanding of our public finances. The wide range of reports that it has produced far exceeds what it is required to do. We have seen many reports from the council, including one on the Northern Ireland Water funding model that demonstrated that it is neither fit for purpose nor sustainable.

That clearly shows the range of what is available to the council and its ability to scrutinise across departmental remits and address uncomfortable truths that hamper our collective ability to deliver for households, communities and the economy. The challenge from the Fiscal Council is so important to us.

The Fiscal Council has helped us to gain a better understanding of our public finances. The critical value of the Fiscal Council is in its independence. Financial reviews, opinions, presentations or bids that come from within government are often shaped, or perceived to be shaped, by a particular perspective. If the Department of Finance, which is where the council sits currently, were to present a position, there could be a perception that the Fiscal Council's position within the Department could lead to its bringing forward the Department's, the Minister's or a party-political view. I am not suggesting that that has, in any way, been the case — the Fiscal Council has been excellent — but the legislation will, rightly, remove that potential perception. We need to make sure that the independence of the Fiscal Council is paramount. Throughout the Bill's progress, that point about independence has underpinned our position on the Bill and the positions that we took on the amendments. Where the Fiscal Council sits within the Department, the perception that that creates, the budget parameters and the governance have been key.

The clear status of the Fiscal Council as independent is important. As others have outlined, the Fiscal Council has been in operation since 2021 and has demonstrated its professional operation and status, but it has been operating through the Department of Finance. The Bill sets the council apart from the Department of Finance. We believe in the importance of the council's professional independent discretion to select its topical work without political interference, which it has done exceptionally well, time and time again. We believe in the Fiscal Council's ability to apply scrutiny in its fullest form to all aspects of public finance, and we have clearly supported that throughout its work.

Other parties have seen an opportunity to bring political points to the Bill, mandating for specific pieces of work to be carried out by the council. When those parties did not get those proposals passed, they framed false narratives. The SDLP tried to mandate the Fiscal Council to produce costed analysis of the Opposition's proposals. That is somewhat unsurprising, as the leader of the Opposition never misses an opportunity, in the Chamber or on the Committee, to make the call for additional funding for Opposition services. In a point of order today, he asked for a review of the privileges that are available to the Opposition. That is a theme that has come through, but it did not pass in this Bill. The focus should be on the independence of the Fiscal Council.

The Alliance and SDLP wanted the Fiscal Council to be mandated to produce reports on the "cost of division", without defining that term or the scale of the work in terms of annual staff resources. The Fiscal Council already has the scope, the professional discretion and the bandwidth to consider all the costs of duplicating services. In the debate at a previous stage of the Bill, I said that I fully supported that across the board, especially in the Department of Health. The council does that in its work, where it is relevant, and does not need a specific mandate or applied staff to do it. The Alliance and SDLP amendment would have involved more cost for the Fiscal Council and potential duplication of its work. We believe that the Fiscal Council should be a fully independent professional scrutiny body that sets its own work plan, rather than its work plan being prescribed by political parties, and we have been clear on that throughout the Bill process. We believe that the Alliance and SDLP amendment would have involved more cost. We welcome scrutiny by the Fiscal Council, but at its own professional discretion rather than because of political intervention.

An array of false claims was rolled out by both the SDLP and the Alliance Party following a previous Bill stage, including on social media, to say that the Fiscal Council was being blocked from doing specific pieces of work. In fact, quite the opposite was the case. We fully support the Fiscal Council having full and complete professional discretion to do any work that it selects and defines. Nothing is blocked. To be perfectly honest, that is precisely what the Bill does: at its core, it allows scrutiny in its fullest form on an independent legal basis. Putting the Fiscal Council on an independent footing, with its having the independence and credibility to do all that work, is at the centre of everything that we in the DUP have decided as we have applied our scrutiny to the Bill. We fully support the Bill and, as I said, the delivery of the commitment, which was made in NDNA.

A separate point has come up in the Bill process. The DUP has long called for a reduction in the number of quangos and arm's-length bodies, of which some 140 are in operation here — a number that we feel is ridiculous for a country of this size. We recognise, however, that the Fiscal Council does not fall into that category. The Fiscal Council has been in operation since 2021, demonstrating its professionalism and status, but it has operated through the Department of Finance, and this Bill is just setting it apart in status. Its operation, structure and funding are already in place. This is about its governance, independent credibility and legal footing. It is not a brand-new body being set up, like the multiple new commissioners being established at running costs of at least £1 million a year for an array of causes. The Fiscal Council is a professional organisation already in existence that deserves full legal status.

We believe that the Fiscal Council should be fully independent. We support the Bill, and we welcome its further progression today. Again, we thank the Minister, the Department and all who have worked on it. We congratulate the Fiscal Council on its excellent work and look forward to continuing to work with it in the future.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

The Ulster Unionist Party welcomes the Fiscal Council Bill. It is something that we set out many Stormont Houses ago. It is so far in the distant past that we have forgotten how long ago it was. It was always clear that we needed to see what our government was doing and to measure it effectively. Time and time again, we have not been able to properly scrutinise what has come through or to look at the various figures, the Estimates and the spending lines. That is why, when the leader of the Opposition brought forward his amendment, the Ulster Unionist Party supported it in the Chamber. A degree of economic analysis needs to be applied.

The other key issue is that the Fiscal Council was designed to deal with a steady state, analyse budgets appropriately and follow the appropriate system, but, yet again, we are in a situation where there is no Budget. We know from various correspondence going back and forth from the Departments that there seems to be a definitive approach to ignoring the rules and regulations laid down in the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and going on and spending anyhow. In that case, bearing in mind that the vires of the Fiscal Council Bill is for the Fiscal Council to examine the funding as it goes forward within the framework of a Budget and a budgetary process, yet again, we are outside that scope. I hope that the Fiscal Council takes its interpretation and ability to look at the processes as widely as possible, because I believe that, in the discussions that we had with the Department of Finance over the various things, and from what has been mentioned in the explanatory and financial memorandum, there is a degree of flexibility in the Fiscal Council to be able to achieve that.

The process will only work if there is openness and transparency and if the Fiscal Council can get hold of the appropriate data and report it back. The purpose of the Northern Ireland Assembly, and Committees in particular, is to scrutinise Departments, but it is quite clear that we do not have access to all the data. We do not have sufficient detail to scrutinise the arm's-length bodies, and sometimes the granularity — to use that horrible phrase — of the information available is not appropriate for the task ahead. I would like the Minister, in his closing remarks, to state what direction has been given to his Department and, more importantly, as his Department is the lead for finances across all the Northern Ireland Departments, that it will provide data and cooperate fully with the Fiscal Council so that we can get a degree of analysis and rectitude in looking at where we are and where we need to be.

