Northern Ireland Assembly, 17 June 2002

40 contributions from 18 members. The official report.

Procedural Matter

Joe Hendron (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I would appreciate your clarification and help on a matter of procedure. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Ms de Brún, presented the document ‘Developing Better Services’, about modernising the hospital service, on Wednesday 12 June at a press conference in the Odyssey Arena. I would have thought that it should have been presented to the Assembly first — at least by way of a statement — rather than outside. There is no precedent for that.

It was a discourtesy that the Minister did not come to the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety beforehand and give it information about the document. The Department’s permanent secretary most certainly did on Tuesday and Wednesday, the day of the presentation. I am not aware of any case in which such an important ministerial document — in reply to the Hayes Report, and concerning all the people of Northern Ireland — has not been presented to the Assembly.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

I have written to the Minister this morning saying that it would be a proper courtesy to the House for a matter of that kind to come forward in the normal way, as a statement. It remains for the Minister to respond. I was disappointed that on a matter of such importance the normal procedure was not followed.

The Member is aware that there are other ways in which he, as Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, or another Member, may bring the matter to the Floor of the House.

Joe Hendron (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Marriage Bill: First Stage

Sean Farren (Social Democratic and Labour Party, North Antrim)

I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 18/01] to make provision in connection with the formalities for marriage and the solemnisation and registration of marriages; and for connected purposes.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

The Bill will be put on the list of future pending business until a date for its Second Stage is determined.

Pollution Prevention and Control Bill: First Stage

Dermot Nesbitt (UUP, South Down)

I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 19/01] to make provision for implementing Council Directive 96/61/EC and for otherwise preventing and controlling pollution; to amend the transitional provisions in relation to waste management licences in article 47 of the Waste and Contaminated Land (Northern Ireland) Order 1997; to make provision about certain expiring disposal licences; and for connected purposes.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

The Bill will be put on the list of future pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.

Budget (No.2) Bill: Second Stage

Sean Farren (Social Democratic and Labour Party, North Antrim)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill (NIA 16/01) be agreed.

In moving the motion, I shall briefly draw attention to a few points. The debate follows the Bill’s First Stage on Tuesday 11 June and the Supply resolution for the 2002-03 Main Estimates, which was also considered and approved last week. The Bill can be given accelerated passage because the Committee for Finance and Personnel has confirmed that, in line with Standing Order 40, it is satisfied that there has been appropriate consultation on the public expenditure proposals contained in the Bill. That condition has been met, and the confirmation was given in a letter dated 11 June from the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel to the Speaker.

I welcome the Committee’s assistance in the matter and, indeed, the work that it undertakes and the contribution that it makes on all matters concerning public expenditure and related procedural issues. The purpose of the Bill is to give legislative effect to the resource Estimates approved through the Supply resolution passed on Monday 10 June. In introducing that Supply resolution, I provided considerable detail about the figure work contained in the Estimates booklet. Therefore, I do not intend to delay today’s debate with unnecessary repetition of that detail. Members have received copies of the detailed Main Estimates booklet. Copies of the Budget (No. 2) Bill and the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum should also be available.

For the benefit of Members, however, I wish to summarise briefly the main features of the Bill in accordance with the nature of the Second Stage debate envisaged under Standing Order 30. The principle of the Bill is to authorise the use of resources totalling £5,710,516,000 by Departments and the issue of £4,962,077,000 from the Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund in respect of the Main Estimates for 2002-03.

I remind Members that the spending plans reflected in the Budget (No.2) Bill were approved and endorsed by the Assembly when the Budget for 2002-03 was approved last December. Today’s proceedings are an important step in putting in place our expenditure framework for the year 2002-03.

The Assembly has important responsibilities in this area, and I was most interested to hear the views of Members in last week’s useful debate. The nature of these debates means that they are wide-ranging; that is important, because financial provision is fundamental to every one of our public services, and I welcome the interest that Members take in those matters.

We are now becoming more familiar with the various stages of the budgetary processes. In that context, the Assembly has made considerable progress. In addition to coming to terms with many complex issues and processes, it has had to cope with making the transition from cash to resource accounting. The Assembly has important responsibilities for public expenditure, authorisation and control, and it has demonstrated considerable interest and diligence in addressing those responsibilities.

Eamonn ONeill (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I thank the Department of Finance and Personnel’s officials for their work in bringing the Bill to Second Stage. As I have already said in the House, the Bill is an indication of how successful the Assembly has been in organising and administering its finances. As we approach the end of the Bill’s process, will the Minister look ahead to the reinvestment and reform initiative, which was initially introduced by his predecessor, Mark Durkan, and worked on more recently by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister? Will he consider whether some money can be spent on roads in my constituency of South Down? Some hope and opportunity must be offered to provide improvements to its woeful road infrastructure. There is not one inch of dual carriageway in the constituency. Moreover, no major road schemes have ever been undertaken there, and no significant money has been spent on roads. Accessibility to the area is neglected and must be improved for the constituency’s growing tourist trade and its other services and needs.

Sean Farren (Social Democratic and Labour Party, North Antrim)

That was a briefer debate than I had anticipated, notwithstanding the fact that Members have addressed the issues on several occasions. I thank Mr ONeill for his contribution. The Department of Finance and Personnel is embarking on its preparation of the 2002 Budget. The Executive’s position report, which was recently presented to the Assembly, is available. It is hoped that Members will take the opportunity to put forward their views at pre-consultation stage. Those views are influential in shaping the draft Budget, which the Department will introduce for consideration in September.

Mr ONeill has invited me to stray outside the limits of the particularities that surround the Budget (No.2 ) Bill, but the Executive, officials in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and officials in the Department of Finance and Personnel are working on the first set of proposals that they want to see adopted and implemented with respect to the resources available through the reinvestment and reform initiative. I note the points that Mr ONeill made about his constituency, and I am sure that many of those concerns could be reflected by other Members. The reinvestment and reform initiative is intended to provide the Assembly with a greatly enhanced range of resources from which to draw from in order to make good the deficit in investment in infrastructure.

I am not in a position to make any commitments on the Member’s concerns about roads in South Down: that is a matter for the Minister for Regional Development, who will undoubtedly bring forward suggestions with respect to how the resources available to us under the reinvestment and reform initiative can be allocated to meet needs such as those that the Member has identified.

The roads in South Down are part of the range of considerations that are in the Minister for Regional Development’s mind. The reinvestment and reform package will enable us to address many other aspects of our infrastructure that are suffering from the deficit that we are all well aware of. I thank Mr ONeill for raising the point, and I thank him for his complimentary remarks. I seek the House’s support for the Second Stage of the Budget (No.2) Bill.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

As this is a Budget Bill, it requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That the Second Stage of the Budget (No. 2) Bill (NIA 16/01) be agreed.

Local Government (General Grant) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002

Dermot Nesbitt (UUP, South Down)

I beg to move

That the Local Government (General Grant) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002 (SR 182/2002) be affirmed.

