Northern Ireland Assembly, 7 September 2026

553 contributions from 78 members. The official report.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Members, there are a number of issues before we move to today's business.

Executive Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Sign Language Bill received Royal Assent on 9 July. It will be known as the Sign Language Act (Northern Ireland) 2026. It is chapter 7.

Assembly Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I received notification from the office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister advising that Mr Mike Nesbitt resigned the office of Minister of Health on 19 August 2026.

The nominating officer for the UUP nominated Mr Robbie Butler to hold the office of Minister of Health. Mr Butler accepted the nomination and affirmed the Pledge of Office in my presence and that of the Clerk/Chief Executive on 20 August 2026.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Butler ceased to hold office as Chairperson of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. Mrs Diana Armstrong was nominated to fill the office with effect from 21 August 2026.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I advise Members that I received notification that Mr Malíosa McHugh resigned as a Member of the Assembly for the West Tyrone constituency on 1 September. I notified the Chief Electoral Officer in accordance with section 35 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. I was informed by the Chief Electoral Officer that Mr Paul Boggs has been returned as a Member of the Assembly for the West Tyrone constituency to fill the vacancy.

This morning, Mr Boggs signed the undertaking and the Roll of Membership and entered his designation in my presence and that of the Clerk/Chief Executive. He has now taken his seat, and I welcome him to the Assembly and wish him every success.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr Jonathan Buckley has resigned as Chairperson of the Assembly and Executive Review Committee (AERC), and Mr Peter Martin has resigned as Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure. I have been notified by the DUP nominating officer that Mrs Deborah Erskine has been appointed Chairperson of the AERC and that Mr Jonathan Buckley has been appointed as Chairperson of the Committee for Infrastructure.

Speaker's Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

On a personal note, I will comment on the death of Dr Stephen Walker, formerly the political editor of BBC Northern Ireland. I express my wishes of condolence and, indeed, those of the House to the Walker family on their loss.

Stephen was an excellent journalist who reported extremely well on issues, without embellishment and without gotcha-type journalism. He was a decent character who carried out his job and duties in such a manner that politicians from all sides of the House could have some degree of confidence in his work and in the fact that he was not seeking to undo them in any way. He just wanted to report what was going on, here and right across the country, in a very honest way to the public.

Stephen will be sadly missed by his family, and he will be well remembered by the people who worked with him.

Matter of the Day

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Timothy Gaston has been given leave to make a statement on public confidence in the Parades Commission following the Drumcree legal action that fulfils the criteria set out in Standing Order 24. Other Members will have their three minutes thereafter.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Twenty-eight years ago, when Portadown district was prevented from returning home by its traditional route, the late Harold Gracey echoed Martin Luther's famous words:

"Here I stand, I can do no other".

Last month's High Court judgement on Drumcree has exposed serious failings at the very heart of the Parades Commission. The judgement did not simply concern some insignificant technical error, as nationalists would have us believe as they try to downplay the significance of what unionists have achieved through the courts; the commission's determination was quashed, as it was clearly unlawful. The court heard that not all the commissioners had even seen, considered or approved the determination issued that was in their name. There were shortcuts and sloppy procedures, while incorrect information was provided to the court under oath by the commission's secretary. These failings go directly to the legality and integrity of the commission's decision-making process. The obvious question is this: how many other cases have been handled in the same way? Unsurprisingly, the Parades Commission has not replied to my letter asking if it had issued similar determinations that took a similar approach.

The Secretary of State initially declared that the commission "can't function" without the respect of all communities. I will be crystal clear to the Secretary of State: principled unionists have no respect for, or any confidence left in, the Parades Commission, and it is about time that he gave the remaining commissioners their marching orders out the door with their P45s in hand.

We now face the extraordinary prospect of this discredited commission adjudicating upon the fresh Drumcree application. Portadown district has proposed a limited parade involving only 60 members. It has offered mediation without preconditions and has again demonstrated a willingness to find a peaceful way forward. Portadown district once again calls on the Garvaghy Road residents to enter mediation without preconditions. Sinn Féin is the one that has ruled that out. Sinn Féin is gaslighting the people of the Garvaghy Road for its own political agenda. Drumcree is not about the rights of Orangemen prevailing over those of residents. It is time that the Portadown district banner was allowed to return home.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

The High Court decision on the Drumcree parading issue came as no surprise, because it is a well-accepted fact among those of us who have been involved in this for some considerable time that the Parades Commission was designed merely to ensure the status quo, and by that I mean to block any form of parade. However, the court case demonstrated that not only is the Parades Commission there to ensure the status quo but that it has acted against one of its statutory obligations, which is to facilitate mediation. What none of us could have expected was just how far it would go to ensure that that mediation did not take place.

One of the commissioners has had to resign in disgrace following his private comments to other commissioners that the commission should never open the door to mediation and that it should not give them that tool to prod it with.

We have seen shoddy decision-making, an attempt to obstruct mediation and a chair, who is still in place, who did not directly challenge the comments made by that particular commissioner at the time. Their positions are untenable. How can any chair still sit in office on some £50,000 of taxpayers' money when she and, indeed, some of the other commissioners would not even read the determination that had been sent to the commission to adjudicate on? It is a complete farce.

The Secretary of State has announced a judge-led inquiry, which I welcome, but it remains to be seen how not only that position but the very body that he insists that he is trying to review can exist when he says that it has the full backing of the current commissioners. It could not be any more barefaced. There is an attempt to cover up gross misconduct in office by those commissioners. If it were any other commission or public body, Sinn Féin and other Members of the Assembly would be outraged.

Sinn Féin has now taken to the public stage, and its position has changed. One minute, it wants no mediation; the next minute, there is some form of mediation. Who is talking for Sinn Féin? For the past 28 years, Sinn Féin has been nowhere to be seen when it came to mediation on the Garvaghy Road. We have heard only from Brendan McKenna — a man who was jailed in the 1980s for his part in trying to blow up the Portadown branch of the Royal British Legion — that is the type of dialogue and facilitation that we have come to expect from those who want to spout loudly in Drumcree instead of dealing with the substance, which is this: devoid of confrontation, let us have mediation and find accommodation —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up,

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— for a rebalancing of rights across Portadown.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call John O'Dowd.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

First, I concur with your remarks about the late Stephen Walker.

On the matter before us today, 28 years of peace is not a problem that requires a solution; it is progress that needs to be protected. However, yet in all, we have people in this Building and people outside this Building who are determined to reopen an old wound, and for what purpose? For what purpose do they desire to reopen this old wound? Some say that the Portadown Orangemen need to get home. I have news for you: the Portadown Orangemen have gone home. They go home every Sunday. On the annual parade, they parade to their church service undisturbed through a nationalist area. They have their worship undisturbed, and they go home undisturbed.

The unspoken accommodation that has taken place in Portadown between the residents and the Orangemen has worked for 28 years. It has allowed the people of Portadown and the Garvaghy Road to get on with their lives, it has allowed the citizens of the North to get on with their lives, and it has allowed an atmosphere to be created whereby community relations in the Portadown area have improved almost daily. Yet and all, people are coming along and picking at it. Why are they picking at it? They cannot cope with progress. They cannot cope with stability. They fear peace, and they fear the ability of the communities to get on together.

Why are you at this? Why are you opening old wounds? Some of you do not even remember it. Some of you are too young to remember it. I remember it. I remember the hurt and the pain that were inflicted on the Garvaghy Road community. The scar runs deep in that community. The hurt and trauma that were inflicted on the community run very deep and are generational. Stay away from it. Allow the accommodation to work. Allow the Orangemen to march to their church service on the first or second Sunday of July; allow them to have their worship; allow them to disperse; and allow people to get on with their lives.

We recently heard that there is to be an accommodation that allows 60 Orangemen to march down the road. Tellingly, however, the Orange Order's legal spokesperson has stated:

"We will be coming back for more".

What more do they want? Do they want to inflict more hurt and pain on the people of the Garvaghy Road? Do they want to inflict more pain and suffering on the people of the North?

Let me read out the names of a few people who paid the ultimate price because of what you want: Elizabeth O'Neill, who was killed in her home; Robert Hamill, kicked to death in the street; the Quinn children — Jason, Mark and Richard — whose ages ranged from nine to 11, burnt to death in their home. What more do you want?

Eóin Tennyson (Alliance, Upper Bann)

Many constituents watching the Assembly proceedings today will be asking themselves whether they have woken up in 2026 or 1996. I am fortunate, thankfully, to be of a generation that is too young to remember the pain and suffering of the Drumcree dispute, but I am wise enough to know that Drumcree was an utterly grim period in our history. It ruptured community relations; roadblocks and disorder were common; people were denied service in shops on the basis of their community background; and many in our community tragically lost their life, including the three young Quinn boys. I think of that family today.

It is not surprising that, in the absence of any vision for the present or, indeed, the future, some will seek to hark back to some of the most painful and divisive episodes of our past. It is less picking at an old wound and more something akin to picking at a scab with a chainsaw. There are no winners in seeking to go back to that hellscape. I do not disagree with other Members when they say that the Parades Commission's latest determination was flawed: the court is clear that it was. I am as frustrated as anybody else that such a sensitive issue has so clearly been mishandled, and it is right that the Secretary of State launch an independent review. However, that is not an excuse to seek to relive the past simply for the hell of it or to rush to throw the baby out with the bathwater and ignore the fact that there has been progress in Portadown as a result of the Parades Commission's determinations over 28 years.

I was at a good relations event with people from across our community in the People's Park just off the Garvaghy Road a matter of weeks ago. That is a sign of the progress that has been made in that community. Some 93% of parades can now happen in Northern Ireland with no conditions at all, so it does not have to be a simple zero-sum game of winners and losers, and none of us should wish to jeopardise that progress. I have consistently said that it would be far more powerful for Portadown district to state that it believes that it is entitled to march down the Garvaghy Road but will forgo doing so in recognition and respect of the deep wounds that are yet to heal across our community.

Just this summer, we saw what a blueprint for positive and not provocative cultural expression can look like. The fleadh created space for everybody, regardless of their background, identity and tradition, to come together and express their culture positively. That is the conversation that we should be having in Portadown in 2026, not reopening the wounds of the past. Most of our constituents today want to focus on the future. We owe it to them to be respectful and sensitive about the past, not to relive it but to live generously in the present and, crucially, always have our eyes trained on the future.

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I hope that every Member will join me in agreeing that Northern Ireland has come a long way in parading. Over the past decade, we have seen a substantial fall in objections, disputes and disorder. Parades take place in a more relaxed atmosphere with far less policing. That has been good for community relations and for our economy. Those gains were hard won, and none of us should take them for granted. That is precisely why what happened in the High Court matters so much. The Parades Commission conceded that its determination had not been considered in its final form by all its members. The judge said that the case did not stand up to any scrutiny at all. He spoke of "errors", "shortcuts" and "sloppy procedures", and correspondence disclosed to the court showed a commissioner describing mediation on the parade as a "non-starter" before a word had been exchanged. That commissioner has since resigned.

The body restricts fundamental rights — freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and freedom of religion — and it does so for parades of every tradition in the House and none. If the process behind those decisions is not sound, that should trouble every one of us, whichever community we represent.

The Ulster Unionist Party welcomes the Secretary of State's decision to order an independent, judge-led review, but its terms of reference are too narrow. A review of processes and procedures alone will not answer the questions that people are asking. The review must examine the commission's culture, its working practices and its training. It must be empowered to recommend real reform, including a statutory right of appeal against determinations, because a body that reviews only itself has plainly failed. It must establish whether other determinations were affected by the same failure and must report publicly with a clear timescale for doing so.

I say this to the Secretary of State: he has given the current commissioners his full backing, yet a fresh application will now be determined by the very body that has been found to have acted unlawfully on this last one. That is not a stable position: it risks public confidence and invites another court case within months. Fresh commissioners should be appointed and appointed promptly. He should also meet Portadown district, which took its case through the courts and was vindicated.

This is a moment for calm heads. There is a lawful, orderly route through this. Our responsibility in the Chamber is to find it and resolve this dispute without creating others.

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

The recent legal action concerning Drumcree has clearly raised questions about the process followed by the Parades Commission. Those questions should be taken seriously. Where issues have been identified, they should be properly examined. Lessons should be learned, and confidence in the process maintained. We should, however, be careful not to allow questions about one determination to become an excuse to undermine the entire system. We should remember why the Parades Commission exists.

Drumcree represents a horrible period in our recent history. It was a real low point for community relations, when confrontation spilled on to our streets, communities were divided and innocent men, women and children lost their lives. My heart goes out to the people of the Garvaghy Road, many of whom will be traumatised by the ugly Drumcree situation rearing its head again.

For almost three decades, the Parades Commission has provided an independent process for adjudicating on parades and placing conditions on them where necessary. Thousands of parades take place across the North every year. The vast majority pass off peacefully and without controversy, with the commission's decisions accepted and respected. That is worth remembering amid some of the rhetoric of recent weeks, because there is something disturbing, sad and backward about seeing Drumcree forced back on to the present-day political agenda. There are those who want to turn it once again into tribal warfare, reopening old wounds, stoking grievance and dragging people back to some of the worst days of our past. It is hugely disappointing to see political parties fall in behind that. There are voices from across the community, including people with a long history in and a deep connection to the marching tradition, who recognise the danger of where that leads. It does not need to become another unionist/nationalist battle.

Political leadership in 2026 should be about helping people navigate the challenges of the present day and giving them hope for the future, not about constantly dragging them back to the divisions of the past. Our health service is struggling, families cannot find homes and schools are under enormous pressure, and the Executive cannot even agree a Budget. People are entitled to expect political parties to have some strategy and some vision for addressing those challenges.

It is harvest time in Armagh. Growers are bringing in the apple harvest and getting on with the work that sustains families and communities across our Orchard County. They deserve politicians who are focused on their future, not ones who are more interested in harvesting old grievances and dragging us back to the divisions of the past.

Bríd Rodgers, who knows better than most the enormous human and political cost of Drumcree, was straightforward when she said, "Let sleeping dogs lie". There is wisdom in that. I ask Members here and the lodges this: what is the Christian thing to do? Remember that you reap what you sow. What we need now is responsible political leadership, cool heads, measured language and the determination not to stoke tension for short-term political advantage. We have spent nearly 30 years moving away from the politics that produced Drumcree.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

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

Our responsibility is to keep moving forward, not to drag people back.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

When unionist parties have nothing positive or progressive to offer people, they revert to the tired old tactic of reaching into the past and to a specific event or period that will stoke division and resentment in the hope that it will serve electoral purposes. It has been clear for some time that unionism is in a deep crisis and is no longer able to dictate and command in the way that it used to, so what does it do? It reaches for Drumcree.

It is also worth saying that the DUP is in a terminal crisis because of its failure to deliver anything of substance and because of its excusing and cover-up of the abusive, coercive and violent behaviour of some of its reps — Donaldson and Shannon, to name but a few. In that context, the DUP reaches for Drumcree. It knows that that issue mobilises hardcore loyalist sentiment and puts the fear of God into people from a nationalist or non-nationalist background. That is why the DUP is intent on stirring the pot of Drumcree.