I will draw my remarks to a close, because everybody has clearly stated their views, but my final point is that we have fought hard to get the Fiscal Council on a statutory basis. We need to make sure that it is not squeezed out or pushed into a corner just because it does not support some political parties' narrow views around how they want to do financing. That is the message that should come from everybody in the Assembly. The Fiscal Council is there to support us, and, bearing in mind that it will probably be one of the few organisations that will be guarding the guardians, we should support it.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Like everybody else, I welcome the Final Stage of the Fiscal Council Bill. It is good that we have got to this point. There has been some constructive discussion through the Committee and at each stage in the Chamber. As others have highlighted, this is putting the council on a firm statutory footing from where it was when it was established back in 2021. One important point that has been raised today in relation to some of the amendments is that, from the outset, it was always important that the Fiscal Council operate independently from the Executive, Departments, Ministers and, indeed, even the Opposition. That point is important: it is for the Fiscal Council to determine the work that it carries out. The council is about increasing transparency and adding to the public debate around our finances. We should not shy away from that, and it is welcomed by Sinn Féin. As Steve Aiken mentioned, it is key to the discourse on where we are with the Budget. It is important that the general public know that we are not financed on the basis of need when compared with Wales and Scotland. The Fiscal Council’s work has shown that the Budget that comes from Westminster treats us as second-class citizens when compared with the funding for the other jurisdictions, and that is not acceptable. If we were funded to the level of need, we would have an additional sum of between £1 billion and £3 billion, which would go a huge way to alleviating some of the pressures that our public finances face at the moment.

I welcome greater scrutiny from organisations such as the Fiscal Council, and it is important that they look at the broader issues going forward. As was touched on earlier, there have been some attempts to misconstrue the role of the council or to say that it is about trying to stop us from looking at the cost of division. I have spoken about those issues; I do not shy away from them. They are important. I have highlighted the fact that the cost of poverty is almost double the cost of division, but both are important areas for us to look at. There is nothing in the Bill to stop the Fiscal Council from looking at any of those issues going forward, which makes it all the more important that we have an independent council. The Fiscal Council’s two statutory duties are to bring forward a Budget assessment report and a fiscal sustainability report. The rest of the operational decisions are down to the council, and that is the right course of action. The legislation before us today strikes the right balance. If the council wants to look at other wide-ranging societal issues, it has the independence to do so, and that ensures confidence in the body among the wider public.

I thank the Minister for introducing the Bill, and I should highlight the fact that it was Conor Murphy, a Sinn Féin Minister, who established the Fiscal Council in 2021. We will continue to engage proactively with the council and others as we discuss our public finances.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Members, as Question Time begins at 2.00 pm, I suggest that the Assembly take its ease until then. The debate will continue after Question Time, when the next Member to speak will be Brian Kingston.

The debate stood suspended.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 8 has been withdrawn.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

1. Miss Dolan asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on the public consultation on wildlife intervention options as part of the bovine tuberculosis 'Blueprint for Eradication'. (AQO 3702/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Tackling bovine tuberculosis is a key priority for me as Minister. The impact that the disease is having on the farming community is unacceptable. The cost to individual farmers and government is unsustainable. I was therefore pleased to endorse the 'Bovine Tuberculosis in Northern Ireland: Blueprint for Eradication', which was co-designed alongside key stakeholders on the TB partnership steering group that I established last year. The public consultation on potential wildlife intervention options, which is a key pillar of the 'Blueprint for Eradication', alongside measures on people and cattle, is being finalised. I expect to launch that consultation in the next few weeks. The consultation, which will be open for a 12-week period, will provide stakeholders and the wider public with the opportunity to consider the available evidence and share their views on the options set out. The responses received will help to inform my decision on the way forward. As I have said previously, any decision that I make will be guided by the science and the available evidence. There is no preferred option at this juncture. I encourage all interested parties to participate in the consultation to ensure that their views are fully considered as part of the process.

Jemma Dolan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you, Minister. TB affects the entire island, and it is important that we work collaboratively on it. Can you outline what engagement you have had with your counterpart in the South?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

There is significant engagement, whether through my involvement in the North/South Ministerial Council or through officials, who engage on an ongoing basis. There are also practical measures such as the regionalisation initiative that we are now delivering through the Shared Island funding. I am committed to respecting the fact that we live in one single epidemiological area. TB is a challenge, North and South. The Shared Island initiative is critical, and we will continue to engage at official and ministerial levels on that key issue.

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

Minister, around 19,000 cattle are slaughtered each year due to bovine TB. Can you give an update on any clinical trials in England and Wales regarding vaccination and outline whether any similar research is being done here in conjunction with them? I have a wee PS as well: what about the spread of TB through deer?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Patsy. Your latter question is more of an issue in the South of Ireland than in the North, but I acknowledge that deer are part of the wildlife issues that we need to consider.

On the vaccination programme, DEFRA is conducting a trial on that. It is being conducted in north Wales, as far as I am aware. I hope to visit that over the summer to see how it is progressing. It is important that we consider all available interventions. We will have to be respectful of the fact that we are under EU law in Northern Ireland and how that affects how we will go forward with any future roll-out, but I am watching that with interest.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

According to a recent report from the Ulster Farmers' Union and the Livestock and Meat Commission that was launched just two months ago, TB is costing farmers over £96 million per year. Minister, when will we see direct action, given that, as you know, many farmers right across the country, including in our constituency, continue to face massive issues with TB?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Significant action is already being taken on that. We have increased the level of testing, and we will go out to procurement on biosecurity advice to farmers. We are doing that in partnership with people, and that is why it is important that we have the stakeholder group. We will consult on wildlife interventions, and we want people to respond to that consultation. I want people to be assured that there are interventions on the three pillars of people, cattle and wildlife. I recognise the cost to farmers, not just the financial cost, which the report from the Ulster Farmers' Union set out in a very stark manner, but the mental health cost resulting from the breakdown of herds. There is also an issue with my Department's budget. However, fundamentally, I am on the side of the farming community, and I recognise the challenges. The issues are complex, but we are determined to push forward and implement the blueprint.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

2. Mr Robinson asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline any discussions he has had with Shared Environmental Services (SES) in relation to environmental responses to planning applications. (AQO 3703/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

My officials have discussions with SES about various planning issues as and when they are needed. I will be meeting SES representatives in the near future. Some recent engagements between my officials and SES have related to habitats regulations assessment requirements associated with poultry applications, including transboundary movements and land spreading of poultry litter.