This Statutory Rule is needed to specify, or list, the district councils that are taken into account to determine a rate that is used in the current formula for distribution of the resources element of the general grant. Members will be familiar with the financial support that the Department of the Environment provides for district councils in the form of the general grant.

There are two elements of grant: the derating element to compensate district councils for loss of rate income due to the statutory derating of certain properties; and the resources element to provide additional finance to those district councils whose total rateable value per head of population falls below a standard determined by the Department. The amount of grant available in the current financial year is £27·9 million for the derating element and £19·5 million for the resources element. That is a total of £47·4 million.

The funds are distributed to councils in accordance with a statutory formula, which is detailed in the Local Government &c. (Northern Ireland) Order 1972. The primary legislation requires, as part of the methodology of the distribution of the resources element, that the Department set a standard rate each year. Any council that falls below that level is entitled to a share of the grant, but those councils above the standard do not qualify. To determine the rate, data for selected district councils relating to gross penny rate products and population are applied. The formula is extremely complicated.

The legislation also requires that the councils taken into account in the calculation of the standard rate be specified in an Order subject to affirmative resolution. Article 2 of the Order lists the 14 councils for which data were used to determine the standard rate for distribution of this year’s provision of £19·5 million. The approval of the Order is a necessary part of the methodology for distribution of the resources element of the general grant for 2002-03. I commend it to the Assembly.

William McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I support the motion. This is a very important Statutory Rule that is needed each year to specify those councils that will be used in calculating standard penny rate product, which is an essential component of the formula used to distribute the resources element of the general grant.

The Minister is aware of the Committee for the Environment’s ongoing scrutiny of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which aims to put a new methodology in place for the distribution of the resources element in the general grant payable to district councils. The Committee is in discussion with the Department on clauses that relate to the general grant, and several amendments are being considered.

The Committee is concerned about the projected reduction of the general grant from £20 million to £13·3 million for 2003-04. I have already drawn that issue to the attention of Members, and I assure the Minister that my Committee will not allow this injustice to occur — and I use the word "injustice" deliberately, but that is a debate for another occasion. Although this Statutory Rule will play a part in future calculations of the grant, the Committee has no objection to it’s being made. I support the motion.

Eamonn ONeill (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

I do not have much to say, but I am concerned about an issue that the Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment has already referred to; that is the disquiet that councils feel about the general grant and its operation. There is a genuine feeling of injustice. It is an archaic way to provide support for councils. Perhaps after the Committee and the Department have considered the issue, the result may be a fairer and more efficient method that will cause people fewer concerns and dispel any sense of injustice.

Even before devolution I was worried about the general grant. It has been eroded gradually to such an extent that some councils, including small councils such as Down District Council, have had an enormous budgetary battle to stay solvent and keep within the bounds of reasonable financial control. Can the Minister tell us how the community sector worked within the administration of the general grant allocation? Consideration was to have been given to how communities were divided, how they were made up, and what overall effect that had. However, he may not be in a position to give us that information.

Dermot Nesbitt (UUP, South Down)

Unlike Dr Farren, I am pleasantly surprised that there have been so few comments.

I thank the Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment for his support for the motion and the necessity of the resources element. I wish to put on record that since I have become Minister of the Environment, Dr McCrea and I, although we come from different positions, have worked in a professional way; I commend the Chairperson for that. He referred to the new methodology that the Committee and the Department of the Environment are discussing. I repeat what I said on that topic: if the Committee or others have concerns, I seek constructive criticism from them — namely, that when they disagree with certain elements they genuinely put forward other views on how those issues can be dealt with.

Dr McCrea also mentioned that the resources element of the general grant has possibly gone down from £20 million to £13·3 million; that also concerns me. There is a problem with minima and with how the Department bids in the next round. I am conscious of how the Department has bid for resources and of how that bid may pan out. However, as the Chairman has rightly said, that is a debate for the future. I commend him for his words of support.

Mr ONeill referred to the injustice of the general grant and the disquiet that it has caused — perhaps echoing Dr McCrea’s fears that the general grant seems to have been reduced. Those concerns are raised when I meet with councillors.

Mr ONeill referred to the archaic method. I draw his attention to the new method that Dr McCrea referred to, which will be introduced in 2003. It will focus more on wealth and population indicators with adjustments that reflect the needs of the community, needs that are based on unemployment, tourism, and so on. I trust that the new method for dealing with the grant — when it is finally agreed upon — will empathise more with the community and will reflect its needs better than did the previous formula. I do not consider the new method to be archaic. I am not sure whether Mr ONeill wished me to explain the complicated method that is proposed today. It is more mechanical in relation to statistics, standard rates and average rates.

I hope that I have covered that aspect. Mr ONeill asked me how communities were dealt with in the workings of the grant. The difficulty was that communities, as such, were not dealt with. The grant was worked out by dividing the rate poundage by the population of Northern Ireland to get the average rate. The rate for each district council was examined. If a district council’s rate was below average, it was entitled to more money. If Members saw the number of councils that were below average, they would see that the amount of money needed this year — based on the Northern Ireland average — is £23 million. The Department has only £19·5 million.

Therefore, the Department must undertake a mathematical process to reach a figure that allows it to allocate the £19·5 million among 14 councils, which will be listed. However, that £19·5 million will only be shared among some of the 14. That complication in the calculation means that it may be viewed as archaic, in a sense. A new method is being devised and will be introduced. I believe that I have covered the points raised by the two Members.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Local Government (General Grant) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002 (SR 182/2002) be affirmed.

Assembly: Business

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

I draw to the attention of the House — lest anyone has not been observing the annunciators — that a private-notice question to the Minister of Education has been tabled and will be taken immediately before Question Time.

The next item of business is a motion on the involvement of children in armed conflict. However, I do not see the proposer of the motion, Mr McGrady, in his place.

John Tierney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. As Members can see in the indicative timings, the motion was scheduled to be debated at 1.20 pm. As a member of the Business Committee, I understand that the indicative timings are just that. Mr McGrady has had a personal problem this morning. However, he is on his way to the Assembly. I should be grateful if the House would debate Dr McCrea’s motion first to allow Mr McGrady time to arrive.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

I am sure that the Member’s Colleague will be grateful that he asked the question. However, he must know that what he suggests is not possible.

If a Member is not available to move a motion, for whatever reason, it must fall. There may very well be reasons that the House would entirely understand. Nevertheless, I am held by our procedures, and the motion must, I regret to say, fall.

Care of Special School Leavers

William McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I beg to move

That this Assembly recognises the lack of suitable facilities for young, disabled persons leaving special education and calls upon the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to make immediate Province-wide provision for the continued care of special school leavers and to alleviate current pressures on day-care facilities.

The motion is very important, and I thank the Business Committee for permitting it to be tabled.

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

Life is full of challenges, but the challenges faced by children with a severe learning or physical disability are often immense. How we provide for the needs, both immediate and long-term, of those children who require additional help, especially as they make the strenuous transition into early adulthood, is a measure against which we should be judged. Surely, they too should have the equal rights and equal opportunity to achieve their full potential.