We have to say clearly that the Orange Order is not some cultural or identity-type organisation; it is a political organisation that despises women, rails against LGBT+ women and sees cross-community campaigns and struggles —

[Interruption.]

You might not like to hear it, but it is the truth —

[Interruption.]

I am speaking. Yes, thank you. It sees cross-community campaigns as a threat to its ideology and grip, but it is a complete non-starter to try to paint all Protestants or all working-class Protestants as being in thrall to the Orange Order. Large numbers are fed up with its divisive rhetoric and see it as completely out of touch and out of date.

We need to challenge firmly those who want to use Drumcree as a stick to whip up division and sectarianism. People on Garvaghy Road and beyond know the division and hatred that that brand of hardcore loyalism brings. They know about the deaths and murder that it brought in the late 1990s. The unionist elite of Buckley, Gaston and Lockhart are trying to drive the agenda, but they offer nothing for working-class Protestants, never mind the rest of us across the North. The Garvaghy Road residents —

[Interruption.]

I will speak. I do not care if people want to hear it or not; I will speak here and be heard. The Garvaghy Road residents are entitled to challenge any Orange Order march and are entitled to protest, if they want to.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Before I call Diane Dodds, I will say this. Mr Carroll — he should know better — referred to Mr Shannon. There is a live court case going on, and nobody has been convicted of anything. Members should never comment on issues involving a live court case. If you do it again, there will be significant consequences.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

The 25th of August was a day of shame for the Parades Commission. It was also a day of vindication for Portadown district. I sat in the court as the judge described decision-making as "sloppy". The representative from the Parades Commission had to apologise for the wrongful information around whether Carla Lockhart had been notified to make representation. It revealed decision-making by WhatsApp. At least two commissioners did not have the time or could not be bothered to read a pre-cooked determination by the secretariat. Absolutely shameful. Another commissioner told everyone not to mention mediation because it would only give "them" something to prod at. Absolutely shameful. The Parades Commission completely ignored its lawful duty to ensure that mediation took place.

Along with my colleague Jonny Buckley, I met the Parades Commission in January this year to have a conversation about parading in general but specifically about Portadown and Drumcree. We talked about how mediation could turn things around in Portadown and, indeed, across unionism in Northern Ireland. The commission really did not care less; it was just ticking a box and going on with its process.

What has happened since — I want to address it because it is important — is revealing about political parties in the Chamber.

The narrative has been, "It is all finished; it was 28 years ago; forget about it; move on; let's not do anything else". For Portadown district, however, it is not finished. They have not completed their lawful parade, nor have they been allowed their rights of assembly and parading. The arrogance of politicians in this House is clear for all to see. Alliance tells us, "Just move on. Forget about it". The SDLP says that Portadown district wants to provoke tribal warfare. For the SDLP's information, Portadown district has made it absolutely clear that violence is not on the agenda. It is not its intention and it is not where it wants anyone to go. All of the hyperbole that we have heard from the other side of the Chamber is exactly that, and it is stoking up fear and tension —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Diane Dodds (DUP, Upper Bann)

— in the Garvaghy Road community.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

The issue today is not simply about Drumcree, but about public confidence in the Parades Commission and, ultimately, the integrity of an organisation that must continue to command the confidence of people across Northern Ireland. Around 4,000 processions are notified every year, and fewer than 5% of those are considered sensitive. To all intents and purposes, that tells us that much of the work of the Parades Commission happens successfully, routinely and without controversy.

That is precisely why what has happened in relation to Drumcree is so damaging. Mr Justice McAlinden was scathing in his assessment of the process. He spoke about public administration needing the confidence of the public, as well as errors, shortcuts and sloppy procedures requiring appropriate corrective action. For any public body, those comments would be serious, but for the Parades Commission, dealing with Drumcree, they are particularly serious.

Drumcree predates the commission itself. Indeed, the events surrounding Drumcree and other contentious parades were among the reasons why the system was created in the first place. I was a child during the worst years of that dispute, and while I do not remember every argument, I remember the images. I remember the protests, the tension and the sense of fear around them. I remember members of my own family going down to the bridges to protest and being terrified. More than 30 years later, none of us wants to return to that. However, an organisation that was established to manage disputes of that sensitivity must enjoy the confidence of all sections of our community and, right now, I do not believe that it does.

Billy Gamble has, rightly, resigned, and I believe that the remaining commissioners should do the same.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

This is not personal. It is not about attacking individual commissioners or dismissing the work that they have done; it is quite the opposite. Sometimes, public service requires people to take responsibility, precisely because the institution is more important than the individuals. A significant mistake was made in one of the most sensitive parading disputes Northern Ireland has ever known. For the sake of the integrity and future credibility of the Parades Commission, I believe that a fresh start is now necessary.

Therefore, I find it really difficult to understand why the Secretary of State has chosen to give the remaining commissioners his full backing. I would have had much greater confidence in an approach that saw the commissioners step aside and the Secretary of State establish a genuine, comprehensive review of what the Parades Commission should be in 2026. However, that cannot stop at Drumcree. There are already 4,000 notified processions, not all of which are contentious. Those include protests, community parades, sporting events, road races and activities that are part of everyday life across Northern Ireland. If fewer than 5% of those are sensitive, we should be asking whether a framework that was designed almost 30 years ago remains proportionate and appropriate for Northern Ireland today.

I do not know whether they should walk down Garvaghy Road or not —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

— but I do know that we need to get back to listening to all sides of the debate.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

The item in the Order Paper is about confidence in the Parades Commission, but going by the comments by the parties on the opposite Benches, you would not think that it is about that. There was not a scintilla of comment from the Sinn Féin representative about the disgraceful, illegal decision that was made by the Parades Commission. Instead, he talked about violence and about threatening peace. I remind the Sinn Féin contributor that no one on these Benches broke peace in Northern Ireland. He may wish to look to the Benches that he sits on, where he will find the reason why there was not peace in Northern Ireland. He talked about the disgraceful murder of the Quinn children. This party condemns that, yet his party is led by someone who celebrated Thomas McElwee, a man who burnt a mother to death in Ballymena. Do not dare come here, Mr O'Dowd, and speak out of both sides of your mouth. No one takes Sinn Féin seriously on the issue of condemning violence.

The Alliance Party wants to create no-go areas in its own constituency. The deputy leader, who has left the Chamber, says, "Oh, it is great that Orangemen can come to a church and go to a community fun day", but do not dare wear your Orange sash and try to walk home from a service.

We then had the rant from the Member from People Before Profit, who says that people come into the Chamber and speak from the past. That is the man who gets up here and speaks about Karl Marx; a man who says that the Orange Order hates women. I am sitting beside a member of the Orange Institution, but he is so idiotic that he cannot even get across basic facts.

We are then told to temper our language. I quote the SDLP's comment on the issue: "You will reap what you sow". How dare the unionist community have the temerity to apply for their legal right to be able to parade home from a church service?

At the heart of the difficulties for the nationalist and Alliance parties is this: their supremacist attitude has been exposed. "Do as we say, not as we do". We have a message for those parties: this issue is not finished. To paraphrase the former Member of Parliament for West Belfast, we are not going away, you know.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I am going to allow a little extra time for Members' statements.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Members' Statements

Declan Kearney (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Andy Burnham is not the first British Prime Minister to come to Ireland and seek to impose a unionist veto on the right to self-determination. Hopefully, he will be the last. There has been speculation on whether his comments had more to do with a gaffe or lines that were drafted by Britain's colonial outpost here in the North, the NIO. Whatever the case, it is not in his gift to put on to or remove from the table the right to self-determination. Irish national self-determination is integral to the Good Friday Agreement. That, of course, conflicts with the unionist security and military mindset of the British state. However, the Good Friday Agreement is an international peace treaty, so it is not for Andy Burnham or for political unionism to undermine or unpick the terms of that agreement.

His remarks have also coincided with the latest attempts, which we have just discussed, by political unionism to drag us all back into sectarian strife over Orange parades. All of that is about slowing down and attempting to block the momentum for change, but here is the thing: the Good Friday Agreement was not negotiated as a handbrake on continued progress in this society. It is a framework to manage change. The right to national self-determination and a unity referendum are absolute. Neither will be vetoed by either Andy Burnham or political unionism.

Julie Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

I express my profound disappointment and deep concern at the recent exclusion of Israeli athletes from the Europe Triathlon Cup in Londonderry. Sport, at its very core, is a universal language that possesses the unique power to bridge divides, transcend borders and bring people of diverse backgrounds together in the spirit of fair competition and mutual respect. The fundamental principle of international sport is that athletes meet on the starting line as equals. They compete under the same rules, and they are free from the heavy hand of geopolitics. We must absolutely keep politics out of sport.

What is particularly disturbing about this situation is the awful, inflammatory language that has been directed at and used about these Israeli athletes. Sadly, we have seen groups and even public representatives openly expressing delight and relief at the exclusion of these competitors. Even more alarming, we saw public statements from the event organisers themselves, openly objecting to the participation of athletes representing Israel and welcoming the fact that they would not compete. Let us be absolutely clear: targeting individual athletes who travel to Northern Ireland simply to compete in their chosen discipline purely because of the country that they represent crosses a dangerous line. It is highly discriminatory, it is exclusionary, and it sets a deeply grim precedent. No athlete should ever be made to feel unsafe, demonised or unwelcome because of their nationality.

Furthermore, there are serious questions regarding exactly how that decision was taken. We are told that the decision was enacted due to safety concerns and the potential for protest and disruption. Are we now setting a standard whereby the mere threat of disruption from protesters is enough to effectively ban a specific nationality from an international sporting event in Northern Ireland? Who ultimately made the call to capitulate to that pressure? What level of consultation took place with the PSNI on those threats? How is it acceptable that an event that was supported by public funding failed to uphold the most basic principles of non-discrimination? If an organiser cannot or will not protect the principle of equal participation, the very purpose of sport is lost. We must send a clear message from the Chamber that discrimination against any athlete is completely unacceptable. We urgently need transparency on how that deeply flawed decision was reached.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

My focus in the Chamber this afternoon is on children with special educational needs and how they continue to be failed by the education system here. We have had children with statements without access to the provision to which they are entitled. This year, yet again, we have seen families starting the school term without certainty about something as fundamental as how their child will get to school. We have seen tenders being issued late in the summer; parents finding out at the last minute that trusted relationships with individual drivers are changing; and escorts not being in place for children who need them, including non-verbal children. For families who are already navigating the almost daily challenges of our system, facing the annual uncertainty, stress and anxiety around school transport is simply not good enough.

Achieving better value for money in school transport matters. I am aware of the waste, duplication and poor procurement practices that exist across our education system, and we absolutely have to tackle them, but saving money cannot come at the expense of the well-being of children with additional needs. Reform has to be planned around the needs of the child. Parents should have confidence that the people who transport and, where required, escort their child have been properly vetted and appropriately trained and that they understand their child's individual needs.

We cannot look at transport in isolation. If a child has to travel a significant distance because there is no appropriate local SEN placement, the costs increase, as does the stress on the child and their family. All of that is indicative of a much wider failure to plan and provide local, appropriate SEN places for children who are coming through the system. SEN parents should not have to fight every step of the way for an assessment, for a statement, for a school place and then, days before the term starts, for certainty about how their child will get there. The Education Minister needs to step up and take responsibility. He needs to ensure that the needs of those children are a priority and that the Education Authority delivers a service in which families can have confidence, because these annual failings cannot continue.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

With the untimely passing of Stephen Walker, local journalism has lost a role model. With Stephen's untimely passing, society has lost a role model . For over three decades at the BBC, Stephen was a class act, demonstrating all the characteristics of an effective journalist. He was curious, courteous and bloody determined, and he was always fair. In return, he was trusted to reflect the intricacies of the most complex situations, not to put a spin on his reporting and not to make himself part of the story.

Sometimes, I imagine him pinching himself because he could not quite believe that he was being allowed to report on incredibly important situations, such as the run-up to the 1998 agreement or Brexit in 2016. He was extremely talented but too modest to admit it.

I had left BBC Northern Ireland before he joined, so we were rivals rather than colleagues, but he had the kind of personality that made it easy to celebrate his successes with him. He had what many people have referred to since his passing as an endlessly sunny disposition.

Of course, Stephen was not just a cherished, celebrated and award-winning journalist; he was a highly successful author. He penned biographies of two of the central figures of the 1998 agreement: John Hume, without whom there would have been no process, and David Trimble, without whom there would have been no agreement. Again, people who contributed to those books trusted Stephen to accurately reflect their views.

One of his closest friends was a former colleague, Mark Carruthers, who broke the news of Stephen's passing on social media. Mark wrote:

"He was a wonderful husband, father, brother and son, a fine journalist and author, and the very best of friends. We are all heartbroken, but grateful for his life so well and fully lived."

At just 61 years of age, Stephen had a lot more to offer to his family and to society. Stephen Walker, Stephen Grimason and Ken Reid were three of the most brilliant political journalists whom you could ever hope to meet or, indeed, call a friend. I send condolences to Stephen's many friends and admirers and, above all, to his wife, children and broader family.

I also mention the passing of Sharon Bradford, also from the BBC newsroom, who, perhaps, did not have the same high profile as Stephen but was clearly equally beloved.

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

I highlight what is happening at Altnagelvin Area Hospital's emergency department. It can be described only as an utter disgrace. People across the area that I represent and far beyond who have to travel to the hospital with sick relatives or for themselves are fed up hearing language and excuses about pressures, challenges and demand being used to sanitise the horrific experiences that they have when they visit there. People sit on floors. Seriously ill patients line the corridors. There is one toilet in the emergency department waiting room — one. It is the oldest type of emergency department in this place. It is 41 years old. It was designed for 35,000 attendees a year; today, it is trying to cope with 70,000 to 80,000 attendees a year. That is not possible.

Elderly, frightened and vulnerable people spend hour after hour in conditions that strip them of their dignity. It is not just a once-off issue; it happens every day. Every day, my office is contacted by constituents and families at breaking point. Last week, an elderly gentleman spent 30 hours in that emergency department struggling to breathe. I am told that he went for long periods without being properly observed. He had pneumonia. As soon as the staff recognised that, he was taken to a ward, but he had sat there for 30 hours. A woman with terminal cancer was left sitting in the middle of all that madness. What on earth have we come to when we consider that acceptable? Where is the dignity? Where is the duty of care? Where is the health service that our people pay for, depend on and have every right to expect?

You then look at what the staff are asked to endure. Police are regularly required in the department. Staff deal with people who are heavily intoxicated with drugs or alcohol. The trust informed me that three nurses were attacked in the emergency department last week. Nurses and healthcare staff do not go in to do that work and save lives to be attacked for doing their job. Doctors and nurses should be treating patients, not firefighting chaos in a system that the Government have failed to resolve over and over again.

Let us stop pretending that it is a new issue. In the House, we get angry, upset and frustrated about signs and language. Where is the outrage about this? Where is the outrage that we hear about marches when it comes to our health service? Where is the outrage when it comes to people who are dying and lack the dignity that they deserve, sitting in an emergency department in Derry? When we strip the services out of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, we add to the pressure in the Altnagelvin Area Hospital setting. That is not what people deserve, and it is not what we are elected to allow. We need solutions from the Executive, but the DUP and Sinn Féin continue to preside over the mess while picking holes in each other over things that mean little to people in their ordinary lives.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Your time is up.