Alan Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his answer. When he meets Shared Environmental Services, does he intend to discuss any additional staffing requirements in order to meet the increasing demand for environmental assessments that are linked to planning applications?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I will meet Shared Environmental Services on Wednesday. I am respectful of the fact that it is a shared service that has been set up by councils, so the authority sits with them. I have asked for a representative from the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) to be at that meeting, because councillors have a role to play. I get people's frustrations with Shared Environmental Services, particularly when it comes to an inability to get clarification on, and a response to, issues from it. That is why I asked for Wednesday's meeting. I will seek to find a better way forward, because there is real frustration with Shared Environmental Services in the agriculture community and a need to turn around queries on the issue that the Member has raised.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I appreciate the response that the Member got, because there has been a lot of discussion about the role that Shared Environmental Services plays, about the need to get clarity on decisions that it makes, or does not make, and about the planning hold-ups that it causes. Is the Minister exploring any reforms of, or improvements to, how Shared Environmental Services engages with the Department on planning matters?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

As I set out in my previous response, I am respectful of the fact that Shared Environmental Services was set up by councils, so, ultimately, the remit for it sits with them. I will say to Members, however, that, when it comes to collaboration across local government, we all have representatives on NILGA, and they have a role to play in finding a way forward. I will do what I can, but I also have to respect the nature of local government. I will have that meeting with Shared Environmental Services on Wednesday, at which I will seek to find a resolution to the issues that have been raised. Ultimately, however, local government needs to act collectively to allow me to resolve them.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

What impact do reapplications have on slowing down the processing time for the DAERA planning response team?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The impact is significant. My Department is actively seeking to improve its planning performance rates. Reapplications and re-consultations increase the planning caseload and put pressure on performance, however. It is therefore vital that reapplications and re-consultations include the environmental data and information that is required up front in order to avoid the need to go back and forth for information. That is a key issue for me. It is important that it be addressed by those making the applications in the first place and then by councils, which have to contact the Northern Ireland Environment Agency.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

3. Mrs Cameron asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on his engagement with the farming and agri-food sectors in relation to Northern Ireland's climate change targets. (AQO 3704/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The sustainable agriculture programme, through its four key outcomes of improved environmental sustainability, enhanced productivity, stronger resilience and an effective supply chain, provides the core policy levers to deliver emissions reductions in the first carbon budget period and plays a central role in meeting statutory obligations under the climate change legislation.

The policies and proposals for emissions reductions in the agriculture sector that are included in the first climate action plan, and the emissions reductions that those could deliver, have been discussed on a number of occasions with the agricultural policy stakeholder group (APSG) and individual processor organisations. An agri-food-focused stakeholder consultation event, which included presentations and a discussion on agriculture sector input and land use, land-use change and forestry took place as part of the climate action plan consultation that was held last year. Stakeholders were also invited to the Met Office event that was held in the Long Gallery last week to hear at first hand about the impact that climate change will have on the sector and the importance of working towards our climate change targets.

Engagement with the APSG and other agri-food stakeholders on climate action will continue as we move towards the development of subsequent climate action plans and an agriculture sectoral plan.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer. It will not be lost on him that our agri-food industry is a prized economic asset in Northern Ireland, supporting over 100,000 jobs. Therefore, his climate change aspirations need to strike an important balance between protecting the environment and ensuring that one of our most important sectors continues to grow, thrive and provide food security to our population. I feel that the industry is not convinced that his approach does that. Is it time for the Minister to adjust his sights on the climate targets?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am very aware of the importance of our agri-food sector to our economy and, more than that, to our rural way of life. We are seeking to strike a balance between the two. The legislation that is being implemented was passed by my predecessor, and the 2022 DUP manifesto trumpeted it. Your change of approach to the legislation is not in line with science and evidence or the mandate that we have to deliver action around climate change.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Despite others' attempts to distract from the real level of the climate crisis, will the Minister give us some more information on the impact that climate change is actually having on Northern Ireland's farmers and why timely action is necessary for a just transition?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, John. The locked-in impacts of climate change are already being felt in the agriculture sector through the increased frequency and severity of storm events; increased rainfall; extreme heat events and droughts; and new, climate-sensitive pests and pathogens. Changing weather patterns are affecting crop yields here and across Europe and damaging farm infrastructure. Unpredictable rainfall and temperature extremes are disrupting traditional farming cycles. Extreme rainfall and flooding events have caused significant damage to farmland, infrastructure and agricultural assets across Northern Ireland.

As a result of those extreme weather events, risks such as soil erosion and nutrient depletion threaten the long-term sustainability of agricultural land. Water scarcity during prolonged heatwaves and dry periods can impact on irrigation and the availability of fresh water for livestock, which adds further pressures on farmers. We have seen the impact that that can have on grass growth and silage production. Those combined impacts are expected to hinder productivity, limit economic growth in the agriculture sector and adversely affect rural communities, highlighting the urgent need for adaptation and resilience measures in response. That is why we have launched the third version of Northern Ireland's climate adaptation programme and are committed to implementing it, taking heed of the science and evidence and the imperative to act.

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

Farmers and the agri-food sector accept that they need to adapt to the challenges of climate change. However, they ask for clarity, support and a just transition. What more can the Minister do to support the sector? What more can he do to support the apple-growing industry in County Armagh? The crazy reality now is that 90% of our apples are imported, while we have the perfect growing conditions here, including in our Orchard County.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Department is committed to supporting the agriculture sector on climate change. That is delivered through the sustainable agriculture programme. Over £300 million in funding support is provided. We are the only part of the UK that has that ring-fenced, and I was delighted to do that. What is more, we are setting up a just transition commission to ensure that the views and voices of farmers are heard as part of the transition towards decarbonisation. In addition, there is a just transition fund for agriculture that is in its second year, supporting farmers on the adaptation and changes that are needed. I am committed to doing that in a just and fair way. The realities are there. We owe it to the farming community to deal with climate change in a fair and just manner, and that is what my Department is doing.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister's draft climate action plan can be found on the DAERA website, where it lists a 21% reduction in agri-emissions by 2030. The colourful document states that this will be achieved by a reduction in livestock of 22% for dairy cattle, 17% for beef cattle and 18% for sheep, pigs and poultry. Minister, is it now time for you to come clean with the industry that the proposals that you are taking forward will lead to destocking of farms through either the draft climate action plan or the other measures that you are bringing in through the nutrients action programme?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The climate action plan, which is from 2023 to 2027, does not recommend herd reduction. We are following a way forward with the science that we can use to deliver productivity and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

We are working with the farming community to deliver that. It is important that we not only heed the imperative to act but work with people on the sustainable agriculture programme and the assistance that we are giving.