In schools for those with severe learning disabilities, the transition stage begins at 14 and continues until pupils leave school at 19. For many young people with a severe learning disability, that transition stage is particularly traumatic given the changes that accompany leaving school and the preparations necessary for them. At that age, the options available are either placement in an adult day-care centre, a specialised course at a college of further education, employment or staying at home.

Although the numbers leaving special schools each summer are not large — 74 in 1998; 84 in 1999; 79 in 2000, and 84 in 2001 across all board areas — day-care services have become stretched in some areas. Saturation point has been reached, and no more places are available. Parents in my Mid Ulster constituency have been told that their children must remain at home until the waiting list there can be addressed. Mid Ulster is not alone in that. Parents in South Antrim are facing a similar dilemma.

Surely with the involvement of social services in transition plans from age 14, the shortfall in local day-care places should have been detected much earlier. Appropriate measures should have been taken to avoid what is now a calamity for many parents, who have every right to fear that any benefits and skills that their children accrued at school will be lost unless effective adult services become immediately available. The situation that they face cannot be put on the long finger. Although I want to develop longer-term issues, the motion deals directly with a situation that is immediate and a dilemma that many parents are facing.

In a memorandum to the House of Commons Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs’s inquiry and contained in its report ‘Public Expenditure in Northern Ireland: Special Needs Education’, published on 19 April 1999, Mencap (Northern Ireland Division) stated that

"Transitional plans … have not always been given the attention they deserve."

In a similar submission, the Northern Ireland charity Sense recognised the need to upgrade the adult services available when children reach school-leaving age at 19. Sense said that when the children leave school

"They will have had 15 excellent years at well resourced schools, with programmes geared to meet their needs … The transition from school to adult services, where their needs cannot possibly be met, can be traumatic … these people have special needs which need to be met, no matter what age they are."

More recently, in ‘Ignored or Ineligible?’, a survey conducted last year by the National Autistic Society, it was reported that the Government policy of inclusion in the education system raises expectations which are shattered in adulthood, as current provision is woefully inadequate:

"The crucial years of transition can mean the difference between an unhappy and dependent existence in adulthood, or a more independent and fulfilled life."

In seeking adequate and appropriate provision for their children, parents are looking not for an adult crèche but for consistent and continuous curricular provision, so that the excellent work already delivered by the professional and dedicated teaching staff at special schools can continue. Is not the mission statement of the Northern Health and Social Services Board "Promoting Health and Securing Care"?

The help and teaching available to these children from birth are second to none. I pay genuine tribute to the professional support staff, social workers, psychologists, occupational therapists and special-needs teachers who have such a positive impact on young lives. How sad it will be, therefore, if all their efforts over the years are washed away because further facilities are unavailable when school-leaving age is reached.

Surely society owes these young people a chance to lead a fulfilling life, during which they can achieve many of the things that we, as able-bodied people, often take for granted. Instead, it appears that some are simply tossed aside — too unimportant to be considered for future advancement when people in mainstream education are actively encouraged to take up opportunities now and throughout their lives.

Pressure on day-care services and post-school placements has been of primary concern to many in the special school sector. This issue should be viewed in the context not only of Mid Ulster, but of the Province as a whole.

I thought it prudent to source opinion from special schools across Northern Ireland before this debate. The similarities in the 21 responses I received were striking. They all reported difficulties with appropriate provision and support. Among the main issues identified were: very late confirmation of placements for young people, with the added stress that that brings to their families; inappropriate placements, or mismatching, where a school feels that placements have matched the provision available rather than a young person’s actual needs; an inability to guarantee full-time placements; a lack of more appropriate placements because of demand and the difficulties experienced by health and social services in moving people to alternative placements to release places for school-leavers; a breakdown in further education placements due to a lack of consistent and practical support; and a lack of alternative occupational provision for those unsuited to further education and for whom traditional day-care provision is inappropriate.

The principal of Cranny Special School in Omagh told me that provision in that area is not encouraging and that, unless the situation is quickly resolved, two more students will leave at the end of December 2002 with no proper placements available.

The principal of Sandelford Special School in Coleraine stated that the problems to which I have referred have become more pronounced over the last six or seven years. Many leavers have had to wait at home for a considerable time before, in most circumstances, being offered one or two days’ placement a week because the local day-care centres are either full to capacity or understaffed.

Riverside Special School in Antrim noted that if a young person does not get a place at an adult centre, he and his family are often isolated from the rest of the community and that a parent may have to contemplate seriously giving up work and rely solely on state benefits to support the family.

The principal of Jordanstown Special School in Newtownabbey stated that there is a need to ensure that proper provision is made for young people so that they are challenged and stimulated and continue to develop their skills.

The principal of Loughan Special School in Ballymena stated that something must be done about the appalling lack of provision for people over the age of 19 who have learning difficulties. That sentiment was reiterated by Knockevin Special School in Downpatrick, where support was expressed for a review into the funding arrangements for post-school placements for all those with learning difficulties.

At the end of June, many parents will be faced with the need to provide care, occupation, training and entertainment for their son or daughter, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Holiday periods are especially difficult for children who require additional learning time and support and for those who need a set routine to continue to make good progress over the summer recess. The Assembly must assess the damage that will be done to individuals if, come September, placements cannot be found.

In the areas where increased pressures are most evident, immediate measures must be taken to ensure that this summer’s leavers can make the transition to the post-school world seamlessly. Provision for children who leave special schools will continue to be an ever-increasing problem unless it is addressed at the highest level and long-term strategies are deployed.

The parent of a child at Kilronan Special School in Magherafelt wrote to me and said that

"in a society where moral and social values are rapidly deteriorating, please consider just how valuable a part can be played by many of these very special young people. Please don’t allow their world to be shut down at a time in life which most consider to be their prime".

I received that letter because of the problems experienced by children who leave Kilronan Special School in Magherafelt at 19 years of age. Many parents are angry and frustrated because no one seems to acknowledge their plight and because, although the children that they love with all their hearts face a very uncertain future, no one seems to understand the pain that they suffer. I pay tribute to the parents of those very special children. However, although we agree that they are special, it is about time society provided for them. As I said earlier, the motion deals with a particular situation: children face a dilemma, and their parents face a nightmare. However, the motion itself is not the answer.

Able-bodied children are encouraged to fill their potential through continued education. That education could continue until a person is 30 years of age, because people are encouraged to go to university. However, for disabled children, education ends at 19 years of age, and that ought not to be the case. I have spoken to the Minister for Employment and Learning, Ms Carmel Hanna, about this and I headed a delegation that met her. Departments must work together to ensure adequate provision, and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Department for Employment and Learning have vital roles to play. Why should education for these children finish when they reach the age of 19, given that other children are able to continue with theirs?

Adequate provision is vital because when these children reach the age of 19, they are put into adult centres. That is inappropriate but welcome, because there is no other provision. However, those placements are inadequate, and places ought to be provided for disabled people between the ages of 19 and 35. Society is not doing that, and it should. Adult centres are suitable at a later stage in life, but not at 19 years of age.