I call, um, Emma Sheerin.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Me?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Yes.

Emma Sheerin (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Bhí tú i do chodladh ansin.

[Translation: Thank you, Mr Speaker. You were sleeping there.]

I have listened with intent this afternoon to contributions from the DUP and, indeed, broader political unionism, hoping that we would hear some positivity. Although I am not surprised, I, of course, have been disappointed. The summer is over, and I do not know whether the DUP has become lost in some sort of time warp and thinks that we are back in 1969 or 1996 or whether it has jumped forward into pantomime season, but its contributions today would give Dame Edna a run for her money. It is not fooling anybody, however. All the drama, deflection and performance is just a distraction from what the DUP really does not want us all to be talking about, which is the summer of scandal that it has just had. It has only five MPs, over half of whom are currently under investigation. Gregory Campbell and Sammy Wilson, men who are no strangers to controversy and who have shown us time and again that you simply could not redden them, are being investigated for financial wrongdoing, and both have been defiant in their response.

We have also had news that another DUP MP is in court, charged with assault. What is most concerning about that was the DUP's response. The DUP leader told us that the party had been aware of the issue for years but saw fit to let the MP in question remain in his role, dismissing it as a private family matter. Such private family matters see women from this place murdered every other week, behind closed doors in family homes by family members and people whom they know. He then told us that it was all right and that there was nothing to worry about, because the DUP had conducted an internal investigation.

That brings me to the story that the DUP really does not want us all to focus on: that of its former leader Jeffrey Donaldson and the fact that his sentencing is coming up at the end of the month. That is why we are dragging up Drumcree and talking about a parading issue that has been dead in the water for almost 30 years. I am lucky enough to remember it only as a news item as a child. The DUP wants to distract us from the fact that its internal investigation is ongoing. We are supposed to have trust and confidence in it when it comes to who knew what. We are supposed to believe that only its jilted former members — those with whom it has fallen out — saw what was happening when Jeffrey Donaldson was on all his trips abroad.

The DUP needs to stop trying to gaslight the public. It needs to show some humility and stop trying to drag up old arguments and rows that have caused trauma in this place. It needs to start delivering for people.

Diane Forsythe (DUP, South Down)

The DUP is, and always has been, a firmly pro-life party. We are dedicated to giving a voice to the voiceless and advocating at every turn for the right to life for babies from the moment at which they are formed in the womb. Only months ago in the Chamber, every corner of the House came together with genuine compassion to introduce baby loss certificates, recognising the lives of babies who died in the womb. I am devastated, however, to see the stark contrast between that compassion and that recognition of the life of unborn babies and, beyond the Chamber, a majority of Belfast city councillors having voted to light up City Hall in support of abortion. The DUP has opposed that and taken a stand for life. Our councillor Tracy Kelly proposed that the illumination should not proceed, but her proposal was defeated by 36 votes to 18.

Abortion is not something to celebrate. Belfast City Hall should not be illuminated in support of an international campaign seeking its further liberalisation and the removal of restrictions. Belfast City Hall is a significant civic symbol, representing the people of Belfast and those across Northern Ireland. City Hall belongs to everyone. It should not be turned into a billboard for abortion. It should be a place where the value, dignity and well-being of every person is recognised and protected, not a place that is used to endorse publicly one side of a deeply contested moral issue.

The language "Safe Abortion" also ignores the reality that abortion is never safe for the unborn child. Both lives matter: women who face difficult circumstances deserve compassion and meaningful support, but abortion ends an unborn baby's life and leaves the mother facing a lifetime of loss. Since abortion services were introduced to Northern Ireland under the Abortion Regulations 2020, 11,192 abortions were carried out here up to 31 March 2025, with the 2025-26 figures still to be published. Those are innocent lives lost. It is too late for them and too late for their parents, but it is not too late to stop and reflect.

Over 20,000 people have signed a petition against the illumination. Feelings are incredibly strong. It was disgusting to watch recent coverage of the Sinn Féin leader, Mary Lou McDonald, and her colleagues celebrating the removal of the three-day wait for abortion in the Republic of Ireland. Abortion is not something to celebrate. That is so distasteful. Belfast City Hall should not be illuminated to celebrate abortion. The DUP continues to oppose that. We will call in the decision, and we urge other parties to reconsider and listen to their constituents. We will stand up for every baby, as they are fearfully and wonderfully made in God's image. Every life matters.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

One of the reasons why I stay in politics is that I do not want my children to move to Australia; I want them to stay and have a future here. I want every child to be proud of living here.

The stories that have filled the airwaves over the past few weeks give concern to, I think, everyone in Northern Ireland, but especially to parents who are wondering what sort of society their children will grow up in. The conversation today — old parades disputes, a defaced memorial, flags glorifying a loyalist killer and schools being refused integrated education status — is a reminder of how much our past still impacts on our now. Meanwhile, so much of what needs to be said is not being said when it comes to what is happening with our health services, now that we cannot move on with plans for transformation; the gridlock in infrastructure; the strain on higher education; and what is happening with SEN. There are gaps in so much. There are gaps in what dominates the headlines and gaps in what people need us to talk about.

Something needs to change. That is why, as Northern Ireland's cross-community party, Alliance has, for decades, championed reforming the institutions and how we operate. It is welcome to see that there is more conversation about that, with the Prime Minister saying that the Secretary of State has been empowered to take forward discussions on reform, and more and more politicians talking about it. Our 'Democratic Renewal' proposals would make Stormont more stable, effective and accountable by reducing vetoes and modernising the Assembly and Executive structures. That is not a threat to anyone; it is actually the only way that we will get on with doing what we need to do. We need to look at so much. It is about not just stopping stop-start government and ending the ability to collapse the institutions, but making sure that every person, regardless or their identity and long-term aspirations, is valued and has a clear say.

There is so much that we need to do around changing how the Assembly works. It strikes me that the easy bit of work is to focus on what we disagree on — the divisions that we still hold in this place — rather than on how to move forward. If we were to reform the Assembly and change how the structures operate, we could hold those differences and have discussions and disputes, but, every time that something like Drumcree came up, everybody would not automatically be worrying that the Assembly will collapse again. How do we operate as a normal place with that threat constantly hanging over us? We need to move to a new politics that delivers for everyone in Northern Ireland and, rather than focusing on what divides us, focus on how we can work together. That is the only way that we will ever move forward.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

In the December monitoring round, £6 million of funding was allocated to the Minister of Education for Irish-medium facilities and accommodation, which was supposed to go to Iontaobhas na Gaelscolaíochta

[Translation: the Trust Fund for Irish-Medium Education.]

It is a simple issue: Paul Givan's Department bid for £6 million specifically for Irish-medium accommodation facilities and the money was secured on that basis, yet, having secured it, the Minister chose to divert £5 million elsewhere. No amount of sleight of hand or retrospective justification from the Minister can change those basic facts.

He asked for money for one purpose, got the money and then spent the vast majority of it on something else. That is not acting in good faith. It is dishonest conduct from a Minister who has serious questions to answer about how he has handled public money.

Unfortunately, Paul Givan has form when it comes to the Irish language. This is the Minister of Líofa renown, who previously stripped away bursaries that enabled disadvantaged young people to attend the Gaeltacht. His party has form too. The DUP has gone through the courts to challenge even the visibility of Irish language in our communities. Therefore, the Irish-medium education community is entitled to look at this decision and question the motivation behind it.

Irish-medium education is the fastest-growing sector in our education system. It needs investment in accommodation and facilities to meet that growing demand, and the Minister cannot bid for money on the basis that the Department will support that sector, take the money and then decide that £5 million of it would be better spent elsewhere. Paul Givan should restore the funding to Iontaobhas na Gaelscolaíochta and explain clearly to the Assembly why he asked for £6 million for Irish-medium education if he had no intention of spending £5 million of it on the purpose for which it was sought.

Deborah Erskine (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

When it comes to dealing with serious concerns brought to Ministers and Departments, we cannot talk out of both sides of our mouth. Concerns must be taken seriously, investigated properly and acted upon quickly.

On 29 June, in Fivemiletown, a deeply concerning incident unfolded, with the slaughter of 51 cattle. I want to make it absolutely clear that nobody is disputing the court's decision and the order regarding the farm in question. The issue is DAERA's handling of that incident and the questions that remain about how it was managed. Alarm bells rang for me when the response from the Minister began to paint a very different picture from the one experienced by people on the ground. I wrote to him on 30 June, and his response appeared to side with officials and, in doing so, blame the public. Those same constituents heard gunshots and were upset and horrified by the scenes that they had witnessed.

From the very beginning, I made clear to the Department that this was not something that could simply be brushed aside and that there were serious questions that needed to be answered. When the Minister subsequently responded by praising the staff involved, I wrote to him again and raised those concerns directly and promptly, doing what I believe any elected representative should do when serious concerns are brought to their attention. I made sure that the Minister was aware of them and gave him the opportunity to act decisively. It required the issue getting into the mainstream media before the Minister felt compelled to take the matter semi-seriously. That is not good enough.

Talk is cheap. Talking a good game in the Assembly Chamber about animal welfare is one thing, but demonstrating that commitment when a serious incident occurs is quite another. The review must not be a whitewash. It must clearly identify what steps could and should have been taken but were not. It must establish which aspects of policy and guidance failed and what the Minister will do to rectify those failures because confidence in the Minister has been completely lost, not just in my constituency but right across Northern Ireland. That is why my colleague Jonny Buckley is standing by what he said he would do and laying a motion of no confidence in the Agriculture Minister today. I will be signing that motion, and I encourage other MLAs sitting in this Chamber, who have heard the concerns and calls from our farming industry, to do the same.

John Stewart (UUP, East Antrim)

Over the summer, Carrickfergus suffered the latest of a series of blows to our high street with the announcement from the owners of Dobbins Inn that that historic business will close later this month. That is a huge blow not only to Carrickfergus High Street but to tourism and hospitality across the town and, indeed, in east Antrim more generally. For those who do not know, Dobbins is much more than simply another business. It dates back to 1530 and is an almost 500-year-old historic hotel, bar and restaurant, and is a unique tourism offering in Carrickfergus.

The Fallis family has run Dobbins Inn since 1978 and, for almost half a century, has dedicated itself to providing hospitality to our town and promoting Carrickfergus as a place to visit. I thank the family for all its efforts.

It is desperately sad that we have reached this point — the town is shaken by it — but the closure is not due to any lack of effort from the owners or their hard-working staff. It is because the trading conditions facing hospitality, retail and town-centre businesses have become increasingly difficult and, for many, simply unviable. At every level, government needs to act. At Westminster, the Government must end the enormous tax burden on hospitality. The sector has rightly called for lower VAT, and the increased cost of employing people through National Insurance and other pressures must be recognised. Government cannot continue to increase the cost of doing business and then wonder why businesses fail.

At Stormont, we need a fundamental business reform of the rates system. The Finance Minister must recognise that hospitality and town-centre businesses, in particular, are in a precarious position. Rates have to reflect economic reality rather than becoming another weight around the necks of businesses that are already struggling with energy costs, wages, supply costs and taxation. We have also had the high street task force: we need to see a "Town centre first" approach from it. I call on the Executive to re-establish that as quickly as possible.

Our councils also need to play their role. Local government reform promised greater efficiency and services at better cost, yet, year after year, we have seen business rates continue to rise and services being reduced: that is simply unacceptable. Councils have power in economic development, regeneration and town-centre management. They need to use those powers to improve public realm, address dereliction and support events and initiatives that increase footfall. They also need to look seriously at parking and accessibility and at how we make our high streets an attractive place to invest and do business. The fundamental economic responsibility of government at every level is to create the conditions in which businesses can flourish and investment can take place, but, for too many, the opposite is happening.

I sincerely thank Derek, Maureen, Kirsty and the team at Dobbins for everything that they have contributed to Carrickfergus. I wish them the best and hope that the business can stay open. I will do all that I can to support it. However, hope alone is not a strategy. The Government must do more to support our hospitality industry.

Nuala McAllister (Alliance, Belfast North)

Just a few weeks ago — over the summer recess — Northern Ireland was faced with yet another change of leadership in the Department of Health with Mike Nesbitt's resignation as Minister. I thank Mike for his time in the role. We had many robust exchanges in the Assembly Chamber and in Committee, but I respect the dedication that he showed to the role and the matter of principle on which he stepped aside. I also welcome Robbie Butler to the role and look forward to working constructively, because that is important.

The crucial point is that there are only seven months until the end of the mandate. There is no time to wait. I do not underestimate the challenge that is facing the new Health Minister at this stage in the mandate. With a service in crisis, an undoubtedly full in tray and a plethora of issues to understand, prioritisation is key. If those seven months are to be put to good use and not wasted, the Minister must use his time wisely. One of the most important factors in creating a sustainable, safe health service and driving down waiting lists across the board is delivering transformation. However, next month, we will be ten years on from Bengoa, and progress around the reform of services has been held back by the collapse of the institutions, a lack of leadership and, frankly, an unwillingness to make difficult decisions.

Alliance has remained consistent on the need for reform of the health service. It is not a question of there being too many hospitals in Northern Ireland; it is about the services that are delivered in them. We all know someone who is impacted by the increasing difficulty in accessing healthcare services in Northern Ireland. At a time of crisis, having three Ministers in the space of three years is far from ideal, but the reality is that the new Minister has seven months to make his mark. The time cannot be wasted with a caretaker leader at the helm, shying away from difficult decisions or setting up yet another committee or review, because the election is fast approaching and decisions need to be made. If he wants his time in ministerial office to have a meaningful impact, we need to ensure that progress is made now.

We cannot have dithering and delay. We need decisions. We need to ensure that patients are put first.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The massacre that took place in the fields outside Fivemiletown in late June horrified people across Northern Ireland. The decision by DAERA officials to slaughter 51 healthy cattle put a focus on the Environment Minister and torpedoed the myth that animal welfare is a top priority for him. Let us not forget that, prior to sending the inhumane hit squad to kill healthy animals, Muir knew that it was going to happen and did absolutely nothing about it. Now, when he has rightly been called out, he cries, "Misogyny" and "Sectarianism". The massacre has once again exposed a DAERA hierarchy that operates under the banner of "Do as I say, not as I do". I fully expect the Minister at Question Time today to attempt to hide behind his not-so-independent external review of the handling of the massacre at Fivemiletown. What the Minister cannot hide, however, is that his first reaction was to defend the staff involved, before having to bow to the public pressure and call for a review.

If the recklessness that the hit squad deployed had been carried out by a farmer, their guns would have been lifted and they would be facing a lengthy time behind bars. The inescapable fact is that the farmer had already found homes for 21 of his cattle, yet the Department proceeded to shoot even one of those animals during the massacre. Why could the rest of the animals not have been rounded up by the farmer and disposed of in the same way? The folly of the decision to massacre all remaining animals was compounded by the resurrection of the three calves that the Department claimed to have shot over the two days. Those calves, including the calf that had been shot through the neck, were allowed, once they turned up, to be transferred to another farm.