To deny and deflect from the realities of climate change is a gross dereliction of responsibility to our farming community, who are feeling the effects of climate change. Those effects will become even more acute if we continue to do so and listen to the Member's friend in the White House, who is in a position of complete and utter dereliction of duty when it comes to facing the realities of climate change that affect so many people, not just in Northern Ireland but across the world.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

4. Mr Dunne asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on improving his Department's statutory consultee response times to planning applications. (AQO 3705/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

With an overall performance rate of 65% for statutory planning applications during 2025-26, I recognise that, in recent years, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency's (NIEA) statutory planning consultation performance has fallen below the expected standard. My officials are committed to doing better through delivery of the Northern Ireland Environment Agency's planning improvement plan, which was formally initiated in January this year. The improvement plan places a strong emphasis on getting decisions right at the earliest stage. Updated standing advice, including new advice for single dwellings, has been developed to improve clarity, consistency and proportionality in responses. Early evidence indicates that performance is improving, even in the context of sustained demand. From 1 April to 29 May this year, my Department received 688 statutory planning consultations, of which 96% were responded to within the statutory target time frame. The outstanding 155 cases are on track to meet a similar performance rate. Tackling the planning consultations that are outstanding from 2025-26 remains a priority. As of 29 May, 91% of consultations that were received in that period had been responded to. My officials aim to clear all the remaining outstanding consultations by the end of September this year.

Stephen Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. The Minister will know that that is an issue across Northern Ireland, including in our constituency, where, even today, long delays in NIEA's consultee responses are curtailing economic development amongst other things. In the past five years, the Department's performance rate has ranged from 59% to 72%, which is simply not good enough. Minister, when will we see real improvement and action rather than just words?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I will write to the Member to set out the actions that we have taken through the planning improvement plan and the further actions that we plan to take. We are putting effort into it, because we recognise that people need to get responses more promptly. We require help from other parts of the planning system, whether that means applicants or district councils, to ensure that we do not have high levels of re-consultations. We also need to make sure that people take heed of and understand the statutory advice, so that, when they put an application in, it is more likely not to require an elongated process.

Dealing with the matter requires resourcing. In our current financial situation of being without a Budget and the uncertainty around that, resourcing in the Department will become even more acute. We need to have a Budget and to be able to properly resource the Northern Ireland Environment Agency to do the job that it seeks to do.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Minister, one farmer of many whom I met at the weekend told me that he has spent over £20,000 on a planning application on which no decision has yet been made. Has the Department carried out any assessment of the financial impact of the delays in responses on the farming community, some of whom are trying to get approval for essential projects, such as slurry storage or new or improved livestock housing?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am conscious of the frustrations. Some of it also relates to wider policy issues and the need to reduce our ammonia emissions. We are working intensively with stakeholders to agree a way forward on that. There is a significant and sustained response from NIEA through the planning improvement plan. We seek to turn consultee responses around more quickly, but there is a role to play for the applicant in making sure that, when an application first comes in, we can give it a prompt response without there being an elongated process.

Andrew McMurray (Alliance, South Down)

Minister, can you outline the situation regarding NIEA re-consultations by councils on planning applications?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

From 1 April 2015 to 20 May 2026, my Department received a total of 61,969 planning consultations across all planning authorities. Of those, 26,241, or 42%, were identified as re-consultations. Re-consultations can range from one re-consultation or, in the case of one planning application, to 16. We have been asked 16 times for the Northern Ireland Environment Agency's view in relation to that application. Whilst the majority of those cases can be resolved after one re-consultation, the upper end, as I have said, is 16 times. That needs to be addressed and, through the delivery of the Northern Ireland Environment Agency's planning improvement plan, work is under way to address poor-quality consultations and to reduce re-consultations by planning authorities by enhancing biodiversity checklists, defining a competent person for completing surveys and developing support tools for planning authorities.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

5. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline any engagement he has had with local councils in relation to funding issues associated with the Dilapidation Bill. (AQO 3706/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I met local government representatives recently to discuss a variety of issues around the Dilapidation Bill. My officials have maintained regular and extensive contact with council officials throughout the Bill's progress. I have consistently highlighted the fact that no discrete funding has been provided in respect of the Bill. The powers within it are discretionary, giving councils the flexibility to avail themselves of those powers as resources permit.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you, Minister. Most councillors whom I speak to want to use the powers that are contained in the Bill, but they are worried about the cost to ratepayers. What can you do to reassure them on that issue?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Sinéad. The Dilapidation Bill will consolidate and modernise outdated Victorian legislation in order to help regenerate our cities, towns and villages by giving councils the powers to better tackle the issue of dilapidation. There has been significant engagement with local government, and I thank them for that constructive relationship. The Bill includes discretionary powers equivalent to those that are now long-established in Great Britain and in Ireland. We have met council representatives on a number of occasions and, pursuant to those meetings, we have agreed to table a number of amendments to the Bill.

The Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs conducted an extended Committee Stage on the Bill and engaged with local government in that regard. I emphasise that the Bill's powers are discretionary. The Bill does not impose new statutory duties or financial burdens on councils. We intend to publish statutory guidance, giving greater clarity than exists at present. We will continue to work with local government on the development of that guidance.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Minister, given the absence of clarity on funding for councils, do you not accept that the Bill risks being legislatively sound but financially undeliverable by councils?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

As I have outlined, the Bill's powers are discretionary. It is really important to have a wider perspective on the matter. Where there are dilapidated buildings in neighbourhoods, towns, villages and cities, that takes them potentially off the rates base and makes it less likely that people will invest in the area. It is in district councils' interests, therefore, that the legislation is used so that buildings can be refurbished and brought back into use and that neighbourhoods are not blighted by dilapidation. We are seeking to give councils those discretionary powers so that they can use them. Obviously, when councils consider the use of those powers, they will consider whether they will get the cost recovery associated with that. The legislation puts additional methods in place to allow them to do that.

I thank the AERA Committee for its scrutiny of the Bill and for its engagement with local government. The Bill will be a good piece of legislation for councils to use in order to address the issue of dilapidated buildings across our constituencies, which many Members have raised.

David Honeyford (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Dilapidation is a major issue that damages our high streets and holds back economic growth and regeneration. I thank the Minister for joining me in Dromore, in my area, to see the regeneration that could take place there. How will the Bill empower councils to tackle dilapidation in the wider community?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, David. It was good to be in your constituency to see what the potential power of the Bill could be. The Bill is an example of what the House should be doing, which is enabling people to do good for their local communities. Most of the powers that are available to councils currently are from the Victorian era and are geographically fragmented, so councils tend to make little or no use of them. The Dilapidation Bill will consolidate and enhance those powers, drawing on the successful use of legislation in other jurisdictions, which will ensure that we tackle dilapidation at an earlier stage. Currently, councils have limited powers in this area, but the Bill will provide them with the necessary discretionary powers to take steps, if they wish, to require buildings or land to be cleaned up where their condition adversely affects the amenity of the area.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, you said that there would be no financial burden on councils in carrying out their scrutiny and actions. I represent an area with lots of small villages. In many cases, there are buildings in a severe state of dilapidation. Can you assure me that, in the exercise of the councils' duties, the weighting given to those small villages will be equal to that of the larger conurbations?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Member is correct to raise that issue. Alongside the Bill, there will be statutory guidance on the exercise of the powers. It is important that we understand that dilapidation affects not just cities and towns but villages. The Bill will give discretionary powers to councils, and it is important that councils actively consider them. We can intervene at an early stage to ensure that that situation does not emerge. Across Northern Ireland, we have seen too many neighbourhoods where one dilapidated building leads to a second and then a third. That is why it is important to intervene. Hopefully, the guidance will give people assurance on the exercise of the powers.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