I ask the Assembly to offer genuine care, and I pay tribute to those who have drawn this matter to my attention. Whether the child is Mary’s, Teresa’s or Peter’s, I say to those about whom I am concerned that the Assembly owes it to them to make this provision. At the end of this month those parents should know that their children will not be cast aside, that their rights will be acknowledged and that a place, albeit inadequate, will be found for them. They may not receive perfect provision, but they will receive good provision. These children are being discriminated against. Every other child is encouraged to continue with his education, but at 19 years of age disabled people are told that their education is over. These parents and children are doubly discriminated against because they are told that there is no provision for them and that the children must be kept at home.

I ask the Assembly to support the motion wholeheartedly. Justice will be done if we ensure that these children receive adequate provision.

Joe Hendron (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

I should like to congratulate the Dr McCrea for tabling this important motion. Learning difficulty is more common in Northern Ireland than in Great Britain; indeed, approximately 8,000 people here have a severe learning disability, and approximately 35 children out of 1,000 under the age of 16 are disabled. People with a learning disability have the same right as non-disabled people to lead their lives as independently as possible. A key priority for the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in the Programme for Government is described in the section ‘Working for a Healthier People’. That focuses on helping disabled people to achieve the highest possible standards of living and to be integrated fully into society, which is a worthy aim. However, evidence points to wide gaps in the provision of services for the learning disabled, with disparities in expenditure between different areas.

The Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety recently met with the Kilronan Parents’ Action Group —I know that Dr McCrea is familiar with that group — as well as with the Foyle View Parents’ Support Group. The Committee learnt of the chronic lack of support for young people with special needs. Problems connected with a lack of respite care provision, especially in rural communities, were described. Transport to and from special schools and, crucially, a lack of suitable after-school places were also mentioned. Due to the limited options available, parents are often faced with providing 24-hour care for their children. That can mean that they must leave employment, which can lead to stress and severe health problems for the carers.

The Foyle View Parent’s Support Group advised the Health Committee that parents in Belfast receive provision of £73 for each child compared to £53 for each child in Derry. Post-19 education services for people with learning disabilities are chronically underfunded. There is little available by way of training and social-care provision. The three existing adult centres in the Homefirst Trust area are already operating at 30% over capacity, and the trust cannot build more centres without additional funding.

At the age of 19, these vulnerable young people are faced with the complete withdrawal of educational input. That means a lack of mental stimulation and loss of skills, which can lead to isolation, behavioural difficulties and depression. These young people must be able to build relationships with others in their age group and develop their full potential. Many of the children attending special schools are quite skilled and can excel in different areas.

This is a cross-cutting issue for health and education, as Dr McCrea pointed out, and it needs to be addressed urgently. Children with special needs are very limited in their life choices. At 19 their lives should be just beginning, but they face a poor quality future. That is clearly an equality issue. The Human Rights Act 1998 provides an additional focus on the rights and freedoms of individuals guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights, which includes the right to education.

Legislation must ensure provision for day care for young adults with disabilities. The Executive must demonstrate a clear commitment to targeting social need by directing resources equitably to ensure that this most vulnerable group is provided with the same opportunities and encouragement to develop as children in mainstream schools.

Jim Wilson (UUP, South Antrim)

This is a Province-wide problem, but I am acutely aware of difficulties in my constituency of South Antrim, where I have been pursuing the interests of Riverside Special School. The school has a high reputation but cannot send its pupils, on leaving, to the local day centre because it has advised in advance that it will be unable to admit them.

In February I asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she agreed that all young people leaving special education should be entitled to a full-time place at an adult facility or day centre so that they can continue to avail of the opportunities created for them at a special school. The Minister’s reply, like that given to my Alliance Colleague in South Antrim, Mr Ford, contained a high degree of detail about procedures in place between the Departments of Health and Education. Those procedures were so complicated that they might have been specifically designed to fudge the question of who has responsibility for this.

Children who attend special schools have severe learning difficulties, and some have additional complications brought about through sensory or physical impairments. The main goal of the curriculum designed for them is to give them independence in their adult life. In mainstream education each child has his talents, strengths and weaknesses. So too, have the children who attend special schools, except that these children also have physical and mental needs that vary from child to child. There are different implications for each child, depending on his individual needs and ability.

That can present problems when these young people attain school-leaving age and are forced to leave the secure cocoon provided for them during their formative years. Some are able to pursue further education by attending a further education college, backed up by a work placement. That option is a positive step for those whose disabilities are not too serious. Others are not so fortunate. Sensory and physical impairments restrict their passage into the adult world and an independent life, and the options available to them are severely limited.

Attendance at an adult centre is usually the most appropriate option for them, but places are limited or, as in my constituency, non-existent. At the beginning of June, the local adult centre in Antrim closed to school leavers. The centre is oversubscribed, and the implications for young people and their families are serious, to say the least. Denied a place at an adult centre, they will find themselves plunged into isolation.

Dr McCrea was spot on when he said that some families have no option but to give up work and rely on state benefits. Families’ incomes can be reduced suddenly and drastically, affecting all members of the household.

Even if a young person obtains a place at an adult centre, there are problems ahead. The 10 or 12 years spent at a special school will have been carefully planned and tailored to suit an individual’s special needs, including interaction with students of similar ages. However, once a person has been allocated a place at an adult centre, there is every possibility that he will stay there for the rest of his life, which could be 50 years. The variety of stimulation provided by such an environment is bound to be very limited.

Anyone leaving special education should be entitled to a full-time place at an adult day centre to continue to pursue the opportunities created for him at school. How can the teachers who educate these young people have any job satisfaction, knowing that the benefit of their efforts will come to an abrupt end when the children leave school? How can we encourage new teachers with a penchant for teaching children with special needs to enter the profession? That is a real problem. How can the families of children with special needs hope to achieve any quality of life, for their children or themselves?

These serious matters must be addressed now. If anyone is in any doubt about that, he should visit Riverside Special School in Antrim — I encourage members of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety to do so. They will see the young adults there, the special facilities that are provided for them, the special care that they receive and the expertise of the staff. When they leave, they should ask themselves whether those young adults are ready to leave, without further provision being made for their care. I support the motion.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom tacú leis an méid a dúirt Comhaltaí eile faoin ábhar tábhachtach seo. I commend the Members who have spoken for highlighting the needs of perhaps the most vulnerable section of our community — young people and adults with learning disabilities. I also commend William McCrea for tabling the motion, for drawing attention to this essential area and for collating the views of the principals of schools such as Cranny Special School in Omagh and similar schools in Magherafelt, Antrim and other places.

The case that he made would strike a chord with a mother from the Dromore area of County Tyrone who recently lobbied me on her situation. I can testify to the parental anxiety and trauma, having listened to her account. Parents are struggling to meet the needs of children with learning disabilities, and they dread their sons or daughters turning 19 and having to face the next stage of their lives with minimal or no provision. Often, they learn only at a very late stage whether their child has secured a place at a day centre.

Even when someone is allocated a place at a day centre, the arrangements are often not suitable. Facilities can be overcrowded, young women and older men can be catered for together, and there can be minimal stimulation — the point has been made already that everyone has right to a meaningful and fulfilled education, not least young people with learning disabilities.