To restore any confidence in DAERA, Andrew Muir must resign, and he must take his permanent secretary, Katrina Godfrey, and the chief vet, Brian Dooher, with him. First, it was the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) scandal that was brushed under the carpet. We cannot and will not allow the same thing to happen with Fivemiletown. The agri-industry has had enough of you, Mr Muir, and it is time for you to pack your bags, do the right thing and resign.

Claire Sugden (Independent, East Londonderry)

I reiterate my continued opposition to the removal of emergency general surgery from Causeway Hospital. I do not oppose change for the sake of it. The Northern Trust argues that the current model cannot be sustained across two sites, that emergency surgical demand at Antrim Area Hospital is significantly higher and that workforce and capacity pressures must be addressed. If a service is genuinely unsafe, at risk of collapse or putting lives at risk, of course, we must act. Accepting the problem, however, does not require us to accept that as the solution, because there is another clinical view here, and it must be heard. I speak regularly with senior medical staff at Causeway who believe that this is the wrong decision. The clinicians' concern is that we are weakening one functioning, sustainable hospital to compensate for pressures elsewhere, and they tell us that that has consequences.

Antrim is under enormous pressure. I know that hospital well. I spent time there during my pregnancy and after giving birth, and I listened to the clinicians working there. Ultimately, Antrim is the spillover hospital for north Belfast, and, if it were in the Belfast Trust, we would be having a different debate. However, the answer to the pressures cannot simply be to transfer resources from Causeway to Antrim. Are we transforming the service or managing the cost of failure elsewhere? Emergency general surgery cannot be viewed as an isolated unit on a spreadsheet. Remove it, and we must consider what follows. What does it mean for intensive care and anaesthetics? What does it mean for paediatrics, for services needed by an ageing population in an area with the most ageing population in Northern Ireland and, ultimately, for the sustainability of a 24/7 emergency department?

I recognise the assurances that have been given that Causeway will remain an acute hospital with a 24/7 emergency department. However, my concern is not simply what Causeway will look like in a year but what it will look like five or 10 years from now if we continue to remove the services that underpin an acute hospital. The trust's strategic vision is increasingly one of developing Causeway as an elective and diagnostic hub. Those services are welcome, but they cannot be a substitute for the acute healthcare that the north coast needs. Access matters too. For someone in Limavady, Coleraine or a rural community, getting to Antrim is not insignificant. I travelled there every week during my pregnancy, and I wondered how I would do it if I did not have a car. We have an ageing population, families matter to recovery, and geography matters to healthcare.

If inconvenience were the only argument, I would support the proposal, but it is not. Doctors send me questions to ask the Health Minister about safety, capacity projections and the wider consequences for Causeway. This is not just about wanting to keep it in our backyard; it is about health and safety, which matters as much to the people of Causeway as it does to people in Antrim.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

First and foremost, on behalf of the DUP, Mr Speaker, I join you in your condolences to the family of Stephen Walker: a remarkable man and a gentleman on and off the screen. I pay tribute to his courage and commitment as a journalist. He was fearless, fair and level-headed. I have no doubt that his loss has left a heavy mark with his former colleagues in the BBC and, indeed, with his family.

Our asylum system is being manipulated on an industrial scale. If you do not know that, you have been living under a rock. The people who are being failed — the people who are most impacted and are paying the price — are ordinary, hard-working, law-abiding citizens.

'The Times' today reports the staggering allegation of a Home Office whistle-blower who claims that one in every 100 asylum applications is genuine. Let that sink in. If that allegation is even remotely close to the truth, we are talking about a system that is being exploited, manipulated and abused every day. It is the scale of it that should shock us. Illegal immigrants and, indeed, their gangmasters are making every attempt to manipulate and bypass laws that are not fit for purpose — failed legislation.

Some in the Assembly shriek in horror at every opportunity when I raise the issue of illegal and uncontrolled immigration. Despite the Sinn Féin, SDLP and Alliance attitude of, "Let's bury our heads in the sand: we don't have a problem", we see that Home Office illegal immigration raids have resulted in over 1,000 people being removed from Northern Ireland. It sounds as though we have a problem, and Sinn Féin's attitude of, "Brits out, everybody else in" is as ridiculous today as it has ever been.

It is not an orange and green issue; it is a common sense issue. It is not a left versus right issue; it is a security issue. Potentially, if we do not grip the issue once and for all, its unrepairable nature and the harm to our communities will be clear for all to see. It increasingly impacts on communities across Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Surely, the Government's priority should be to secure our borders and remove those who have entered illegally, not simply to manage the consequences —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

The Member's time is up.

Jonathan Buckley (DUP, Upper Bann)

— of bad legislation.

Aisling Reilly (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

My statement will be in Irish. Members may wish to put on their headphones.

Tá sé cothrom agus simplí a rá go bhfuil sé soiléir, i mbliana, go bhfuil Béal Feirste anois i gcroílár shaol cultúrtha agus Gaeilge na hÉireann: d’éirigh go hiontach le hOireachtas na Samhna ar an bhliain seo caite; bhí ard-fheis Chonradh na Gaeilge againn anseo sa chathair; agus, ar ndóigh, ceann de na buaicphointí i mbliana, gur tháinig Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann go Béal Feirste. Ba í an fhleadh ba mhó riamh í. Tháinig 1·6 milliún duine go Béal Feirste. Sin 1.6 milliún duine a bhí ag baint sult as an cheol, as an teanga, as an chultúr agus as an chathair s’againn. Bhí sin iontach speisialta agamsa. Thug sé deis dúinn Béal Feirste a thaispeáint don domhan: cathair atá athraithe go mór, cathair atá muiníneach aisti féin agus cathair atá bródúil as a cultúr, as a teanga, agus as a muintir.

Ar ndóigh, bhí tionchar ollmhór eacnamaíochta ag an fhleadh: bhí na hóstáin, caiféanna, tithe tábhairne, agus na bialanna uile lán, agus bhí na sráideanna dubh le daoine ó cheann ceann na seachtaine. Ach domsa, bhí rud níos tábhachtaí ná na figiúirí sin ann, ba é sin an t-atmaisféar a bhí sa chathair agus na mílte daoine ag teacht le chéile: teaghlaigh, daoine óga, ceoltóirí agus cuairteoirí as gach cearn den oileán agus níos faide i gcéin. Bhí áit ann do gach uile dhuine acu. Sin an cineál cathrach atáimid ag iarraidh a thógáil, cathair atá oscailte, cathair atá fáilteach agus cathair ina bhfuil meas ar gach duine agus ar gach traidisiún. Gabhaim buíochas ó chroí le gach duine a rinne an fhleadh chomh speisialta sin.

Má bhí fleadh 2026 mór, tá mé cinnte gur féidir linn fleadh níos mó agus níos fearr arís bheith againn nuair a fhillfidh sí ar Bhéal Feirste ar an bhliain seo chugainn. Beidh mise iontach bródúil bheith i mo chuid den scaifte sin arís.

[Translation: It is fair and simple to say that, this year, it is clear that Belfast is now at the heart of Irish cultural and Irish language life: last year’s Oireachtas na Samhna was a huge success; we had the Conradh na Gaeilge ard-fheis here in the city; and, arguably, one of the highlights of this year was Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann coming to Belfast. It was the biggest fleadh ever. Some 1·6 million people came to Belfast. That is 1.6 million people enjoying our music, our language, our culture and our city. To me, that was very special. It gave us the opportunity to show Belfast to the world: a city that has changed a lot, a city that is confident in itself and a city that is proud of its culture, its language and its people. The fleadh has had a huge economic impact. The hotels, cafes, pubs and restaurants were all full, and the streets were packed with people from start to finish. For me, however, there was something more important than those figures, and that was the atmosphere in the city, with thousands of people coming together: families, young people, musicians and visitors from all over the island and further afield. There was a place for everyone. That is the kind of city that we are trying to build: a city that is open, a city that is welcoming and a city where everyone and every tradition is respected. I thank everyone who made the fleadh so special. If the 2026 fleadh was great, I am sure that we can have an even bigger and better fleadh when it returns to Belfast next year. I will be very proud to be one of the fleadh-goers.]

Committee Business

Ministerial Statement

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I have received notice from the Minister of Education that he wishes to make a statement.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Since taking office in February 2024, my approach has been characterised by three simple ambitions: excellence in education, choice for parents and a fair deal for hard-working families. By this stage, Members will no doubt be familiar with my educational reform plan, which is grounded in evidence and informed by international best practice, known as TransformED. In a few weeks, I will set out my ambition to organise the education system based on the choices of parents and children, not bureaucratic structures. Today, however, I will set out some of what I have been doing to help out the hard-working families who are the bedrock of our community and announce an important next step. Too often, they are overlooked, ignored or taken for granted. They do not complain or make a fuss, but I know that they are the ones who raise their families, pay their taxes and meet their mortgages. In my constituency and in my mailbox, I hear their concerns. I have already responded with practical support, but I intend to do more.

(Madam Principal Deputy Speaker in the Chair)

When the Executive were restored in February 2024, "early learning and childcare" was widely regarded by parties across the House as being a priority. It was an early example of how devolution could make a difference to the real lives of real people. With the support of Executive colleagues, I brought forward a range of measures to revolutionise early years and childcare provision in Northern Ireland. Although it is only a start, in a constrained financial environment, I believe that we are beginning to make a real difference.

Amid all the challenges and difficulties that are being faced, and with sustained investment, I believe that TransformED will stand the test of time as one of the signature achievements of the Executive during this Assembly term. There are those who oppose devolution or, at the very least, whose approach would end any form of devolution that is reasonably available, but be in no doubt that, in the absence of devolution, none of the progress that has been made in providing increased early learning, education and childcare support to thousands of families across Northern Ireland would have been achieved. Exceptional civil servants have delivered those changes, but, in the absence of Ministers, they would not have been empowered to do so. That is not speculation but an empirical fact.

In the coming weeks, the Executive will consider a final early learning and childcare strategy, but, in reality, that will be to confirm a direction of travel on which we have long since commenced. Between April 2024 and March 2026, the Executive allocated £80 million of additional funding to deliver on those measures, which are making a tangible difference for thousands of children, families and providers across Northern Ireland. The measures include the design and implementation of a bespoke Northern Ireland childcare subsidy scheme (NICSS), which has secured over £26·4 million in savings for eligible working parents since its launch in September 2024. When that is combined with tax-free childcare, the savings for families are estimated at approximately £55·6 million.

I will give an example of what that has meant in practice. A family claiming the full subsidy for two children who are below primary-school age will have saved just under £8,800 since the scheme was introduced — that is £8,800 that those families would otherwise have had to pay out in fees. As a direct result of the action that we have taken, they have been able to retain and use that money for other purposes. When combined with tax-free childcare, their childcare bills over the period will have been reduced by an estimated £16,800. It is a significant achievement that the Executive have been able to ease the financial pressure on working families to that extent in just two years, and at a time when many other costs have been rising.

In 2025-26 alone, the subsidy scheme supported 27,486 children from 20,210 families. Eligible families could receive a subsidy of up to £184 per child — over £2,200 per child per year — with no limit on the number of children whom that can be claimed for. Analysis of the NICSS data indicates that only 2·7% of claims reached the maximum monthly subsidy, which confirms that the majority of families continue to receive the 15% reduction available on the full value of the childcare costs, rather than being constrained by the cap. It is also worth pointing out the extent to which the scheme has specifically benefited working families on low and middle incomes. It is further evidence of my commitment to target hard-working families, often where both parents are working in average-income jobs but still struggling with the various financial demands of bringing up young children.

In addition to the Northern Ireland childcare subsidy scheme, I have strengthened the support provided to thousands of families through established and highly respected programmes such as Sure Start and the Pathway fund. That investment is enabling over 9,000 additional children across Northern Ireland who have not previously had access to the programmes to benefit from high-quality early learning, health and family support.

Building on the policy set out by my predecessor, Michelle McIlveen, we have made huge progress in moving towards a universal full-time preschool education offer. It will ensure that all children, regardless of their background or where they live, will be able to access 22·5 hours of structured age-appropriate education, learning and development in the year before they start school. Preschools are starting the new academic year as we meet here today, and I am delighted to confirm that the latest Education Authority (EA) data indicates that over 65% of pupils will have the benefit of a full-time preschool education place; that compares with just 40% only two years ago. The Executive have committed to delivering preschool education as a universal offer, and my work to do so continues at pace. Members will be aware of the significant benefits that families are reporting from full-time provision. We can see how popular it is, with settings that moved to the longer day in the first year having received, on average, a 300% increase in applications.

The work to transition all preschool provision to 22·5 hours must be prioritised; it is too important to children and their families to risk losing momentum. I have, therefore, tasked my Department and the EA to progress standardisation for approximately 100 more settings, so that even more children can benefit from full-time provision next year. The speed of standardisation will be largely dictated by the resources that are made available to me by the Executive, as well as by the state of readiness of individual settings.

My Department recently consulted on the draft early learning and childcare strategy, which contained a wide range of actions to further progress the Executive's priorities in that area. In addition to the core objective of providing a universal, full-time preschool education offer, the early learning and childcare strategy includes other preschool education actions, such as consulting on legislative changes to remove the current statutory admissions criterion that prioritises children from socially disadvantaged circumstances (SDC) when applying for funded preschool education places during the preschool admissions process.

The SDC criterion was first introduced in 1998 to prioritise access to a limited preschool programme for children deemed likely to benefit from it most. At that time, there were only enough funded preschool education places available for approximately 45% of children, meaning that more than half our children could not access any funded preschool provision at all.

Back then, the criterion was an important intervention that maximised access for children from socially disadvantaged backgrounds. That was nearly 30 years ago. The context today is very different. Following the expansion of provision, all children have been able to access some preschool education provision for more than a decade. There is therefore no longer a need for a law to prioritise children for access because there are enough funded places in every area of Northern Ireland to accommodate every target-age child whose parents want a funded preschool place.

There have been numerous consultations about the SDC criterion, and they have all told us the same thing: it is no longer fit for purpose. There have been calls for more than 20 years for it to be amended or repealed. Many parents, preschool education practitioners and elected representatives from across the Assembly have been clear. The legislation is now outdated, unnecessary and unfair, and I believe that it should go.

Most recently, consultees who commented on the SDC action in the early learning and childcare consultation, which closed in March, gave a very clear response: change is long overdue, and the current legislative requirement should be removed without further delay.

Today, I can confirm that my Department has listened and will respond positively to those comments. The current legislative requirements will be removed in line with the outcome of previous consultations. That will place preschools on an equal footing with primary and post-primary schools. The change is not about removing protections for disadvantaged children; it is about removing outdated provisions to ensure that children at preschool age have fair access to education provision, just as they do at primary and post-primary age.

Many parents have made clear that they consider the continued imposition of a blanket statutory criterion to be wholly unfair. It is no longer needed to prioritise access, but its continued use unfairly decreases their chances of securing their first-preference setting, including full-time places, which can, in turn, impact on their childcare arrangements.

Parents and preschools in various localities have raised the case for children from other circumstances to be given top priority in their area, but that cannot be done due to the current legislation. Elected representatives from across the Assembly have written to me on many occasions on behalf of preschools and families of preschool children who are frustrated at the unintended consequences of the current outdated legislation. Many feel that local children, children of working families, particularly low-paid families, and children who are looked after or who face other barriers to learning that are not reflected in the SDC criterion, are disadvantaged by the current legislation.