6. Mr Donnelly asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline the measures included in the bathing waters policy review for Northern Ireland. (AQO 3707/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

My Department has launched a 12-week public consultation on proposed measures as part of the bathing waters policy review for Northern Ireland. The consultation seeks views on a range of proposals to modernise and improve the bathing waters programme. They include how bathing water information is communicated to users; the length and flexibility of the bathing season; the introduction of a risk-based approach to bathing water monitoring; revised criteria for the identification of bathing waters; improved monitoring and management of candidate sites; the removal of automatic de-identification of sites; ensuring that monitoring locations better reflect usage patterns; and the consideration of wider stakeholder recommendations. In addition, the consultation provides an opportunity for members of the public to propose new bathing water sites through a dedicated application process. My Department will shortly host an information webinar to provide further detail on the proposals and clarify any queries from the public. The consultation closes on Friday 21 August 2026.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Thanks to the Minister for that answer. What role will event duration monitors (EDMs) and near-real-time reporting play in keeping users of our bathing waters informed about water quality?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Event duration monitors could play a key role in near-real-time reporting and therefore improve transparency and keep users informed of water quality at bathing waters. The technologies monitor the event and duration of spills from combined sewer overflows. That could improve public messaging, enabling more informed decision-making by bathers, and enhance public confidence in the bathing water programme.

My Department is working with Northern Ireland Water on a pilot initiative to explore the use of EDMs with enhanced data reporting to support more timely identification of pollution events at bathing waters. The aspiration is to have a public-facing version of the pilot within the next year. As part of the bathing waters policy review, my Department is considering how best to strengthen communication with users. Any future approach that involves EDMs will build on the existing bathing water dashboard, which provides an accurate one-stop shop for bathing water information and gives sound public health advice.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

7. Mr Gildernew asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on the NIEA investigation into a suspected gas leak in the Granville and Eglish area on 8 May 2026. (AQO 3708/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) commenced an investigation following the report of a gas leak from the Granville Ecopark Ltd anaerobic digestion facility, which is located in the Granville industrial estate. Granville Ecopark Ltd holds a waste pollution prevention and control permit that is regulated by NIEA. An enforcement notice was issued to the company on 28 May 2026 in response to the incident. As an investigation is ongoing, in line with DAERA's enforcement policy, I cannot comment any further. I can, however, tell you that the gas network company has confirmed that it was not a gas leak, and Granville Ecopark Ltd has confirmed that it was a leak of the odorant used in the gas-to-grid process.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, the odorant is in the form of a gas. That company is charged with managing gas safely. What reassurance can you give the community of Granville and Eskra that the facility is managing highly dangerous gas safely?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I understand the Member's concern. I will check with officials about the engagement that has occurred with the Health and Safety Executive on the matter. The investigation is ongoing, and it is important that we are sensitive to that, but I get the concern around it. I will make enquires with officials and then write to the Member on the safety issue that he has raised.

Andy Allen (UUP, Belfast East)

9. Mr Allen asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for his assessment of the effectiveness of forestry education and training provision in supporting skills development and workforce capacity in the forestry sector. (AQO 3710/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Capacity and sectoral skills shortages are well recognised in the forestry sector and are a common feature throughout the UK and Republic of Ireland. That is primarily due to the increasingly competitive demand for forestry competencies to achieve ambitious tree-planting targets set by respective Governments to meet societal benefits and contribute to climate change mitigation plans.

My Department is due to publish the Northern Ireland tree-planting action plan, which is a collaborative approach that has been co-designed with sectoral stakeholders to deliver the strategy of 12% forest cover by 2050. The plan includes the consideration of education and capacity building to support sectoral resource planning and ensure that forestry skills and capacity are developed in line with the needs for forestry technical staff, contractors and managers across the supply chain, including for the next generation. That will involve my Department and stakeholders promoting forestry as a career and opening up opportunities and access to forestry education, training and skills for the Northern Ireland sector. The absence of the formal provision of forestry education in Northern Ireland requires innovative and bespoke solutions. My Department's Forest Service is assessing opportunities to develop forestry education and training opportunities, including apprenticeship and graduate trainee forestry schemes and recruitment programmes.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move to topical questions.

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

T1. Mr McCrossan asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, given that farmers in the significant rural constituency that the Member represents fully accept their responsibility to protect our rivers and land and the wider environment but cannot control the weather and should not be punished when prolonged wet conditions make slurry spreading unsafe, unsuitable or environmentally damaging, whether he accepts that rigid deadlines without practical flexibility put law-abiding family farms in the impossible position of being forced to choose between breaching rules and risking penalties or spreading in conditions that could do more harm to the environment. (AQT 2441/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I take it that the Member's question is about the closed period for slurry spreading. There has been analysis of the science in that regard and of the importance of improving water quality and safeguarding our watercourses. I acknowledge the good work that farmers do across Northern Ireland on environmental stewardship, of which there are many examples. The Department's focus is not on changing the closed period; it is on looking at issues such as the planning process associated with covered slurry stores. That is something on which we are actively engaging with stakeholders, because that also relates back to our obligations to reduce the levels of ammonia in Northern Ireland. I hope that that will be concluded in the short time ahead.

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

I thank the Minister for that answer. I am sure that you agree, Minister, that it is important that we give our family farms all the reassurance that they need. They are extremely frustrated by the delay in the process of getting storage facilities etc through the system. What are you doing as Minister to deal with that issue and assist farmers in getting the storage that they need, so that they are not left in an impossible and risky situation?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am very conscious of the law in that respect. The Department was investigated in 2023. That report is available on the website of the Office for Environmental Protection, which undertook the investigation. There was a situation in which we were acting unlawfully. That is not now the case, but we need to deal with the practical issues. We have been engaging with stakeholders to gain an understanding of the challenges and come up with practical solutions on the ground, in particular, so that we have a planning process that enables the quicker approval of covered slurry stores.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

T2. Mr Gaston asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, having noted that he understands that the nutrients action programme (NAP) stakeholder group will publish its recommendations as the House enters summer recess and further noted that internal briefings with the industry have resulted in farmers contacting him with grave concerns about what is being proposed, to update the House on what he plans to do with hen litter from layer houses, given that the current proposal is to ban the land spread of that valuable by-product by 2030. (AQT 2442/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am very grateful for the work of all stakeholders as part of the task and finish group associated with the nutrients action programme. Over the past number of months, they have been committed to finding a way forward that is workable at a farm level and contains practical measures that meet our legal obligations within realistic time frames. A significant amount of work has been undertaken in that regard. Hopefully, that work will come to a conclusion soon and the report will be published, after which we will undertake a further consultation on the measures. It is important that we allow space for that work to be completed, after which we will have that consultation, so that people can give their views. I have the utmost respect for all those who took part in that process, including the group's independent facilitator, Karen Brosnan.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I did not have the benefit of seeing whether the Minister delivered that answer with a straight face. I can only think that he did not. Given that it was exposed that a poor culture existed at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), with video evidence showing slurry being blown into a local forest, amongst other breaches, when will all the data behind the NAP proposals be published to allow the industry to robustly scrutinise it? Minister, to be brutally honest with you, you and AFBI have little or no credibility left among the agriculture industry. The answer that you provided sums that up nicely.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

When I come to the House, I do so to give my answers in a truthful and honest matter, and I take great exception to your seeking to impugn my integrity on the issue. Sadly, however, I am not surprised.