As usual, the Irish language is equipped to deal with daoine le Dia — special people with special needs.

Reference was made to their world shutting down at a time when it should be opening up. The right to education is absolute, and it applies to all. There are equality issues here, and part of the problem rests in the lack of long-term planning in the past. We should be looking at long-term planning and a joined-up approach by the various agencies and Departments, not least the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has said that the boards have been given additional money in the recent past to deal with community services such as this. There are certainly issues here for the boards and the trusts. With reference to the Sperrin Lakeland Health Trust, I want to pay tribute to individuals such as Mr Ciaran Downey and Mr Liam McDermott, who do a great job in difficult circumstances to provide this care. They need more money to do the work that they have been charged to do.

Support for carers and parents is crucial. Often parents need respite urgently, and Dr Hendron adequately covered the area of stress on parents and the debilitating effect it has on the carers who are essentially charged with a huge task. They are often stressed out and at the end of their tether, and there is a cry for urgent help and attention. We need to invest in our carers and the parents involved, because they are the key delivery mechanism of the help at the end of the day. More focus and greater resources are required. Mr Jim Wilson spoke well when suggesting areas of work that the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety might wish to undertake. I am sure that that Committee has a heavy workload, but this appears to me to be an ideal subject for a Committee inquiry. Perhaps Dr Hendron and the Committee members would consider that.

We are all challenged to look at the priority that we give to the issue. Should this area of health provision come before the Executive in the future for Executive programme funds and extra funding, the other Ministers would need to give the necessary support. In conclusion, a LeasCheann Comhairle, I agree that society must not leave young people with learning difficulties behind. We should work hard on the matter, and there should be a joined-up and thoughtful approach taken by everyone.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank Rev Dr William McCrea for bringing this very important subject to the Floor of the House. When I say "very important" I mean very important, because I am speaking as a parent of a daughter with severe learning difficulties, who has gone through exactly what we are talking about today. My family and I know only too well the stresses and strains involved. As we go through life, we must ensure that every effort is made to get the best educational and health provision for people such as my daughter. I must tell the Assembly of my sincere gratitude to all the service providers who up until now — over the past 30 years — have been with Joanne and my gratitude for the enormous educational and health provision that she has received. I hope that that can continue.

Joanne attended Clifton Special Care School in Bangor, and when she reached the age of 19, I recall that our family was really concerned about her leaving that school. We wondered where she was going to go. That was the real concern, and that issue is what we are talking about today. We were almost at our wits’ end, because at that time there was very little available. I am thankful that both Departments came together to find a place in the local adult training centre. Joanne attends there five days a week, and she gets enormous satisfaction from being there. For families and parents, the provision is essential. No stone must be left unturned to ensure that the provision is available to every person in Northern Ireland who needs it.

Other Members have spoken of the need for the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to come together to ensure that the provision is open to everyone. Every establishment in Northern Ireland is under extreme pressure, but, if sufficient funding is not available, the Assembly will have failed. I am sure that Members will agree that that is not an option.

I thank Rev William McCrea for tabling the motion, and I thank the Members who have spoken. I just wanted to relay my experience of this very important subject as a parent. It is unbelievable not to know where one’s young son or daughter is to go at the age of 19. The Assembly must ensure that the provision is made. I support the motion.

Patricia Lewsley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Lagan Valley)

I too support the motion, and I thank Rev William McCrea for bringing it to the House. The care of special school leavers is a frequently overlooked topic that is not given the attention it deserves. Disability is often the poor relation of the Health Service, and responsibility for the care of those with learning disabilities is often left to families or carers. That causes hardship for the carers, who could be perceived as the forgotten people. They work long hours, often under severe financial pressure and with little recognition for their valuable contribution to society and to the quality of life of the person with the learning disability.

A wide range of needs is currently not being met, and the situation will continue to deteriorate if something is not done immediately. The main reason for this is inadequate funding. Most trusts are severely underfunded; as a result, they are unable to provide adequate facilities and services that reflect the needs of people with learning difficulties. When I talk about services, I am referring to the whole range of services, including care workers, therapists and all other healthcare professionals working in the field. I have had reports of centres that have the facilities, but no resources for therapists to provide a service to their clients. Money that should be going to disability services has, all too often, been diverted to acute services, with the result that there has been a continual decline in facilities for the disabled.

Many with learning disabilities depend on the services offered by day centres. It is often the only opportunity that they have for therapy, social contact and the security of a structured environment, which they need to promote proper development of their capabilities. Current provision is not sufficient to deal with demand, and that does not bode well for the future as more clients make the transition from the education system to adult support services. As many Members have said, we have seen in the past how many young people stay in the education system until the age of 19 and then move to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

Over the years, young people with learning difficulties have proved what they are capable of, and many have now been given the opportunity to move into employment, learning and training. Their needs have changed. Many Members, including Rev William McCrea, have mentioned the lack of facilities in their constituencies. Two weeks ago I raised the issue of the adult resource centre formerly known as the Wallace day centre. Members’ contributions today only prove the need for a focused strategy on the services and facilities that should be offered to young people with learning difficulties across Northern Ireland.

Despite the commitment of their excellent staff, many of these centres are not of an acceptable standard to cater for their clients’ needs. Many are overcrowded and, in some cases, because of the demand for services, can be offered only on a part-time basis for a few hours each day or even for just two to three days a week.

Some older adults in my own day centre have been intimidated and told that as they have been there for 10 years, they must now move over and take part-time places to allow new people to join. That puts further pressure on families and carers, many of whom are getting older and finding it difficult to cope. That has a serious effect on the morale of clients and their families, carers and staff.

People with learning difficulties already suffer considerable social disadvantage and, because of their inability to speak out for themselves, they rely on others to speak for them. They deserve a service tailored to their needs, and they should be secure in the knowledge that the service will continue if that is their choice.

The facilities and services must be flexible enough to deal with people of different abilities. The staff who work in those centres must be given adequate resources and support to deliver those services. The right to choose is vital, and there should be choices available, both for those with learning disabilities and for their carers. It is important that there be facilitation to enable them to take control of their lives and to achieve a level of independence commensurate with their conditions.

There is also the social aspect. Every individual is a part of our community and, as such, has the right to the opportunity to develop a social network within that community.

Accommodation in many day centres is under severe pressure, and we are heading towards a crisis situation. More young adults are leaving special schools and need the services of a day centre, and older clients are being moved out to make room for them. What is happening to the older clients, and where is their equality of treatment? Are their needs not just as important? The only solution is to ensure that adequate funding is ring-fenced for learning disability services, and facilities should be brought up to date to reflect the needs of the twenty-first century.

I call on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to bring together a working group with the Department of Education and the Department for Employment and Learning to create a strategy for people with learning difficulties, so that there is a clear and simple transition process for many of those young people and their families, carers and staff to give them the quality of life which is a basic human right.

Sam Foster (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I commend Dr McCrea for tabling the motion. We are talking about the less well off in so far as social and vocational interests are concerned.