A small number of stakeholders have previously suggested that there may be some benefit in maintaining a priority for children from socially disadvantaged circumstances in certain cases. I am open to considering how that could be achieved, but it would be done in a tailored way if evidence could be presented to support it.

The consultation that I am launching today will seek views on whether the present regulations should simply be repealed or whether new, fit-for-purpose legislation is required. However, it is important to understand that we do not need new legislation to permit settings to prioritise disadvantaged children. Without it, they would have the same power that primary and post-primary schools have to set their own criteria, with the benefit of guidance from my Department. This means that they can prioritise children in a way that best reflects the children and communities whom they serve.

My Department is therefore consulting on potential next steps. That is an important part of the process to ensure that the preschool admissions process is the best that it can be. I ask that Executive colleagues, particularly those who have previously written to me on the issue, respond to that consultation and provide their views and those of their constituents. Responses are welcome from all stakeholders and interested parties, particularly parents and carers, early-years sectoral bodies and providers of preschool education, including nursery schools, primary schools with nursery units, and voluntary and private preschool education settings that participate in the preschool education programme.

Subject to the outcome of the consultation, which will launch this week, and the legislative process, it is the Department's intention to repeal the current outdated provisions and, if necessary, put in place replacement legislation and/or guidance prior to the commencement of the preschool admissions process in January 2028. However, in advance of the consultation, I intend to take one further significant step today. The impact of ongoing welfare reforms over the three decades means that the benefits that are referenced in the socially disadvantaged criteria legislation have been almost entirely replaced and phased out, leaving the Education Authority reliant on reading in new welfare payments, such as universal credit, that did not exist when the legislation was written. After careful consideration, I have concluded that that is no longer a legally permissible approach. In the preparation of the consultation, it has become clear that we are, in practice, imposing criteria that are not provided for in legislation. Setting aside the intrinsic merits of such an approach, it is not consistent with the prevailing legislation. Universal credit is a significantly wider welfare payment than those that are named in the legislation. In 2019-2020, around 15% of children's preschool applications indicated that they met the SDC criterion. This year, that figure was more than double at almost 36%. That significantly changes the priority criteria to the point that it is no longer possible to properly target those for whom they were originally intended. The current approach is not legally sustainable and must now be changed.

Therefore, today, I am writing to the Education Authority and all preschool providers to make clear that, pending any amendment to the regulations, for the admissions process for the academic year beginning in September 2027, the only SDC criteria that must be applied relate to those who are in receipt of the benefits that are specifically named in the legislation: income support or income-based jobseeker's allowance. As those benefits have almost completely been phased out or superseded, I expect that that will apply to a negligible number of applications next year. This approach will essentially place preschools on an equal footing with primary and post-primary schools, empowering them to select admissions criteria that best reflect their individual settings and the communities that they serve. This is not a mere tinkering with admissions criteria; it is a fundamental change of approach.

In the past few years, we have come a long way with early learning and childcare, yet we are still in the foothills of what we hope to ultimately deliver for the people of Northern Ireland, as set out in the draft early learning and childcare strategy. Building on the progress that we have made, this consultation will allow for renewed focus on what we want to achieve moving forward. For my part, I am clear: I want to ensure that working families have a fair chance at securing the preschool setting of their choice. We cannot guarantee that they will all get the one that they want, although I am working on that, but we can ensure that the odds are not stacked against them. Today, we launch a consultation on what admissions criteria preschool settings should apply. More importantly, however, we realign practice with the law that governs admissions. Hard-working families make this country what it is. Today, I stand with them, acting to ensure that their hard work is not disadvantaged and that they, along with all families, are properly supported to have fair access to preschool education for their children. I commend the statement to the House.

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

Minister, you will know that roughly one in five children in Northern Ireland live in absolute poverty, and that that will shape their lives and have serious implications for their life chances. We all know that preschool can play a powerful, vital and meaningful role in closing that gap. Knowing that, Minister, why are you pushing forward with removing the only statutory protection for those children without guaranteeing a replacement?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for the question. The rationale was clearly outlined in my statement to the Assembly today. First, it is about ensuring that admissions are based on the actual legislation, and it is important that we align the law on those things with the implementation of it. We are also in a very different place from where we were in 1998-99 when we brought the criterion in, when less than half of all children in Northern Ireland had a paid preschool place. Such places are now universally available. When I took office, only 40% of children were getting a full-time place. Now, because of delivery, 65% of all children are getting a full-time place. We are applying to our nursery schools the same process as applies to our primary schools and post-primary schools, where that criterion does not exist. Nursery schools will be able to reflect their local circumstances. If a preschool setting in the Member's constituency decides that it wishes to make the number-one criterion something relating to people who are in receipt of a much wider range of benefits, that decision will be available to it. If a nursery setting wishes to disadvantage hard-working families in its local community, it can do that. However, we should not have a blanket approach that, in the last consultation, over 70% of respondents said was unfair and should go. Today, I am delivering on that commitment.

Nick Mathison (Alliance, Strangford)

Minister, in the 2025-26 academic year, your Department spent over £5 million funding places for non-target-age children: two-year-olds. Your officials have sat in front of the Committee and said that that is poor provision, ineffective provision and, at times, unsafe provision. Why on earth, when you have the legislative levers at your disposal, are you not changing the law to deal with that issue, which actually impacts on educational outcomes, rather than bringing in something that could further disadvantage the children who are at the highest risk of educational disadvantage in Northern Ireland?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A priority for me is to enhance the support that we have in all our preschool settings. It is why, in the early learning strategy, for which I secured funding from the Executive, we have enhanced provision in preschool settings, particularly for children who have additional needs. Often, because of the process of needing an assessment to get support, those children go through nursery school without support. I have been able to put funding into every single preschool setting so that they can provide support for those children.

The Member needs to be honest with the public. Constituents from hard-working families may come to you — it is a notable concern now that the Alliance Party is making clear its position — and ask, "Why can I not access a nursery facility in my local community? Why, because I work and am not in receipt of benefits, am I being discriminated against and disadvantaged?". That is what constituents say in Moira, Hillsborough and right across the Lagan Valley constituency, and they will be very interested to hear that the Alliance Party wants to continue a discriminatory practice against hard-working families. I will not support that practice, but I will support every single child getting the best possible support in our education system, including in preschool settings. That is why I increased funding for Sure Start and why 9,000 children, particularly from more disadvantaged communities, have greater access to that support. Today's statement is about making sure that those who are struggling to make ends meet and are working incredibly hard are not disadvantaged because they work. They should be treated equally.

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Once again, we have the Education Minister playing politics with children. You are pitting children against children, and the most vulnerable in our society are made vulnerable by decisions such as this. It was a very depressing statement, and not once did you mention children with additional needs. Is it fair to say, Minister, that you are removing the rights of the most disadvantaged children in our society?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

In response to the previous question, I mentioned children with additional needs and the support that I have put into nursery settings. Interestingly, the Member raises a concern. He is from West Belfast. His colleague Órlaithí Flynn raised a concern with me earlier this year.

Let me quote from a letter that was sent by Mr Baker's colleague, the Sinn Féin Member for West Belfast. In that letter, she says:

"There is growing concern that the current approach may be unfairly disadvantaging local children".

That was in respect of the social disadvantage criterion — that it was unfairly disadvantaging her constituents in West Belfast.

[Interruption.]

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Order.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Perhaps the Member should have a word with his colleague, who was asking me to do exactly what I have now announced.

The Member seems to be concerned about my taking decisions and getting on with delivering for my constituents. I note that not one other Minister in the Assembly today is bringing forward decisions that will help to deliver. Sinn Féin's track record on delivery — the A5, Casement, Magee university, and the list goes on — is one that it should rightly be embarrassed about. On the part of the DUP and me, we will continue to deliver for the hard-working people of Northern Ireland.

[Interruption.]

Danny Baker (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Education Minister? You are a disgrace.

[Interruption.]

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

OK. I remind all Members, including the Minister, that this is about the statement. He can wax lyrical — that is his role — but it would be really good if Members would stick to asking questions on the statement. I think that I have everybody's name down; if I have not, try to catch my attention.

Peter Martin (DUP, North Down)

I welcome the Education Minister's statement. What numbers or percentages of pupils were eligible for priority when the SDC was introduced, and how many were there last year?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank Mr Martin for that question. I mentioned in my statement the percentage of pupils who were eligible for priority in respect of the SDC arrangement, but it is worth repeating. The priority was to give access to a limited number of places when there were enough for only 45% of children. While that need for priority has disappeared, the number of children who have been prioritised has increased. Although the Education Authority does not hold the data for the number of children who met the criterion when it was first introduced, we know that, in the admissions process for the 2019-2020 academic year, around 15% of applications were processed on the basis of the socially disadvantaged criterion.

During the process for this academic year, because of the evolution and expansive nature of welfare reforms and the way in which they have been wrongly read in, 36% of applications met the socially disadvantaged circumstances criterion. That is why hard-working people in their communities feel aggrieved that they have not been able to access settings because some people who are not from their local community have been able to trump local applicants on the basis of that criterion. That number of people has expanded, and that is why we need to change that. On the basis of this year's figure and what has been announced today, the number of applicants whom, we believe, will meet the socially disadvantaged criterion will be 27, accounting for 0·4% of the total of preschool applications.

Jon Burrows (UUP, North Antrim)

I agree entirely that we need to stand on the side of working families, often with two parents who are working hard and struggling to make ends meet. There has to be fairness for them. The flip side of that is that there are those who are socially disadvantaged; often, there is not the same social capital, and that means that they start on a path of continuing underachievement. What steps can be taken to mitigate the risk of any increase in educational under-attainment in the long term among, for example, Protestant or Catholic working-class boys?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

There are significant supports in place for people who find themselves socially disadvantaged. I support many of them in my constituency, including many who vote for me, to get access to all that support. Today is not about taking something away but about ensuring equality for all children. Constituents come to me, and those who are just about breaking even but do not qualify for any benefit are rightly aggrieved that they have not been able to access their local setting or to get a full-time place on the basis of outdated, discriminatory legislation that referenced particular benefits.

People see this as being the right thing to do, particularly given that the circumstances have changed dramatically. Now, 100% of all preschool places in nursery settings are funded. Everyone who wants to have a funded place in a preschool setting can have that provided. In 1998, the number of funded places was less than half, so even if there may have been a case for the criterion at the time, the circumstances have since changed fundamentally. What we should not allow is for those hard-working families who make this country what it is to be further disadvantaged.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

The Minister will be aware that there is incontrovertible evidence that children from disadvantaged backgrounds have poorer educational outcomes than their peers from more affluent backgrounds, hence the reason that the prioritisation criterion was brought in in the first place.

Following on from the previous question, what other measures will the Minister introduce to ensure that our extraordinarily long tail of educational underachievement is not made any worse?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Members will be able to look back over the steps that I have been taking over the past two years to address disadvantage and underachievement and see where their communities have qualified under the RAISE programme to raise educational attainment and the funding that goes into that programme. There are significant amounts of funding for which I am under severe pressure around the Executive table. When we look at extended-schools funding, for example, millions of pounds go to schools based on free school meals provision. I am having to fight every single day with Executive colleagues, including those from Sinn Féin, when it comes to our education system, so if they want to support me when it comes to prioritising those who need more support, they will have to back it up with funding.

This week, I have already met the Secretary of State and spelled out to him the underfunding of the Executive and the impact that that has on my Department. I trust that, collectively, we will all make the case to get more resources so that we can help the very people whom Mr Sheehan and I want to help.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Will the Minister indicate what the outcome of previous consultations on the issue has been?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I appreciate the Member's asking that question. There have been a number of consultations. From December 2025 to March 2026, there was the consultation on the draft Executive early learning and childcare strategy. That draft strategy went through the Executive for consultation. Perhaps Ministers did not know what they were putting through the Executive, but in that consultation was this very proposal to remove the criterion. The last time that I checked, the Alliance Party is on the Executive. So is Sinn Féin.

When the strategy went through the Executive, it was therefore consulted on for the criterion to be removed. That is the direction of travel. The fact is that, in doing the work in preparation for the consultation, I was able to identify that the legislative basis for the current policy is flawed. That has allowed me to make this decision today. Beyond that, however, there was, in 2021, a specific consultation on the criterion, and 70·7% of respondents asked for its immediate removal, because of the reasons that I have outlined.

Members here are opposed to its removal, but on what evidence? The evidence shows that it is no longer necessary and that the public believe that it should be removed, yet in here we have criticism coming. Is it purely in order to score political points? I suggest that it is, particularly when Órlaithí Flynn, a Member for Sinn Féin in West Belfast, put it in writing that she wanted me to do this. The evidence shows that I am on the side of where the public are at on this particular issue.

There were also reviews in 2011 and back in 2004 on the matter. The issue has therefore been well consulted on, and the decision will be well received by the overwhelming majority in the country.

Michelle Guy (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Minister, I also hear from a huge number of families on the issues. I want all families to have the option of full-time preschool hours if they want them. Although your statement announces a consultation, in effect, through the way in which you are asking settings to implement the current legislation, you are ending the socially disadvantaged circumstances criterion. Would it not be more appropriate to wait for the findings of the consultation and the evidence that it produces before making any changes to the admissions criterion so that preschool and nursery-school leaders can have a say?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member highlights the fact that she, too, hears from constituents about the issues. I actually take decisions that address those concerns: that is the difference between the Member and me. The constituents who raise those concerns with her and my colleagues in Lagan Valley also raise with me the discrimination and disadvantage that they feel as hard-working people, but I listen and then I act. That is what I am doing today.

The Member invites me to preside over an admissions process that has now been identified as legally flawed. That, in effect, is what the Member is asking me to do. It is incumbent on Ministers to respond positively when they get clear legal advice on such issues that the legislation has been read in a way that is no longer legally defensible, as, I suspect, all Ministers would. I will not continue to preside over what is, in effect, an illegal process; I am aligning the practice with the law. The Member is absolutely right that, as of today, the admissions policy has changed.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Minister, you mention equality for all children as what you are trying to do here, but children do not start on an equal footing. They do not all start out from the same place, and, as Education Minister, you should understand that. You know what the socially disadvantaged circumstances criterion was for. You know that it is widely accepted that children from deprived backgrounds are more likely to face educational disadvantage. You also know that early intervention is key to addressing that. I have heard that from your officials' —

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

A question.

Cathy Mason (Sinn Féin, South Down)

— mouths. How can you stand here and justify taking away measures that are designed to support the most vulnerable? Should you not put your efforts into creating more and better places for those children?

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is exactly what I have been doing for the past two years. While Sinn Féin Ministers have presided over inertia and done nothing of any great meaning in their Departments for the people of Northern Ireland, I have acted on a series of education reforms. I have put in place funding particularly for those from more disadvantaged backgrounds and increased access to Sure Start and the Pathway fund. I have been able to put in additional support for all those things in schools. What I will not do — I am glad that the Member for West Belfast Órlaith Flynn is now here — is to allow — .

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It is Órlaithí.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Apologies, I take that back.