AFBI is DAERA's key science partner, delivering the majority of its scientific needs, and it is a key contributor to the needs of the Department and to Programme for Government outcomes. The Member will know from my statement in the Assembly in April that AFBI currently faces a number of key challenges, most notably with its laboratory facilities following an inspection report, as well as because of allegations about farming practices at the Hillsborough farm and because of the data breach. He will also be aware of an independent review of AFBI that my Department and AFBI have been considering. I have published the outcome of the review, and we will continue to implement the actions that I set out in April and the actions arising from the review. A senior partnership, governance and oversight board will support the advancement of that work. It will underpin and enhance departmental support and sponsorship for AFBI as we jointly implement the required improvements. Through the steps that the AFBI board and its executive management team have taken and the additional oversight mechanisms that are now in place between AFBI and my Department, I am confident that AFBI will continue to be able to deliver high-quality science services for the Department and the wider agri-food sector.

I come to the House and do my job because I seek to serve all the people of Northern Ireland diligently and to deliver for them. I do not come to the House to divide people, which is what the Member seeks to do day and daily.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Topical question 3 has been withdrawn.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

T4. Mr Brooks asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, having pointed out that his colleague Pam Cameron dealt neatly with issues regarding agriculture, to detail what engagement he has had with other Ministers to resolve issues with making progress on critical infrastructure, which has hit a roadblock caused by having unrealistic net zero targets, and when we can expect common sense to prevail. (AQT 2444/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am very conscious that there is an ongoing court case dealing with an appeal associated with the A5, so I am limited in what I can say. On the Member's question about whether I have been engaging with Executive colleagues to change our climate change targets, the answer is no.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

I say this: shame on him, because —

Some Members

Hear, hear.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

— that will no doubt be the first of many court cases. Our net zero targets are hampering the A5 project, and they will hamper the York Street interchange scheme. Experts say that they will affect pretty much every major road project that is proposed for this place. Is he willing to continue to risk lives and economic benefits, or will we see some common sense prevail on the issue?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Member conveniently seeks to forget that my predecessor passed the legislation. Your party —.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Not the amendment. Disingenuous. Where is the honesty that you mentioned?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Sorry. Hold on.

[Interruption.]

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

Your Bill. Your Bill. Your Bill.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order. The Minister will be heard.

A Member

Not the targets.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

It was a Bill that was introduced by a DUP Minister, and you —.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

Where is your honesty? You talk about honesty. Where is it?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Bill was passed unanimously in the House at Final Stage, and the DUP put it in its manifesto and was trumpeting the legislation. It has now changed its tune. The shame that the Member should feel is because his party collapsed the institutions for two years and did not allow us to progress legislation and make the important interventions that we are seeking to make. If his party wants to see progress made, agree the first climate action plan, which I will be bringing to the Executive in the short time ahead.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

T5. Mrs Erskine asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to clarify what his local teams are doing to try to combat the increasing prevalence of animal carcasses being dumped in her constituency. (AQT 2445/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I am very concerned about that issue. There has been door-to-door engagement undertaken to encourage people who have any information to report it to their local DAERA Direct office. I have said previously and will repeat it today that the vast majority of farmers dispose of fallen livestock responsibly. Those who are engaging in the dumping of animal carcasses are doing great disrespect to the farming community. If done near a watercourse, there are also potential public health implications. It is therefore imperative that anyone who has any information come forward with it so that the people who are doing it can be brought to justice.

The locations at which the carcasses have been dumped are the responsibility of the landowner. The Department, alongside councils, will engage and intervene as and when necessary. It is an issue that is of deep concern to me. Local people have encountered those carcasses, and it is distressing, particularly for children. We need to get out the message that such activity is not acceptable and that if people are aware of who is doing it — people do know — they should report it and contact their local DAERA Direct office.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that answer. I am deeply concerned about it, as well. He will know that I have raised water quality issues with him quite a lot. This is a water quality issue — right here, right now. I have previously raised with him a waterway that is adjacent to Rhone Road. Over the weekend, we have also seen animal carcasses dumped in a waterway on Tullybryan Road in Ballygawley. How can we be more agile in getting agencies to work together quickly to get those carcasses removed from the waterways? In the Rhone Road situation, which I wrote to him about, the carcasses had disintegrated into the waterway before any action was taken. That is a water quality issue.

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I have asked officials to ensure that there is one DAERA approach, because you have the Northern Ireland Environment Agency and the veterinary service responding to it, and district councils also have a responsibility. Ultimately, we do not want to see this activity happening. That is one of the key issues arising from this. It can also take some time for people to identify and become aware that the incidents have occurred. Ultimately, the landowner has responsibility for the removal of the carcasses, but we are seeking to work with our partners, be that in councils or across the Department, on a response. I urge people to bring forward any information, if they have it.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

T6. Mr Brett asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, why he is seeking to appoint 15 just transition commissioners across Northern Ireland, given that he often informs the House about the budgetary pressures on his Department and given that the public, rightly, want delivery on first-class public services, not the creation of more quangos; and to explain what a just transition commissioner is. (AQT 2446/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

This is a requirement in the climate change legislation. I am keen that we implement our obligations arising from that legislation and set them out to the House as part of the debate on the regulations. That will ensure that our duties are performed in a way that is just and fair.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Minister outline what the cost of the appointments will be? From a cursory look, it seems as though it will be £500 per day for a member who sits on the just transition commission. Given that your front-line public services are stretched, is that a good use of your departmental resource?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I believe that it is a good use of funding. Members come to the House and ask, "How are you going to ensure that climate action measures are carried out in a just and fair way?". I am making it clear that we want to make sure that those voices are heard. I am also making sure that I am listening to stakeholders, including the Ulster Farmers' Union, which welcomed the establishment of the just transition commission.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