The debate has been well rehearsed, and I commend Members for taking part. As a former social worker, I am aware of the great difficulty that arises when the learning disabled reach the age of 19. After that age, there is no place to go. That is sad for the individual and difficult for the carer. Respite is no longer available; stress occurs; the burden of care is further increased; and crisis projects itself tremendously.

However, help may be available. Through some lobbying that I took part in, the Sperrin Lakeland Trust in Enniskillen has provided a new resource at Lackaboy, about a mile outside the town. It has proved very useful, and lots of people have taken advantage of it. Fermanagh College, in conjunction with the trust, has initiated a course of instruction on a two-day-a-week basis, mainly for the younger learning disabled. There is also a scheme initiated by a residential home in the area, known as the Strule/Erne project, based on day-care provision in Enniskillen. Other people can take advantage of such schemes.

Day-care provision is essential to provide self-esteem and to make the learning disabled feel part of life in general. They are enthused by their work, and it is sad that it should be taken away from them at 19 years of age. I found from my experience in social work that carers needs a great deal of respite, and it is unfair to add to their burden.

I support the motion and pay tribute to the carers, tutors, social work staff and all those involved in the tremendous work that they do.

In conclusion, I commend Mr Jim Wilson’s invitation to the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety to pay a visit to his constituency. The experience will be enlightening. I support the motion.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank Rev Dr William McCrea for tabling the motion. The issue is timely and must be discussed. There is little point in the House talking about existing problems unless action is taken to resolve them and to avert further hardship for the learning disabled.

Several Members have said that they have close family members with learning disabilities. My eldest brother has had severe difficulties since shortly after birth. I mention that because it shows that learning disabilities transcend all sections of our society, whether one is Protestant or Catholic, Unionist or Nationalist, rich or poor. No one is omitted. Learning disability can touch any section of our society. In a recent Adjournment debate on people with learning disabilities, which was initiated by Ms Lewsley, I said that we could judge a society on how well it treats its most vulnerable people. What judgement will be cast on our society on how it treats its most vulnerable, in the form of the learning disabled?

In my constituency, there is the Lisburn adult resource centre, Seymour Hill horticultural centre, the Beeches vocational training unit, the Stepping Stones outreach facility and Lisburn YMCA. Outside my constituency, but in the Lisburn Borough Council area, there is a unit at the Dairy Farm centre at Poleglass. Those centres provide for the area’s learning disabled.

Those who work with the learning disabled do their level best to provide a good facility. Unfortunately, it falls short of the real needs of the learning disabled in the area. Lisburn adult resource centre was built for 80 people, but it is being used by 101 people. The centre is not suitable. It has no automatic doors at its entrance for wheelchair users and has no covered area for young people alighting from buses. The site is not integrated, meaning that users of the centre have to go outside to reach another part of the building in all weather conditions, which is totally unsuitable. Too many people with varied behavioural abilities have to use the same room and receive the same service at the same time.

Another problem that must be addressed specifically is that Down Lisburn Trust has adopted a policy of putting the over-45s out of the resource centre to make way for the younger learning disabled. That is totally unfair. There are people in their early 40s who know that pressure will be put on them to leave the centre. Two groups of people will be traumatised. The first group are those who are leaving school to make their way to the centre or to one of the other resources in the area. They will wonder whether a place will be available for them. Their families will want to know what they will do when their children leave school. The second group are those in their early 40s who are worried that they will be put out of the centre to make way for the younger people. Society will not judge that as a good way to treat its most vulnerable people.

There are other opportunities. I know that some people have adopted the Canadian approach of developing a support network of carers and befrienders for the learning disabled who wish to stay at home with their families. I support the people who wish to do that. However, the majority of people do not wish to do that; they want their children to be able to attend the resource centre or another facility where they can mix with other people and have the opportunity to make friends. Those people should be facilitated.

The Department for Employment and Learning must confront its responsibilities. In the past, European funding was reduced, and the Beeches lost the funding that previously was administered to it through that Department. Fortunately, the Down Lisburn Trust was able to take up the slack for this year and ensure that the Beeches stayed open. However, a significant learning and employment element is involved because many of the young people enter employment after they leave the Beeches. I do not accept that the Department for Employment and Learning does not have any responsibility to bear. Why should the learning disabled be treated any differently from anybody else if the work that they do at a centre will generate the opportunity for them to take up employment later on?

The Department for Employment and Learning has a responsibility from which it must not walk away. I trust that the departmental officials will read this debate, take on board what I have said and take responsibility for providing funding for the Beeches and other places that provide training for the learning disabled.

I pay special regard to the Stepping Stones outreach facility. It is a wonderful facility that gets young people involved in working in the community. That is a tremendous asset to the young people and to the businesses that employ them. It gives the young people an opportunity to work in the community and show what they can do.

The agenda for the learning disabled must be driven forward, and Members must address the issues that are being brought before the House. All the Ministers involved must take their roles seriously. They must properly and adequately address the problems in those areas.

John Kelly (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I congratulate Dr McCrea for tabling what is an important motion. Those Members who have met the parents of children in this invidious position know their pain and hurt, which are due to the lack of understanding from the statutory authorities. Anything that the Assembly can do to further projects that promote integration and social inclusion and redress the age-old prejudice and ignorance about learning disability will be welcomed. Anything that the Assembly can do to highlight the difficulties faced by those young people is welcomed.

I agree with and support the idea of a cohesive, collaborative approach between the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Department for Employment and Learning. The care of special school leavers is both a health and an education issue. Primary, secondary and third-level education should be involved in attempting to work out support employment programmes that bridge the serious gap in society that fails to take account of the needs of the people that the motion addresses.

I have a grandnephew who is wheelchair-bound, and I know something about the difficulties that those young people face. They are intelligent young people who are aware of what is going on around them, yet they are dumped on the scrap heap, or sent to institutions or day-care centres to which they are not suited and where they get in the way. Members could sponsor a disabled person from their constituency and bring him to Parliament Buildings for one day a week for as long as they can. Members can take the lead and begin to integrate disabled people into this part of society and give them an opportunity to sit in our offices to see what Members do or to measure what is going on around them. That is something positive that Members could do as an indication of their concern for these young people.

I congratulate William McCrea for tabling this important motion. We have listened to the other Members who have spoken, and I will not reiterate needlessly what they have said. I support the motion.

Bairbre de Brún (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá mé an-bhuíoch den Oirmhinneach Liam Mac Craith as deis a thabhairt domh soláthar chúram lae do dhaoine óga atá ag fágáil scoileanna speisialta a phlé. Tá a fhios agam go bhfuil an-suim ag mórán Comhaltaí san ábhar seo.

I thank William McCrea for giving us the opportunity to discuss this important issue. I regret that I was unable to be present for the start of the debate, but I was hosting a four-Ministers meeting here this morning with Alan Milburn, Malcolm Chisholm and Jane Hutt. However, officials monitored the details of the debate until my arrival, and I have learned a great deal from that and from what I have heard from Members today.