I will not preside over discrimination against hard-working families. It is notable that parties in the Chamber — Sinn Féin and the Alliance Party — have indicated that they want to continue a practice under which those who struggle to just about get by are disadvantaged. Those people have a right to have their children in a full-time nursery setting, just like anybody else. They should not, on the basis of that criterion, have that right dislocated and trumped, often by people who are not even from their local community. It is a discriminatory criterion. I am for equality, and that is why the decision has been taken.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Excellent. Question Time will begin at 2.00 pm, so I ask that the Assembly takes its ease until then. Questions on the statement will continue after the question for urgent oral answer. The next Member to be called to ask a question will be Julie Middleton. Thank you.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Oral Answers to Questions — The Executive Office

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

1. Mr Delargy asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the draft artificial intelligence strategy consultation. (AQO 3849/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The public consultation on the draft Northern Ireland artificial intelligence (AI) strategy was launched on 12 August 2026 and will remain open until 7 October 2026. The consultation provides an opportunity for citizens, businesses, academia, public-sector organisations and the voluntary and community sector to help shape the final strategy. The draft strategy sets out a framework for the responsible, ethical and fair adoption of artificial intelligence across the public sector. It aims to support the delivery of better public services while maintaining public trust and confidence in the use of AI. We encourage all those with an interest in the future development and use of artificial intelligence in Northern Ireland to participate in the consultation. The responses received will be carefully considered and will inform the final strategy before it is brought to the Executive for consideration.

Pádraig Delargy (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat.

[Translation: Thank you.]

I thank the deputy First Minister for her response. She knows that there are many conflicting accounts of how AI is used. People in the public sector in particular want reassurance that their data will be protected. What is the Executive Office doing to ensure that, particularly in public-sector use, there is human oversight of anything sensitive to do with data collection?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

There are a lot of concerns about the future of AI and how it will be brought in and used. The Member is right that human oversight is critical. That is why, at the outset of the process, we made it clear that we wanted an ethical framework. We needed the principles of that to be embedded in and core to the strategy from the start. People's personal data and sensitive data must be protected. As we move increasingly towards digitisation, that is important not just with AI but across the system. The Member is absolutely right: it is an important issue, which is why it is at the heart of the consultation document.

David Brooks (DUP, Belfast East)

It is right that we highlight some of the risks and the concerns that people have about AI, but there are also opportunities. How will AI support efficiency and effectiveness in the Civil Service and the wider public sector?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member. It is incredibly important that we are aware of not just the potential risks with AI but the potential opportunities that AI and further digitisation might provide and that we seize those opportunities. That is why we need a plan. It is why we moved quickly to establish the office of the Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser and tasked her with bringing the work forward. I am really pleased with the work so far. I thank all of the many people who helped with the strategy and contributed to putting it together, particularly those working in the industry. They did so freely, because they want to see a robust and workable AI strategy for Northern Ireland as well.

The Member touched on an incredibly important issue. People want to know that their hard-earned taxpayers' money is being used in the best way across Departments and the public sector. We need to reassure the public that that is the case, but we also need to do everything that we can to root out inefficiency and waste and make sure that the likes of AI and further digitisation improve services and improve the working lives and environments of those who are tasked with delivering and implementing such decisions.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

The deputy First Minister will know that I am delighted that the AI strategy has been published. I have tabled many questions about it. From my engagement as chair of the all-party group on artificial intelligence, I know that there are different views on AI depending on the sector. The tech sector is excited about the opportunities — there are many — while those in the creative sector may be worried, and there are environmental concerns. So much of the conversation is based on outdated information. What will the Executive Office do, beyond an online consultation, to facilitate a wider public conversation about what AI is and its opportunities and risks? Will there be a wider public conversation about it?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is incredibly important that there is discussion. A huge amount of the understanding of and apprehension about AI is fuelled by what people see. There have been key stories about that even over the summer. You referenced the creative industries: the voices of voice actors have been used without crediting them or giving them remuneration for that but taking that within a system and using it in particular ways. There are a lot of frightening things about AI, but the key thing for government is that we are here to reassure. We will not step back from trying to seize the opportunities from AI, but, as I referenced, we need to make sure in doing so that we have an approach that is ethical and safe and engages the wider public. We do not want only those who are incredibly passionate about and interested in AI to respond; we want to engage absolutely everyone. The future use of AI, even just a couple of years down the line, will really engage absolutely everyone. That is why we need everyone: young people, older people and, of course, people across all industries, not just in technology. There are potentially huge impacts across every job and profession in Northern Ireland.

Steve Aiken (UUP, South Antrim)

Deputy First Minister, you will be aware that, through the wonders of the protocol, there are two different versions of how AI is being interpreted in EU regulations and United Kingdom regulations. Will the deputy First Minister point out to us which ones we will use in government? That is important, because they have entirely different outcomes.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

As the Member is likely aware, there have been developments in the European Union and, of course, in the UK in relation to AI. There have been reports, including one published by the UK Government over the summer around AI's impact on the creative industries. This document does something slightly different. It is not about legislation or regulation; it is a framework for the use of AI in the public sector in particular. It does not touch on either of those particularly, but you are absolutely right: we need to get it correct from the start. Therefore, we need an international conversation about how we define things and the safeguards that are in place. The reality is that AI does not respect boundaries; it goes much beyond that. That means that the dangers of AI and the images that it creates, for example, go beyond the boundaries of any particular jurisdiction. We need to have cooperation right from the outset so that the problems and issues that we see emerging, such as different definitions, are not allowed to bed in. We need a joint approach.

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

Minister, do you agree that the question is not about what AI can do but about what it cannot do, given the fast pace of its evolution? As part of your deliberations and cross-departmental deliberations, will an employment risk audit be done? Inevitably, that is the major issue. We see what has happened in places such as Amazon at a very fast pace. We want to establish that job security for many, including those in the public sector, will not be jeopardised by the introduction in places of AI.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Over the past number of months, I have had the opportunity to visit a number of factories, particularly in the engineering and manufacturing space. The support that new technologies are able to give to those companies is incredible not just in terms of efficiency but, of course, in making them sustainable for the future. There is no doubt that that produces some challenges. It means that some of the jobs that have been in place will not be the jobs of the future, but here is the reality: AI is happening right now. AI is developing at an extraordinary pace. We cannot simply wish that away.

There is an opportunity for us in the public sector. I know that people can be deeply frustrated by the pace of delivery in Departments, agencies and arm's-length bodies. People want to see quicker, more efficient delivery. AI and digitisation can help with that in the right context, so there have to be those conversations. I welcome the fact that the unions were engaged during the consultation process. I have heard the calls for more of that to happen. As well as that, the officials tasked with bringing the consultation forward have assured us that they will continue to have those conversations. It is not about replacing jobs; it is about evolving beyond and making sure that the contribution of everyone can be maximised, working hand in hand with the developments.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Artificial intelligence is a sector that I have a great deal of interest in. Can the deputy First Minister tell us why, two months on from missing the most recent scheduled appearance at Committee, the Executive Office Committee Clerk has been unable to secure an alternative date to allow the Committee to scrutinise your work on AI? Is it the First Minister or you, deputy First Minister, who is on the run from attending your scrutiny Committee?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. I am always happy to answer questions. If we do not have the answers to those questions, we should not be in these roles, so I am, of course, always happy to come along. I advise the Member that I have indicated full flexibility to come along to the Committee, so we will, hopefully, be able to get some dates in fairly soon.

Gerry Carroll (People Before Profit Alliance, Belfast West)

Deputy First Minister, how many people in TEO are working on AI, policy and strategy, in total? Concerns have been raised. There are growing concerns about the dangers that AI could pose and calls for an AI kill switch that could basically stop it in an emergency situation. Has that been discussed by the Executive or in the Executive Office?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is important that we do not prematurely fall into a position of opposition or of creating fears and apprehensions about something. That is why we have set up the process. At this stage, there is not extensive use of AI across the public sector. Inevitably, however, as AI develops, it will be used in all sectors, including the public sector. That is clear to us and is why we moved quickly to put in place an ethical framework that, as I indicated, has at its heart safeguards to make sure that some of the fears that are being discussed will not be realised. No system is perfect.

The Member asked about the team in the Executive Office, but AI is not just an Executive Office issue: the teams that have been working on it are cross-departmental, and there are AI leads in each Department. Indeed, it goes much wider than that and into our agencies. For example, it has huge potential in Health, and that engages the health trusts and others. It is much wider than the Executive Office. It is led by the Executive Office through our Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser, and I have no doubt that she would be more than happy to engage with you on the detail of the process.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

2. Mr Durkan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the investment strategy for Northern Ireland. (AQO 3850/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Executive are focused on delivery. We are committed to improving lives, driving economic growth and ensuring that our infrastructure meets the needs of our businesses, communities and people. Significant work has already been undertaken to develop the draft investment strategy and progress a range of enabling actions designed to address barriers to delivery. The work has established a strong foundation for achieving the ambitions that will be set out in the strategy. We are confident that the substantial progress made to date, together with continued advancement of the enabling actions, provides a clear direction of travel. Once the strategy is finalised, decisions on its approval and publication will be a matter for the Executive.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her answer. It is four years since the consultation on the investment strategy. In April of this year, the First Minister said that we were weeks away from its publication — from seeing the final version. As the Opposition, the SDLP, of course, supports the Executive's bid for a fairer financial package, but are we any closer to the publication of that important strategy? Do we have a firm date for publication? What guarantee can the deputy First Minister or the Executive Office give that the strategy, once it is eventually published, will actively correct the decades of underinvestment in the north-west, rather than simply prioritising greater Belfast?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member will be aware that the Programme for Government sets out our desire for not just regional balance but regional prosperity. We want every part of Northern Ireland to be able to succeed and thrive. For example, I am pleased to have been able to get up to the north-west on a number of occasions for positive announcements such as investment in new offices, new jobs or businesses doing exceptionally well. I have been blown away not just by what I have seen when visiting there but by the ambition and positivity about the future.

Everyone is saying the same thing, which is that they need the Northern Ireland Executive to work with them, particularly in relation to challenges around planning, the length of time that things take and our waste and water system. There is a huge elephant in the room when it comes to the investment strategy: the continuing implications of climate change legislation and the A5 case. That matter has been dragging on, and it will have potentially profound implications for the investment strategy. I had hoped that we would have got clarity before this point.

I have put a proposal to my colleagues in the Executive that we should move forward with urgent amending legislation that would unlock the big infrastructure that is currently caught suspended and postponed until the outcome of the appeal in that case. That is what is holding up that document, but I can advise the Member that the £32 billion worth of capital, as outlined in the draft investment strategy, is also contained in the various plans in Departments. The enabling actions are moving forward. Of course, at the heart of this is the fact that we need more capital to be able to spend on that much-needed big capital infrastructure, should that be for roads, for hospitals or for schools. That is the case that we have been making to the UK Government.

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I thank Mark for submitting the question. You did not answer his question other than to confirm what I understood the reason for the delay to be. It is that the DUP is a party of climate-change deniers, and that is why you are blocking the investment strategy. Is that the case?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

No.

Keith Buchanan (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Deputy First Minister, you referred to the Climate Change Act. A lot of Members are shouting about what needs to be done and what needs to be built, yet they support the Act. What needs to happen to reverse it and move forward to develop and build the roads and big infrastructure that those Members want built but will not let be built?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Sinn Féin Infrastructure Minister has made it clear that there are number of projects, including the Enniskillen bypass, that are paused and postponed, waiting for the outcome of this case. Those are the real-life impacts of the climate change legislation interacting with plans on big infrastructure. To me, that is not good enough. We must have the ability to move forward. We look to other jurisdictions. The Republic of Ireland has moved forward with legislation to exclude key infrastructure from the implications of its climate change legislation; yet, here in Northern Ireland, we still have dithering and delay by those who could take those actions that could unlock that capital infrastructure and enable the investment strategy to be amended and released. We have to have balance in this. We cannot simply have virtue signalling around climate change and everything else, should that be a road, a hospital or a school, that is vital for the delivery of public services being delayed. What does delay cause? It will cause billions of pounds of increased costs over the next 10 years if we do not get this right. My call is for people to act quickly and get on and amend to allow those important projects to go ahead.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

Deputy First Minister, if you were serious about delivering an investment strategy, would the answer not simply have been a date and a time for the delivery of that strategy for Northern Ireland? Seven months out from the end of the mandate, the reality is that you should be telling the truth. The answer is that there will not be agreement on a strategy.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I can advise the Member that the draft investment strategy extensively discusses the implications of the climate change legislation on big capital infrastructure, particularly, of course, in the public sector. That has been impacted on, objectively, by the A5 court case. That has been appealed. The interpretation of the implications is not agreed by the Infrastructure Minister, by the Executive or by our system. That is important. This is not about not being upfront and transparent; I am being more than that. I am saying very clearly that, if the interpretation of the court on the A5 stands and the appeal does not succeed, the investment strategy will have to be extensively redrafted and there will have to be a rethink about what we do. Otherwise, we will not be building any big infrastructure any time soon.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

4. Ms Flynn asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on good relations funding for the 2026-27 financial year. (AQO 3852/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

All allocations to good relations programmes have been made, with delivery under way to a range of very worthy projects, including £1·5 million for central good relations, enabling 57 projects to receive funding; over £2 million for the district councils' good relations programme to support more than120 projects across all council areas; £400,000 for the planned interventions programme for 71 projects, engaging 1,400 young people; £1·5 million for the Together: Building a United Community (T:BUC) camps programme to deliver 100 camps, engaging 3,500 young people; and £1·12 million for the Community Relations Council to provide core funding to 27 organisations.

A lot of fantastic community organisations have therefore been delivering, in partnership with us, on that very important issue.

Funding has also been issued for such T:BUC headline actions as interface removal and shared housing. In response to the unrest earlier this year, we also established the £500,000 response fund to support those affected, to divert young people from becoming involved in unrest and to build community cohesion.

Órlaithí Flynn (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her response. Does she agree that applications for public funding should include a commitment to promote good relations and that funding should be withdrawn from marching bands when they repeatedly engage in deliberately provocative and sectarian behaviours?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We have been absolutely clear that no one should be engaging in clearly provocative or sectarian behaviours. I have come out and condemned those behaviours whenever I have seen them. Of course, it is important that our funds be inclusive and that every part of society be able to celebrate, mark and engage in their fundamental human right of freedom of expression. That is at the heart of our T:BUC strategy, and I have no doubt that, moving forward, it will continue to be at its heart.

Phillip Brett (DUP, Belfast North)

There is no doubt that good relations funding does important work, and it is right that the deputy First Minister and the Executive Office support that work, but it is also important that the deputy First Minister show leadership within the community to ensure good relations not just here in Northern Ireland but on and across these islands. With that in mind, will the deputy First Minister outline what work she personally undertook this summer to try to build good relations?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for his question. It was a busy summer, with plenty of activities, some of which I engaged in with the Member, not least the Farnborough air show, at which we supported our aerospace and defence companies, right through to the fleadh in Belfast.