T7. Mr Wilson asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs what immediate practical actions he will take to support farmers who cannot afford to wait years for outcomes while TB continues to spread, given his confirmation that the additional £4 million for bovine TB eradication will not shorten its five-year duration, introduce any new measures or deliver direct benefits to many farming areas of Northern Ireland. (AQT 2447/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The action that we are taking in that regionalised approach to TB is not the only intervention that we are taking. We are basing it on people, cattle and wildlife, and the biosecurity advice for farmers is out for procurement. We have also increased the level of testing so that we can have a better handle on where the infection is. That will allow us to get in early. We are also going to consult on wildlife interventions. Therefore, significant work is being done. I recognise that it is something that has existed for a long time. The levels are unsustainable, and we need to address them. That is what the Department is seeking to do in partnership with stakeholders. We have made significant progress in recent times, but we do not underestimate the impact that it has on the farming community, as well as the costs and the mental health impacts on farmers.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

My focus is on farmers in my Newry and Armagh constituency. What immediate measures will be introduced in this financial year that will allow them to see a difference?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

There will be additional testing and biosecurity advice across Northern Ireland, and any wildlife interventions will be applicable across all of Northern Ireland. The regionalised approach is necessarily confined to a geographical area. That is why we are seeking to take action on a Northern Ireland-wide basis.

Brian Kingston (DUP, Belfast North)

What key steps has the Minister set out to improve water quality in Belfast lough without stopping all development from Ballyholme to Islandmagee?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I have legal obligations regarding water quality in Northern Ireland. We are seeking to have the inner Belfast lough shellfish area designated as a sensitive area, as a result of two reviews and a recommendation of my predecessor. I am seeking Executive agreement to that. At the beginning of March, I set out other actions that we are taking on waste water. It is not acceptable that Belfast lough is on course to become our next Lough Neagh, and it is important that people support me on the required interventions.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

1. Miss Hargey asked the Minister for Communities whether he will introduce the Right to Try work scheme for people living with disabilities, which has recently been introduced in England and Wales. (AQO 3717/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) legislation was subject to scrutiny by the Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC), which found that the amendments did not give claimants the clarity or assurance needed to remove the fear of reassessment. The scrutiny highlighted the fact that, although work itself would not trigger reassessment, work activities could still be interpreted as evidence of improved functional capability. That could impact on future work capability assessments or personal independence payment (PIP) decisions. The SSAC also raised concerns that claimants returning to universal credit (UC) may face stricter conditionality requirements and be exposed to a greater threat of sanctions.

After considering the risks identified by the SSAC, I have decided to monitor DWP's implementation of the scheme before bringing forward equivalent legislation for Northern Ireland. That does not result in any material change to the delivery of benefits to people with disabilities in Northern Ireland and preserves the flexibility to legislate later if DWP implementation proves effective and the response to the scheme is positive.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Thank you, Minister. Your Department's disability and work strategy sets out a commitment to investigate opportunities in the benefits system and benefit conditionality in order to help to address claimant fear or reluctance to participate in employment activity. While you are assessing what is happening across the water on Right to Try, what more can or will you do as part of the strategy to reassure claimants?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

It is important ongoing work. We need to ensure that we have in place the support that allows people to break free from the benefits system. We know how difficult that can be, as one of the barriers is that people are concerned about the loss of support. That is why the disability and work strategy is in place. That work has to intersect with the welfare system to make sure that it serves people's needs and does not keep them bound to benefits. The transformation project that was announced recently will be so important in helping us to tackle economic inactivity, because it brings together the different sections — including Health, importantly — to make sure that there is integrated support that makes a difference to people here.

We will keep an eye on the changes that will come in the rest of the UK. Ultimately, however, I want to do what works best for people here. It is right for us to keep that scheme under review and see what comes from it. However, it does not result in any material change for people here.

Pam Cameron (DUP, South Antrim)

What is the Minister doing to support people into work and to encourage progression in employment to ensure that Northern Ireland works for everyone?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I am grateful to the Member for that question. As I am sure she knows by now, that is a key area of concern for me. Our economic inactivity rate is simply too high. We have too many people on welfare, and that burden is being carried by everyone else. Many individuals who are economically inactive face multiple and often overlapping barriers, including ill health, disability, caring responsibilities and skill gaps. We will continue to deliver targeted employment support programmes, including Workable and Access to Work, which are provisions delivered through our front line, and interventions commissioned under the labour market partnerships that aim to help those furthest from the labour market to find employment.

Importantly, the Member also raised the issue of progress in employment. We should want for all our citizens that they continue to deliver and to develop their skills and abilities, so we want to ensure that we provide the necessary support for them. That is why the pathways to work and well-being transformation project is so important. It means taking a step back from what we have always done, and it challenges us all to redesign the current health and work system and to deliver something that is far more joined up and effective in addressing the wider issues that are preventing people from finding and staying in work.

Sian Mulholland (Alliance, North Antrim)

Enabling a programme such as Right to Try will depend on employers being able to provide opportunities. What discussions have you had with the Minister for the Economy to ensure that employers are ready and willing to provide such opportunities?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

First of all, we have the disability and work strategy, which is cross-departmental and has been endorsed by the Executive. It is important that that is in place, because this is not something that I can sort out in one Department. The issues are multilayered, and we need to make sure that we work together to address them. That again brings in the transformation project, which is about working with the Department for the Economy and the Department of Health to make sure that we tackle the barriers to getting people into the workforce.

I have seen some of the excellent work that is already being done to ensure that employers are in a position to take people on. We need to help give employers confidence, because there are many of them who are perhaps unsure about what will be required of them. Often, little is required of them in order to make the reasonable adjustments that allow people to come into the workplace. That work will continue to make sure that we give employers that confidence and give potential employees confidence that the workplace is somewhere for them: a place where disabled people can not only work but progress. That is something that I am committed to. We see that commitment through the disability and work strategy and the transformation project.

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

Minister, as part of your Department's ongoing work on the disability and work strategy, which you have just referenced, what engagement have you had with the Minister for Infrastructure regarding measures, including the provision of free travel, to improve access to public transport for people with disabilities?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Work on that is going on as a result of the draft strategy, and the Member will know that issues around transport feature heavily in it. Many people are concerned about how they can get to work. The specific issue that he referenced is one for the Department for Infrastructure to consider and take forward. His views are on the record, and I am sure that the Minister will take them on board.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

2. Ms Bradshaw asked the Minister for Communities to outline any work being undertaken by his Department to assess public support for the extension of Sunday trading hours. (AQO 3718/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My Department has responsibility for the legislation that governs Sunday shop opening hours. Any change to the hours set out in the Shops (Sunday Trading &c.) (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 would require primary legislation. I have no plans to review the hours prescribed in legislation and can confirm that no work is being undertaken to assess public support for the extension of Sunday trading hours.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you for your response, Minister. You will be aware of Belfast City Council's recent consultation on the use of the mechanism to extend opening hours over 13 Sundays this summer. In response to the consultation, 79% of people were in favour, as were 57% of businesses, and retail workers were evenly split. Can you not ask your officials to look at that response? There is clear support across the community for the change.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

That was one consultation in one area, and the Member has rightly highlighted the fact that retail workers were evenly split on it. It is important that we recognise the concerns that many people have. Often, those who were opposed were the most passionate about their view, because they would be more impacted on than anybody else. It is clear that there is no consensus on the issue among those who are involved, which includes the 40% of businesses that are not seeking a change. Given the time that remains in the mandate, that is not the right priority for us.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Does the Minister agree that the 'good jobs' Bill would help to protect the retail workers whom he referenced by unionising businesses and ensuring that workers get their rights, regardless of the changes that may happen?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

If she is in favour of bringing forward some of the measures that will, she thinks, help and that have support across the Chamber, Sinn Féin should bring to the Executive a proposal to split the Bill. Those measures that —.