The transition arrangements for young people leaving special schools are set out in section 5 of the Disabled Persons (Northern Ireland) Act 1989, which requires an education and library board to notify the responsible health and social services trust of the date on which full-time education will cease. The trust is then responsible for arranging an assessment of the young person’s needs and the provision of appropriate services. The code of practice for the identification and assessment of special educational needs published by the Department of Education in 1998 provides guidance on how the transitional planning should be arranged.

In the past 12 months, day-care places have been provided for 70 young people who have left special schools, but eight special school leavers have not had their day care needs met. Pressure on day care places is increasing, and waiting lists are beginning to emerge. The four health and social services boards have taken steps to address the pressures on local day care services and they plan to meet anticipated future need.

Young people with learning disabilities have a diverse range of abilities and disabilities that require tailored day-care placement. For those whose level of disability permits, the aim is to provide placements that develop skills and abilities that prepare young people for the working environment and support them in such environments. For those who are unable to access further education, vocational training schemes or supported employment scheme placements are offered in adult training centres or voluntary sector schemes that provide highly supported places.

Some examples of innovative day care projects have been mentioned during the debate. The Bridge Association in Antrim runs a commercial garden centre that employs young people with learning disabilities. In Coleraine, young people with learning disabilities have the contract for the grounds maintenance at Coleraine Hospital and the Robinson Memorial Hospital. Others are involved in a recycling project.

Mr Poots mentioned Stepping Stones, which is a Lisburn-based project that offers employment for young people in a commercial coffee shop. There is also a commercial baking and retail project called the Cookie Company. In Derry, the Lilliput Theatre Company is the only local theatre company that is made up of people with learning disabilities.

Day care is provided for almost half of the 8,500 people with learning disabilities who are in contact with the health and social services trusts. Day care is not provided on the basis of age but on the basis of need. Young people have access to adult training centre places, horticultural training schemes, voluntary sector projects offering arts and crafts training, further education courses and supported employment.

Regionally, there are 3,820 places providing day care for 4,120 people. Thirty people are not receiving any day care and are waiting for a place.

I will outline the action being taken by individual boards to identify special school leavers in the coming years and to develop day-care services. In the Eastern Board an average of 50 young people a year will leave special schools in each of the next four to five years and will require some form of day support, although not necessarily a place in a statutory facility. Trusts adopt the person-centred approach, which has been mentioned, when discussing options with service users and their carers. Trusts co-operate with other statutory bodies in education, training and employment to develop a range of opportunities for those who can access them. They work with voluntary sector care providers to develop some of the locally based schemes that we have discussed.

In the Northern Board area 154 young people will leave special schools in June 2002. The future planning for young people leaving schools there is also a shared responsibility of health and social services, education and training agencies. This year the board will make additional funding available to stimulate additional day-care capacity, which will include the development of small local schemes run by voluntary sector organisations. The board does not believe that there is a need for additional day-care facilities for children who have left school, as has been suggested. Facility-based day care is not necessarily considered appropriate for the needs of young people.

The Southern Board has recognised a need for a more diverse range of day opportunities based on a multi-agency approach. In that regard, it identified a need for day-care provision for an additional 20 people a year over the next five years, which includes six to seven young adults leaving special schools each year in each trust area. Several of them will have complex needs that will require day care five days a week. It is recognised that day care, providing activity and skills training, is vital to support people in the community. The board has identified enhanced day care as an area for development against any additional funding available this year. In the longer term, the emphasis on day-care provision will be to procure a diverse range of tailored schemes with several providers to meet the identified local need. Some of that work fits in with some of the points raised by Members.

Expenditure on learning disability services has increased from just under £89 million in 1998-99 to just over £100 million in 2000-01. An additional £191 million has been allocated to the four health and social services boards to develop community services, including those for people with a learning disability, so some of the money that has been allocated to develop community services in general will be available for the development of learning disability day-care services. Members have drawn attention to, and my Department is aware of, the growing demand for statutory day-care places as the number of more dependent young people who cannot access other day activities such as education, training or supported employment increases.

I will set out my priorities for action for 2002-03. Boards and trusts should continue to expand the provision of day care and respite places for people with a learning disability. The question of carers was mentioned in that regard, and my priorities for action in 2002-03 include provision of extra respite care places. Some of the additional funding, which I have allocated to the four health and social services boards to develop community services in 2002-03, will be available for the purpose of expanding the provision of day-care and respite places for people with a learning disability.

I recently launched the report ‘A Fair Chance’, which records the views expressed by people with learning disabilities about the services they use and how they might better address the equality of opportunity issues that they face. The report has been widely distributed to health and social services and other Departments and their agencies. That will help to inform future service development.

Day care is an essential element in the overall provision of care and support for young people with learning disabilities. However, as has been said today, it must be appropriate to the needs of the individual. In that regard, provision of appropriate day-care activities is a shared responsibility between several Departments and their agencies. That approach will enable those Departments to offer a choice of day-care activities that develop abilities and skills and meet personal aspirations.

Members will welcome the fact that I am meeting Martin McGuinness and Carmel Hanna next month to discuss how our Departments and their agencies can use their expertise collectively to ensure that young people with learning disabilities have the same life opportunities as other young people. Young people with disabilities want to be able to do the same things that non-disabled young people enjoy. That is what social inclusion means. Our responsibility is to ensure that the services we provide help them to achieve that goal. I will work with my Executive Colleagues, the voluntary sector and the rest of the statutory sector to ensure that we remove the barriers to social inclusion and provide the best possible opportunities for people throughout the age range so that people with disabilities and those without disabilities can enjoy and engage in the same range of activities and meet their aspirations in the best way possible.

William McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Members who have participated in the debate for their input and valued support. Comments made in the Chamber today will comfort families who felt that they had exhausted all hope and who are appealing to the Assembly to do something to help them.

I ask Members to consider the motto of Roddensvale Special School in Larne, which concentrates on the three Ps — prepare, praise and progress. The debate has recognised the sterling work of special needs schools in preparing children who have learning disabilities to best meet the challenges that life will undoubtedly throw at them. The debate has also recognised the praise that is readily and freely given to those children not only by their parents and families but also by their teachers and professional staff in the Health Service. That leaves the third element, progress, which is a matter for the Assembly. That is why we are debating how best to make such progress.

I agree wholeheartedly with the Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety who said that there was an equality aspect of the right to education. The Minister said that she agreed with social inclusion and that each child, irrespective of whether he is disabled or able-bodied, should be able to engage in a range of activities and have the opportunity to meet his aspirations. Those are fine and laudable words, but it is important that the Executive help to ensure that money is provided to this most vulnerable group.

Jim Wilson mentioned Riverside Special School. He also spoke about the effects that disability and lack of provision have on every member of a household. I agree wholeheartedly with his sentiment that options are available to young people with learning disabilities, but that they are limited. He referred to oversubscription of adult day care centres in Antrim, and he also mentioned the need for variety and stimulation. All those points are invaluable in meeting the needs of these children. The garden centre run by the Bridge Association in Antrim is a novel and beneficial project. I am sure that Mr Wilson will join me in commending the association on its excellent work.