It is incredibly important that we take opportunities to show leadership. I count it a huge honour to be in this role and to be able to speak up for, champion and showcase all that is good about this place. I had the honour of attending many events, from the commemorations for the 110th anniversary of the Somme in France to our Twelfth celebrations. I supported our athletes in the Commonwealth Games and went down to Dublin to the Dublin branch of the Royal British Legion to remember the lives of the young men from not just this region but right across the island who gave so much in the war. I also attended the fleadh. I believe that it is incredibly important to show respect. It is, of course, important to demand respect for who I am, but it is also important to show that respect. I do not have to be of a particular tradition or to have a tradition belong to me in order to show respect for it. I hope that that has been the clear message that has gone out from what has been a positive summer of engagement.

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

Deputy First Minister, I welcome some of the warm words that you have said today, but in all the engagements that I have had with ethnic minority and newcomer communities since the appalling racist riots of June, I have heard that they feel let down by the response of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, and by the Executive more broadly, to the appalling riots. You indicated or suggested earlier this year that some of the integration funding had been held up by the absence of a Budget. Will you offer clarity, here and now, to those communities that the absence of a Budget — the refusal of the Executive to set a Budget — has had no impact on funding allocations to overcome community integration issues?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Not only has funding now gone out to groups but the First Minister and I moved quickly to put together a new fund this year: the response fund of almost half a million pounds. Working very closely with officials in the Executive Office, the Education Authority (EA), councils and our partners in Communities in Transition (CIT), we have been able to impact on thousands of young people at risk of getting involved in disorder or into some of those narratives. We have, of course, also worked with those from ethnic minority communities. Let me be very clear: all violence or disorder that is based on a person's race or on anything to do with their characteristics is wrong. I said that at the time, and, when I have engaged with them, members from the ethnic minority communities have thanked us for that leadership and for those strong messages. Of course, there were other issues. We have engaged in detail about what people want to see done if such a thing were, unfortunately, to happen again.

That includes better communication, from officials, teams and the Home Office, as to what is happening. We have taken that on board and made a commitment to make sure that communication is improved.

Paula Bradshaw (Alliance, Belfast South)

I will follow on from my South Belfast colleague. In your initial response, deputy First Minister, you mentioned that very worthy projects were being funded — I have no doubt about that — many of which focus on the unrest. I was dismayed last week to find out that a really good project in my constituency was turned down for funding. Now that it looks like the Budget will be set soon, are there opportunities for other groups to come forward? We do not want to lose a lot of the important work that is so valuable in our constituencies.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We have been trying to maintain consistency. The Member will appreciate that it would be inappropriate for the First Minister or me to interfere politically regarding individual funding applications and their scoring. All applications go through a process that is led by officials and are scored against criteria. I do not know the particular circumstances that she references. I have been pushing, across the Department, to make sure that all our funds get out in some form. If additional money can be secured within this year, we will certainly look at topping up and reopening some of those applications.

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

5. Ms Hunter asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the strategic framework to end violence against women and girls. (AQO 3853/22-27)

Connie Egan (Alliance, North Down)

12. Ms Egan asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on funding allocations for the ending violence against women and girls change funds in the absence of an agreed Executive Budget. (AQO 3860/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, junior Minister Bunting will answer this question.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 5 and 12 together. I may need slightly more than the allocated two minutes to give a wholesome answer to the Members.

Ending violence against women and girls is an Executive priority and a key part of our Programme for Government. Our first two-year delivery plan focused on prevention through community investment, targeted campaigns and strategic collaboration. Our second delivery plan, which launched in April, builds on that momentum, with a continued focus on driving action by sustaining grassroots investments, introducing new campaigns to shift attitudes and expanding partnerships into new sectors.

Our change fund has supported over 5,000 events, reaching more than 96,000 participants to date. Awareness campaigns, including Power to Change and Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes, are increasing public understanding. Substantial work continues as we deliver our second delivery plan. We continue to work closely with partners, particularly our sectoral groups in workplaces, safer socialising and education, to help bring about the societal change that we all want to see. We know that addressing this long-term issue will require a coordinated whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach, but we remain committed to playing our part when it comes to ending violence against women and girls.

We are all well aware of the financial pressures that Northern Ireland faces. However, we remain focused on delivery, which is why, this financial year, we have committed over £4 million for communities, working with partners across society to raise awareness on violence against women and girls and to equip everyone to take action to prevent it. That includes the allocation of interim funding to continue the delivery of the regional change fund as well as issuing funding awards to all councils to support community activity under the local change fund, which will allow community organisations to get their grassroots projects up and running. The funding allocation will ensure that our change fund can continue to support regional and local initiatives as well as community-based interventions that contribute to preventing and addressing violence against women and girls.

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

This week, I tried to get a constituent who is a victim of domestic violence a safe space and access to services to keep them safe in a refuge, and that was not possible due to the large number of people who desperately need help. Many community organisations that work tirelessly to help victims of domestic violence say that they are disheartened by the lack of agreement on a Budget and the impact that that is having on victims. Any words of confidence that you can give them today that funding will continue for them would be greatly welcomed.

Joanne Bunting (DUP, Belfast East)

I am grateful to the Member for her question. We understand the seriousness of the issue. The Member will be aware that issues around domestic abuse also factor into the Department of Justice.

The deputy First Minister indicated in an earlier answer that letters of offer have gone out. That applies to those engaged in the change fund, regionally and locally. I am sure that the Member and her constituents will take reassurance that those letters of offer have issued, which will enable delivery to be taken forward.

The Member will appreciate that issues relating to refuges are part of a bigger, cross-departmental Executive issue. With regard to services and ending violence against women and girls, however, the Member will have seen the recent Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes campaign, which encourages people to reflect on their relationship and their behaviours and what is healthy. Each campaign advertisement carried a QR code that directed people to specific services to enable them to get the help that they may need. If we can assist the Member with anything else, I ask her to highlight it.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

We move to topical questions. I call Matthew O'Toole.

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker. First, I wish to add my sincere condolences to those expressed about Mr Stephen Walker, who was an extraordinary journalist, a very decent and kind man and someone who will be greatly missed in our public life and in politics here. There is universal feeling for him and his family.

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

T1. Mr O'Toole asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, after noting that, as the Assembly returns after the summer break, there is extraordinary fear among the public that it simply cannot or will not deliver, that it is defined by dysfunction and division and that, although we are nearly six months into the financial year without a Budget having been set, which plunges our public services into chaos, the deputy First Minister's party and others in the Executive seem to think that that is fine, and in the context of the lack of a Budget, half a million people waiting for their first consultant appointment, Lough Neagh back in crisis and scenes of racism on our streets that have not been addressed, whether, genuinely and sincerely, the deputy First Minister and her party think that the biggest priority facing this place is the revival of a 30-year-old parading dispute. (AQT 2531/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Every day that I turn up to do my job as deputy First Minister is about pushing for progress in Northern Ireland: making Northern Ireland work and driving better public services for everyone. The reason why we do not have a Budget is that the Budget envelope is not adequate for our public services. If we were to set a Budget with that envelope, the first thing that would happen is this: Ministers would have to go and have a conversation with their accounting officers about what they would cut in-year. Those cuts would be brutal and devastating not just for our public services but in particular for the people who need to use them. Every person using a school, every person using a hospital and every person driving on our roads will see the impact of severe cuts unless we get a better Budget settlement. That is why I have been at the forefront in pushing the UK Government and the Secretary of State to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. I will never apologise for putting up a strong fight for every person in Northern Ireland, no matter their background, to get the best funding envelope and the best Budget to enable us to improve and deliver public services.

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

Deputy First Minister, you did not answer my question. The Opposition have said that we support the Executive's efforts to secure more money, but, in refusing to set a Budget, you are pushing public services into crisis. Public servants have contacted me about the real-world consequences across health and education — you have acknowledged them on the Floor of the Assembly — of not setting a Budget. The Fleadh Cheoil na hEireann in this city in the summer proved that this wonderful region, diverse as it is, does not have to be defined by division and dysfunction, but, sadly, your party and others are determined to make it so. Do you agree that, if your Executive cannot set a Budget and agree fundamental reform of how this place works, the public will simply have had enough? They will conclude that members of the Executive —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Deputy First Minister.

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

— are more than happy to take wages and take office —

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Mr O'Toole, you are getting into a monologue. Deputy First Minister.

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

— as long as that does not mean taking responsibility.

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is absolutely inexcusable for the Chair of the Finance Committee not to understand the process. If we were to set a Budget that is short by £1 billion this year, the immediate result would be that an accounting officer could not sign off on anything further in their budget. They would immediately be cutting and cutting in-year. I am not prepared to stand over that for the people of Northern Ireland, whom I am here to serve. The people of Northern Ireland deserve a fair funding model for the Budget. They deserve to have public services that work. They deserve delivery, but we can only deliver with the right funding. That is the message that we have given to the Secretary of State today. We want to work in partnership. We want to drive efficiency and to drive out waste. However, he needs to give us a fair funding position to enable us to continue with the important work of transformation, to invest in our public services and to deliver on health, education and roads — the important things that matter to every single person in Northern Ireland. I am not prepared to stand over letting the people of Northern Ireland suffer because of a bad Budget settlement.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

T2. Ms Ennis asked the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, in light of the Executive's strategy for ending violence against women and girls, whether they recognise and agree that most domestic abuse incidents occur within family relationships. (AQT 2532/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Absolutely. There is extensive research on that. Of course, the strategy that we have works hand in glove with the Department of Health and Department of Justice document on tackling domestic violence. Of course, those are important issues. It is important that those two strategies complement and supplement each other.

Sinéad Ennis (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Does the Minister agree that, just because domestic abuse incidents occur within family settings or among families, that in no way lessens the seriousness of such incidents? If so, does she agree that the comments of the DUP party leader in that regard were not only wrong but potentially dangerous?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

A court case is ongoing, so none of us in the Chamber knows the facts in relation to that issue. However, I assure the Member that, in the Executive Office, we have been driving forward our ending violence against women and girls strategy, and funding is out on the ground. As I said, we will continue to work very closely with the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health to make sure that we drive forward that strategy and that the strategies complement each other.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

T3. Ms Ferguson asked the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, given their responsibility for tackling violence against women and girls, to outline the DUP's safeguarding response when it becomes aware that a party member or representative is before the courts for sexual or violent offences. (AQT 2533/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

This is, of course, topical questions to the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, but I advise the Member that our safeguarding policy is online. If you go on to the DUP website and just click on the safeguarding policy, you will be able to read it there.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I warn Members that there is a live case, so please do not interfere with that.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Thank you for your answer. Is it the case, then, that the DUP will take no action, no matter how serious the charges are, until a person is convicted by the courts of a criminal offence?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I suggest that the Member go online and take a look at the safeguarding policy, which, of course, we implement.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

T4. Miss Hargey asked the First Minister and the deputy First Minister whether Mrs Little-Pengelly's positive comments at the launch event for the hugely successful Fleadh Cheoil na hEireann in the summer that "Respecting another's culture never diminishes our own" and “Confidence in who we are gives us the freedom to celebrate the richness of others” signal an end to the DUP's relentless attacks on Irish language, culture and identity. (AQT 2534/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Over the summer, we have seen the demonisation and, quite frankly, dehumanisation of people across the community, including those who are in the Orange institutions — mothers, daughters, fathers, friends, husbands and wives who are in these organisations. The message that I gave at the fleadh is one that I stand over absolutely. It was about respect. I demand respect for who I am. That is so important not just because it is about our cultural identity but because it is a fundamental human right and a fundamental civil liberty in freedom of expression. Unfortunately, that is not given by those who continue to vilify, dehumanise and demonise the cultural identity of others, which Members to your right and left do day in and day out in relation to the Orange institutions.

Deirdre Hargey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Unfortunately, you did not answer the question. The fleadh showed that Orange culture was represented and respected. Given what you said, and if you are sincere in your words about somebody else's culture, namely Irish, not threatening yours, is your ministerial colleague Gordon Lyons willing to withdraw his legal action against the representation of the Irish language at Grand Central station in my constituency of South Belfast?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I advise people to step back and look at their own positions at times. Some people are very good at running around talking about others imposing their cultural identity on others or where it is not wanted. Yet, when it comes to something that they feel passionate about, such as the Irish language, they have no such hesitation about imposing it, even where just a minority of people are in favour of an Irish language sign on a development or elsewhere.

I advise the Member that, even in the past number of weeks, I have heard some appalling things said that have demonised, vilified and dehumanised the cultural identity that I feel strongly aligned to, despite the fact that, over the summer, I made it clear that I will give respect to the cultural identity of others, and I am proud to do so. That is leadership. That is being a deputy First Minister who represents everyone across Northern Ireland. I suggest to the Member that there is a lot of hypocrisy from those sitting on her Benches in their attitude of demanding respect for the Irish language and their identity but absolutely opposing — no, nay, never — any identity that they do not agree with or align with.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

T5. Mr Blair asked the First Minister and the deputy First Minister for their assessment of the Prime Minister's comments in the House of Commons last week about the importance of reforming the Stormont institutions. (AQT 2535/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The reality is that we need things to work better. I want things to work better, whether that be project delivery in Departments, efficient public services in our arm's-length bodies or the spirit of consensus and compromise that we need to see in the Executive Committee. Importantly, at the heart of this is the fact that any four-party coalition is challenging, but it can work and will work best only when people are willing to work together and show that spirit of compromise and agreement.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

I thank the deputy First Minister for her answer. Does she agree that the next Executive will never be able to deliver fully on the public's priorities unless we reform Stormont to remove vetoes from our system of government?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The process that the Member refers to as "vetoes" is at the heart of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, and it is about inclusivity. It is about making sure that any significant, controversial or cross-cutting issue will not be decided by one party in isolation, which happened back in the early days. Indeed, it is the Executive's responsibility to look at those issues and find a consensus and agreement on the way forward. You cannot simply amend your way out of that or try to force consensus. It is about the spirit of people being able to come together, to have those conversations and to try to find accommodation with each other on very tricky issues on which they will have very different views. The system that we have is based on inclusivity and is absolutely grounded in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. Let us try to do business better — absolutely — but let us not misdiagnose the issues.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

T6. Mr T Buchanan asked the First Minister and the deputy First Minister whether any assessment has been made of the Executive's ability to deliver the Programme for Government's commitments, given the escalating pressures on Health, Education and Infrastructure. (AQT 2536/22-27)

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It is hugely difficult at the moment. We do not have a Budget. I want a Budget, and there needs to be a Budget as soon as possible. As I have outlined, the implications of agreeing an inadequate Budget are sweeping and damaging cuts across every Department, including and particularly Health, Education and Justice. We cannot stand over that, and that is why we are appealing to the UK Government to work with us. We need transformation. Progress has been made, and there is much more to do. We need to get to a sustainable position of efficient, effective public services and sustainable finances. However, we need the support to get there. Any idea or proposal that tries to sustain huge reductions in expenditure in-year is simply impossible. It would mean cuts that would have a detrimental impact on every single family across this place. Of course, we are doing everything that we can to push the UK Government for a better funding arrangement and to get the Budget agreed as soon as possible.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the deputy First Minister. What can or will be done to ensure that the pressures do not derail the Executive's key priorities?

Emma Little-Pengelly (DUP, Lagan Valley)

At the moment, it is exceptionally difficult. Without a Budget, of course, it becomes more challenging to ensure that the full Budget envelope is rolled out for any of those particular issues, but we are doing what we can.