Linda Dillon (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

[Inaudible.]

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

If the Member wants to listen, she will hear that we have a way forward here. We can split the Bill. Those measures that have wide public support —

[Interruption.]

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Order.

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The measures that have public support can go through. The Members opposite have been really passionate about some of the measures that have huge and widespread support across the Chamber. Therefore, in the meantime, why not proceed with the measures on which there is agreement? That could be done quickly by urgent procedure. If that were to happen —

[Interruption]

— it would get broad support quickly across the Chamber.

Of course, this is what Sinn Féin does: it interrupts when it does not agree with what is being said. That is a sensible position that can be adopted, and I encourage Sinn Féin to do that.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Minister, there seems to be a lot of misinformation on Sunday trading hours. We heard 57% mentioned by Ms Bradshaw: that is a change from 15% in Belfast. Are trade unions for the change? Is the position in Northern Ireland an anomaly?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

The consultation that was carried out by Belfast City Council related to proposals to extend Sunday opening hours throughout the city during the summer months. The consultees were not asked whether they supported the extension on a permanent basis or whether it should apply beyond Belfast City Council boundaries, so the consultation responses cannot be interpreted as evidence that people across Northern Ireland support such an extension. I am, however, aware of the views of businesses, retailers and, in particular, retail workers who would be expected to work on Sundays. As has been pointed out, the views are much more divided from that perspective, with approximately 40% of businesses and retailers opposed to the proposals and retail workers evenly split.

As for how we compare with elsewhere, our Sunday trading hours, relatively speaking, mirror those in much of the rest of the UK. However, other countries, such as Austria, Germany, Switzerland and Norway, have an even more restrictive system. You often hear the argument that we are among the most restrictive in Europe, but that is simply not the case. As I said, it is not a priority for me as we head towards the end of the mandate.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Minister, do you share the concerns expressed by the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW), which represents most of those retail workers, that allowing larger shops to open for longer on Sundays would have a negative impact on retail workers, their families and our communities and put more pressure on low-paid workers, in that they would feel as though they had to work rather than spend time with their family, with their community or, indeed, if they wish, at their place of worship?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My goodness, Gerry Carroll and I are on the same page for once. Can we all take a note of the date and time?

[Laughter.]

Yes, there are times when we will find ourselves in agreement, and this is one of those times. He is right to stand up for the views of retail workers not just in the city but across Northern Ireland. I, for one, am delighted that I was here for that little moment of history.

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

One of the points that some small retailers make about Sunday trading, whether or not this is borne out, is that, rather than supporting the high street, it would simply benefit big retailers. What practical progress are you making on schemes to support small businesses on the high street, such as the Living over the Shop (LOTS) scheme, given that we know that one of the things that can help to revitalise town centres is more people living in town centres, because they can avail themselves of local retail and hospitality? What practical action are you taking, and what money are you assigning to that end?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

Across Northern Ireland, you will see examples of how the Department has invested in urban regeneration schemes. I will be in Strabane later this week. Work has been done in north Belfast, in Glengormley, and we have seen schemes in other parts of Belfast.

We have seen a number of smaller grant schemes to help improve town centres across Northern Ireland. Increasingly, in some of the regeneration schemes — the Member mentioned the Living over the Shop scheme — housing-led regeneration is helping our town centres. Help specifically for the businesses to which the Member referred is not primarily a matter for my Department, but we are playing our role in helping to improve public realms and town and city centres more generally. I look forward to further announcements on that in the days to come.

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

3. Ms Hunter asked the Minister for Communities to outline any steps he is taking to tackle social housing fraud. (AQO 3719/22-27)

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

I have made it a priority to protect our social homes as valuable public assets, because every house matters. In 2024, my Department initiated a review of tenancy fraud policies and practices and established a collaborative forum, namely the tenancy fraud oversight group. That group works closely with the Housing Executive, registered housing associations and other key partners, including with representatives from the UK Tenancy Fraud Forum, to develop a more coordinated and effective approach to tackling tenancy fraud, identifying key issues and sharing best practice. Over a year ago, I tasked officials with taking forward short-, medium- and long-term actions in relation to that review. Those actions include a clause in the Administrative and Financial Provisions Bill to allow a specialist team within the Housing Executive to investigate tenancy fraud on behalf of registered housing associations.

I hosted Northern Ireland’s first conference on tenancy fraud, in November 2025, bringing together experts from across the UK to share lessons learned. I also committed to publishing proposals for consultation, including plans for ambitious new legislation and an overarching strategy on tenancy fraud and misuse. Those will be brought forward by the end of this month. I am glad to have the support of the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO), which recently recognised the value of that work.

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

Thank you, Minister. The Audit Office recently reported that social housing tenancy fraud costs the public purse at least £8 million. As elected representatives, we know that the true cost is our families on waiting lists for houses. In its 2014 report, there was a recommendation from the Public Accounts Committee to bring forward an evidence-based baseline estimate for the true scale of tenancy fraud in social housing. Is that an additional element to what you just said you will bring forward at the end of the month?

Gordon Lyons (DUP, East Antrim)

My Department undertook two exercises — in 2015 and 2016 — to establish a baseline. Those were reported on at the time. Those exercises did not successfully identify a level of undetected fraud. We have been collecting data from social landlords on tenancy fraud and misuse since then, but I want to see improvements to how data is collected on suspected fraud, confirmed fraud and recoveries. A report on social housing fraud in England, 'Lost homes, lost hope', published in 2023, estimated that one in 30 homes is subject to some form of tenancy fraud, with many cases going undetected. The NIAO has recommended that we establish an evidence-based estimate of undetected fraud. That will require further work, but we are committed to doing that.

Kellie Armstrong (Alliance, Strangford)

Minister, of course we absolutely want to get rid of housing fraud in any system such as this; it loses us far too much money in Northern Ireland. Mistakes can be made during investigations, however. What appeals process can be built into the Housing Executive's investigation system?