I really welcome the fact that, across Departments, we have been able to find a pragmatic way through. For example, the Executive have agreed to facilitate the Health Minister to continue this year with £80 million of health waiting list initiatives outside the context of the normal Budget round. That is not an isolated example; we have been able to do that across a range of areas. For example, the Education Minister has asked for the same approach in relation to affordable childcare, and the Executive are actively looking at that.

It is not ideal for us to be in this situation, but it is right for us to try our very best to put forward the most robust case possible to the UK Government that we do not need resources that we are not going to use effectively but we need a Budget that is fit for purpose. We need a Budget that will support health, education and justice. We need a Budget to enable us to roll out those public services, and the DUP and the First and deputy First Minister's office will continue to push for that.

Oral Answers to Questions — Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

1. Ms McLaughlin asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on any actions he has taken over the summer to increase the budget for the Mobuoy remediation project. (AQO 3863/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The updated draft remediation strategy, informed by consultation feedback and supported by significant additional technical work, was presented to me in May this year. There has been significant work to bring the draft remediation strategy to this stage, and further important decisions will be required regarding the adoption and implementation of the strategy, including consideration of the substantial costs involved.

Work continued over the summer to update the cost estimates that will inform consideration of the overall financial requirements associated with the remediation of the site. My officials plan to present updated cost estimates to me in the coming weeks. Once that work is complete, it will inform further discussions and consideration of next steps and associated timescales, taking into account my Department's responsibilities in relation to protecting water quality and the environment.

The environmental monitoring programme continues to be delivered, and I am committed to ensuring that it remains in place until a long-term solution is delivered.

Sinéad McLaughlin (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for that answer. We have recently seen the British Government step in to support a £6 million clean-up of a major illegal dump in Oxfordshire where more than 22,000 tons of waste was removed. Given the greater scale that we face in Mobuoy, has the Minister engaged directly with the British Government to explore whether similar financial support could be made available to finally progress the clean-up on the site?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Sinéad. I have had meetings with the current and previous Finance Ministers to highlight the potential costs of remediation. I need to know the final estimated costs, and we will get those in the next few weeks. Engagement with Treasury is primarily for the Department of Finance, which will take that forward. I trust that the Finance Minister will do that once I have the final estimated costs.

I reassure the Member that I get the importance of the issue. I want to ensure that we can adopt the remediation strategy and move forward together. I will seek to meet MLAs, MPs and council representatives later this year to update them on the issue, because the situation regarding the dump at Mobuoy is wrong and needs to be remediated.

Julie Middleton (DUP, Foyle)

Minister, can you provide an update for residents who live close to the Mobuoy site to reassure them about the drinking water, particularly those who do not have access to the internet?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you. I look forward to meeting you next week to discuss the issue further. The concerns relating to drinking water are of real importance. That is why we carry out daily testing. We have an environmental monitoring programme there, and we publish the results on the internet. We can have more discussion next week about those who do not have digital access.

Ciara Ferguson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Minister, given the significant community impact, will you ensure full transparency and accountability and publish the review's findings and recommendations in full, including any lessons learned and actions to be taken?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I will publish the remediation strategy for Mobuoy once the costings are finalised and are with me. I will meet you later this year to discuss the issue.

Danny Donnelly (Alliance, East Antrim)

Can the Minister outline the timeline for the remediation of Mobuoy?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you very much, Danny. I get the concerns that we need to be moving towards remediation of the site. We have adopted the remediation strategy, and the steps ahead of us relate to that. We need to get the costings for remediation, followed by business case approval and the formal adoption of the remediation strategy. Then, we need to move to procurement. I hope to be able to do that at the beginning of the next financial year and for remediation works to commence in 2028. That requires a lot of steps to be taken, particularly regarding funding, but I am committed to remediation of the site.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

2. Mr Harvey asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline any engagement that his Department is undertaking with the farming community to restore confidence in the work of his Department following issues that have been raised recently. (AQO 3864/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

My officials and I continue to engage directly and regularly with the farming community and its representative bodies on the work that my Department does in order to ensure open dialogue, practical engagement and continued partnership working. That engagement takes place through established forums, including the agricultural policy stakeholder group, the tuberculosis partnership steering group and the nutrients action programme stakeholder task and finish group, and through regular meetings with the Ulster Farmers' Union and the Northern Ireland Agricultural Producers Association. I also place significant importance on direct on-the-ground engagement. I have visited 55 farms since becoming Minister. Those visits provide me with an important opportunity to hear directly from farmers about the issues affecting them and ensure that they can inform the Department's work.

I recognise and share the concerns about the operation at Fivemiletown. That is why I commissioned an independent external review of the Department's implementation of the court deprivation order in Fivemiletown to ensure that there is a transparent, evidence-based assessment of the planning, decision-making and implementation of that operation.

More broadly, there are significant challenges and opportunities facing farmers in Northern Ireland. My Department will continue to work constructively with the sector to improve animal health, support sustainable agriculture, restore our environment and help create a thriving future for farming. I remain committed to listening to, and engaging with, farmers and their representatives. Next week, I will meet the Ulster Farmers' Union. I look forward to having further constructive discussions.

Harry Harvey (DUP, Strangford)

Minister, farmers have no confidence in you or your Department. That is a damning indictment. Will you be able to win back that confidence, or should you step aside for someone who will?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I expected better from you, Harry. Farmers deserve an apology, and it is the DUP that needs to offer it. Look at the legacy that I inherited. Very little action was taken on TB. There was unlawful action on ammonia. Northern Ireland was treated as an environmental sacrifice zone. The situation that the DUP left for me to inherit was a disgrace. You should be ashamed.

Some Members

Hear, hear.

Colm Gildernew (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, you mentioned Fivemiletown and the impact of that operation in my constituency. When it comes to the independent review that you mentioned, will you ensure that there will be full transparency and accountability and that you will publish the review's findings and recommendations in full, including any lessons learned and actions to be taken?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I can give the Member that assurance. It is important that we look at all issues that relate to that operation. As the Member knows, and as many people know but fail to recognise publicly, the operation at Fivemiletown was neither authorised nor directed by me. I ordered an independent external review of that operation. I am committed to full transparency, particularly in the review's findings and recommendations. If mistakes have been made by my officials, those mistakes must be identified and lessons learned.

Fundamentally, however, an awful lot of what has been happening over the past couple of weeks has not been to do with the situation in Fivemiletown. Rather, the fact is that some people have not wanted me to be in this position since the day and hour that I took it up. That is because I believe in the environment and in climate action.

Kate Nicholl (Alliance, Belfast South)

Does the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs agree with me that his duty is to serve the entirety of Northern Ireland within the full remit of his Department, as opposed to being beholden to one vested-interest group?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

When I took up office, I took a pledge to serve all the people of Northern Ireland equally, which is something that other people struggle to do. I am the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. An awful lot of people seek to speak on behalf of farmers. I will quote from one of the letters that I have received from them:

"This is just a very brief note to say how angry that I have felt re the mainly politically motivated & misguided 'pile on' there has been against you & your dept. over the last few weeks. Those organisations & parties involved should be ashamed of themselves. There may well be lessons to be learnt from the enquiry & that of course is what it is designed to do. Please do not for one moment think that the feelings of all or even most farmers have been displayed over the last few days. There is a large section of the farming community, less vociferous than those involved, who I believe think that you & your dept. have delivered change for the better over the last few years & with more to come, I’m sure. We simply as an industry have to move forward to reduce the awful impact of climate change, protect food security & support farm livelihoods."

Diana Armstrong (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, no one understands the environment more than farmers. Farmers work in the environment every day, from the moment they get up until the moment they finish their very long day. Minister, in order to rebuild confidence among farmers, do the terms of reference for the independent review permit Dr Blake to examine comparable earlier operations? Will that review, as my colleague from Fermanagh and South Tyrone has asked, be published in full and unredacted?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I will not seek to restrain what Dr Blake does. He is doing good work. I encourage anyone who has any relevant information to share it with him. It is important that they do that so that it can inform his review. The only redactions that will take place will be those required under the law. As you are aware, there will be some situations related to GDPR, but full transparency is the default position.

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

Minister, after the fiasco of the public shooting of cattle near Fivemiletown, can you detail what changes you have made to engagement, consultation and decision-making processes to reassure farmers that their voices are being properly heard?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Justin, I continue to go out and engage. That is what I will do. There is an open door, and I believe in engaging on the issue. People have questions, and they deserve answers. That is why I commissioned the independent external review. It is important that there is full transparency and that the findings and recommendations are published, and that is what I am seeking to achieve. Ultimately, as Minister, I have a duty to serve all the people of Northern Ireland and not be dictated to by right-wing unionist commentators and TikTok users in relation to an agenda that denies the reality of climate change and the importance of facing up to our environmental obligations.

Timothy Gaston (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Minister, you brushed off the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) scandal by claiming that it was an historical issue that related to malpractice in 2023 and 2024. The court order regarding Fivemiletown related to offences between 2022 and 2024, yet the farmer was not given enough time to sell off his 51 healthy animals. It is no surprise that farmers believe that you preside over a two-tier system of, "Do as I say, not as I do". Confidence in you has gone. When will you submit your resignation letter, or do we have to wait for your nominating officer to give you your P45?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Mr Gaston, I will be going nowhere. All that you bring to this Chamber is division and hate. I will take no lessons from you on animal welfare, because you voted against the Bill from the Alliance Member to stop foxes being ripped apart by dogs. You are an absolute hypocrite.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

I call Aoife Finnegan.

[Interruption.]

Order, Members.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

3. Ms Finnegan asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs for an update on bluetongue. (AQO 3865/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

To date, in this season, no cases of bluetongue have been detected in Northern Ireland. Any reported suspect cases here have been ruled out following testing.

I am aware that, on Friday 4 September, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine confirmed that, on post-mortem examination, an unvaccinated 16-month-old heifer tested positive for the bluetongue virus BTV-3. The herd is in County Wexford, and no clinical signs were detected prior to the death of the animal. That is the first case of BTV-3 detected in Ireland in the 2026 season.

As of 6 September 2026, there have been 910 cases of bluetongue BTV-3 in Great Britain in the 2026-27 bluetongue season, which began on 1 July. That includes 791 cases in England, 98 cases in Wales and 21 cases in Scotland. A case is defined as a premises on which at least one bluetongue-positive animal has been confirmed. The figure represents a significant increase compared with the 2025-26 outbreak season, when 348 cases were confirmed in Great Britain.

My Department continues to respond to any reported suspect cases and is undertaking abattoir surveillance, post-import testing of susceptible animals from EU countries, monitoring of wind plume meteorological data and midge surveillance in order to determine the beginning and end of the vector-active period.

The increase in BTV-3 cases in Great Britain, including recent cases in Scotland, is concerning. My Department is also aware of reports of increased severity in clinical signs. I encourage all livestock keepers to consult their private veterinary practitioner for advice on vaccinating their livestock against the threat of BTV-3.

Aoife Finnegan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his response. In light of the recent confirmed case of bluetongue in County Wexford and the continued spread of the disease in Britain, which he has already mentioned, will he provide an update on the availability of bluetongue vaccines, the Department's vaccination strategy and whether further action is being considered to protect the livestock sector?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

I encourage all livestock keepers to consult their private veterinary practitioner for advice on vaccinating their livestock against the threat of BTV-3. That is not compulsory; it is optional, and vaccines are available at the moment. We will continue to monitor the availability of vaccines. It is up to every livestock keeper to make a decision on that. Alongside the availability of the vaccine, we will continue to promote awareness of the issue.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Given the number of cases across the water, farmers are somewhat concerned about not only disease risk but the financial hit should a case come this way and bluetongue restrictions suddenly tighten in Northern Ireland. Will the Minister confirm whether compensation arrangements, movement-control protocols and rapid-testing capacity are fully in place so that farmers are not left carrying the cost of uncertainty if a suspected case should arise in Northern Ireland?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The Member will be aware of the arrangements that are in place, particularly in relation to compensation. The issue in focus at the moment is about making sure that we are dealing with the same strain that we dealt with previously. There are arrangements in place for that, and that is why there will be no immediate changes as a result of the case in Wexford. The most important thing to do is to monitor in order to ensure that no different strains appear in Northern Ireland. If they do, we will have to respond differently, as we did last year.

John Blair (Alliance, South Antrim)

What actions has the Department taken to raise awareness of bluetongue and to ensure that the public and the sector in particular remain vigilant?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

My officials continue to engage with and update the Northern Ireland farming industry through various communication channels, including the DAERA web page, social media pages and press releases when appropriate. Farmers in Northern Ireland should continue to operate in accordance with existing guidance, which is available on the DAERA website. The Ulster Farmers' Union, alongside my officials, hosted a seminar on bluetongue, a recording of which is available on the DAERA website.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Belfast South)

Question 4 has been withdrawn.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

5. Mr Beattie asked the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to outline what his Department is doing to ensure the resilience of equine registration and horse passports in Northern Ireland. (AQO 3867/22-27)

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

The current legislation requires all equines under a person’s responsibility to be correctly identified, which includes holding a single lifetime identification document or, as it is commonly known, an equine passport. For equines born on or after 1 July 2009, that includes being microchipped. Owners and operators must ensure that all information in the passport is accurate and kept up to date, including ownership details.

Since 1 February 2026, it has been compulsory to register establishments where equines are kept. It is now also a requirement to provide an equine establishment number when applying for or amending an equine passport. That was an essential first step towards introducing a robust equine traceability system in Northern Ireland. The Member may be aware of the context around that. While further work remains, those coordinated efforts are laying the foundation for a more robust, transparent, and compliant equine traceability system that will be in line with animal health law requirements. However, that will take several years to operationalise and deliver.

Doug Beattie (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his answer. He is right that there is a process to go through, and I accept that. However, he will also be aware of Professor Patrick Wall's report on equine welfare-led reform. That report was not commissioned here but by the Irish Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, and 11 of its recommendations affect Northern Ireland. One of those recommendations was the rationale for our implementation of the arrangements around identification, traceability and keepers/owners. The report contained another 10 recommendations. Is the Minister able to give us an update on where we are with those other 10 recommendations, particularly around inspection regimes, database control and enforcement?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

Thank you, Doug. That report came about as a result of an RTÉ documentary, which was a really grim watch. On enforcement action, the Department currently has enforcement powers under the Equine Identification Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2019, as amended, with various passporting offences. A person guilty of an offence under the regulations is liable to either a conviction or a fine. The statutory maximum on conviction is £5,000. I will write to you to set it out a bit more. It is heartening to see someone show an interest in the issue, because we need to step up on equine welfare in Northern Ireland and we need to implement the report's recommendations.

Áine Murphy (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Minister, have you had any engagement on or given any consideration to an all-island equine register for traceability and disease prevention?

Andrew Muir (Alliance, North Down)

There is an interoperability as part of this. Further discussions are occurring with the Irish Government on how we can strengthen the future of equine skills at our College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) campus in Enniskillen. I am taking that forward with the Irish Government, with the potential for Shared Island funding.

Gareth Wilson (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

Animal welfare in that sector has been brought to my attention in my constituency in recent weeks with regard to a tethered pony. Are you content with how councils exercise their powers under section 17(1) of the Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 to alleviate suffering immediately when it is encountered? If so, what routine evaluation does DAERA undertake to reach that conclusion?