Mr Wilson said that this issue affects every Member of the House. That is true. One mother from Magherafelt who mentioned the situation to me is a single parent. If her son does not find a placement, she will have to leave her work, which is necessary to enable her to give the best to her child. She wants and needs to work to give her child every possible help while he is in her care, but she is unfortunately being forced into a situation in which she will have to leave work.

If I could put into words the pain and anxiety that was on that mother’s face and on the faces of other parents who have joined me in delegations and deputations to board officers, trust officers and the Minister for Employment and Learning, Members would know that those parents want to give their children the very best. However, they believe that they will not get the best, that they will be discriminated against, because, when the school year finishes at the end of this month, they will sit at home. That is not in the interests of the children.

All the development and effort that has been put in over years in the special schools, which is excellent, A1 provision, will be wasted because many of those children have to take life one day at a time and, therefore, look forward to what is currently provided.

Barry McElduff mentioned a school in his area. A mother’s tears and a mother’s worry over her child are the same in West Tyrone as they are in Mid Ulster. A mother’s care, in Carrickmore, Magherafelt, Larne or Ballymena, transcends all sections of society, as my hon Friend, Mr Poots, said. It is imperative that we give children with special needs the help that is necessary.

Kieran McCarthy highlighted his personal experience. I thank him for sharing with the House the situation that he and his family face with Joanne. I also thank Mr Poots for his personal contribution. No one can really understand except parents who have been there and carried that burden in their hearts. I thank Members for sharing their personal situations. It takes courage. I am sure that many times, like the parents that I am speaking of, they too were at their wits’ end, not knowing exactly what the next step would mean.

Jim Wilson (UUP, South Antrim)

Did the Member hear anything in the Minister’s response that gives any hope at all to the parents who have approached him and me, in Antrim and elsewhere, about the future for their children?

William McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I tried to take in some of the figures that the Minister mentioned. The Minister was recently given a 37% rise in financial allocations, 13% of which was for learning disabilities. That does not augur well, because it is inappropriate and unequal.

This issue transcends everyone and all sections of the community. I am endeavouring to ensure that, at the end of this debate, action can be taken that will ensure that anyone with learning disabilities who is not allocated a place will be assured of and given a place. People have a right to demand that. Parents have a right to demand that their children be treated equally with all other children who have learning disabilities.

The very heart of our motion, and our reason for tabling it, is that this is not happening. I do not care how heaven and earth might be moved to provide places, but it is imperative that funding be allocated to ensure them. A meeting with officers of the Northern Health and Social Services Board has ensured that an additional £140,000 has been allocated specifically for investment in day care. I shall watch with interest how that money is used in that board’s area. Parents are crying out for places for their children, and that money could provide them.

Mr McCarthy said that Joanne is provided for, and we rejoice in that. However, the burden of the debate is that not everyone with equal need is accommodated. Patricia Lewsley said that responsibility is left to families, and on many occasions that is correct. Those parents have been told that when their child reaches the age of 19 it is over to them — there is no provision. Even the special provision during the summer has been taken from them. The door is closed, and parents are left with their children at home.

It is essential that there is provision for everyone and that families are not left to meet their own needs. There is a problem of resources, but the Assembly must provide those and ring-fence them. A clear, concise strategy must be created which makes definite provision for those children. Mr Poots said that society is judged by how the most vulnerable are treated. How will we be judged? After the debate, we will be judged on how we provide for those people. There are so many things to consider. We tell many of these children that their education is finished at the age of seven or nine. Is any other child told that? Many 19-year-olds have the mental capacity of a seven- or nine-year-old, and sometimes in saying that I am pushing it. People see the body of an adult, but they do not see the child. When all the speeches are made and the verbiage is over, we tell those children that their right to education ceases at the age of seven or nine. We hand them over to their parents and provide nothing for them.

A strategy for proper provision between the ages of 19 and 35 is necessary. Those children have a right to achieve their ultimate potential. However, the parents who asked me to propose the motion do not even reach for that. They want their children to have the right to care in an adult centre. It is not the ultimate in provision, but they have a right to it. I agree wholeheartedly.

I need add no more. We will be judged, as Jim Wilson said, on what we do after the final word has been spoken. I trust that the Assembly will support the motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly recognises the lack of suitable facilities for young, disabled persons leaving special education and calls upon the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to make immediate Province-wide provision for the continued care of special school leavers and to alleviate current pressures on day-care facilities.

The sitting was suspended at 1.50 pm and resumed at 2.20 pm

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Private Notice Question: Attacks on Schools

Monica McWilliams (NIWC, Belfast South)

asked the Minister of Education whether he will agree to provide resources for extra security for the schools that have been attacked in the recent spate of sectarian violence; and to make a statement.

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I deplore and condemn the recent spate of attacks on schools and ask those responsible to stop immediately. The attacks serve no purpose and mean that scarce financial resources in the education sector must be diverted from the classroom to meet the cost of repairs.

I have received reports on each of the schools that was attacked, and I pay tribute to the efforts of all those who have worked to ensure that, in so far as possible, the pupils in their care have not suffered and that disruption to the schools’ work has been kept to a minimum. I highlight the work of teaching and non-teaching staff, parents, education and library board staff and officers from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) especially for the way in which they have managed to get the schools functioning again as quickly as possible.

In the past five years, the Department has made an additional £5 million available, specifically to address basic security measures in schools. A further £1 million has been made available this year, and Members will be aware of the additional funding package that was made available earlier this year to deal with the problems in north Belfast. However, the Department’s resources are limited, and it has no additional resources for further security measures at the schools that were attacked recently.

The cost of repairs associated with vandalism is usually met from the budget delegated to each school. However, education and library boards have arrangements to consider what assistance, if any, can be given from available resources to controlled and maintained schools in cases in which the costs of vandalism are excessive. Similar arrangements apply between the Department and the voluntary grammar and grant-maintained integrated schools.

I acknowledge the steps that the education and library boards and schools have taken to reduce levels of vandalism, but we must accept that there are limits to what can be done. We cannot completely secure all school premises without their becoming fortresses. I call on all public representatives and members of the community who are in positions of authority to make it clear that attacks on schools are unacceptable and must stop.

Monica McWilliams (NIWC, Belfast South)

I am absolutely astounded that no financial resources are available for those schools. I remind the Minister that the schools were the victims of arson attacks, not vandalism. If the Minister does not provide principals with extra funding for the private security firms that they have employed to cover the July period, they will have to pay out a considerable amount of money from their school budgets. Given that the Minister’s plans may provide only a short-term solution, what does he intend to do in the longer term? Will he consider employing detached youth workers and more community workers to build better community relations, especially in south Belfast?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

A working group of officials, staff from the education and library boards and the CCMS compiled guidance on school security in 1997 and issued a booklet entitled ‘Security and Personal Safety in Schools’ to all schools. The Department is making substantial bids for additional resources under both the Executive’s reinvestment and reform initiative and the 2002 spending review to meet various pressures across the education service. They include a bid for additional capital funds to enable the Department and the boards to respond to requests from schools for increased security measures.

Members know, and Ms McWilliams is correct to say it, that we have, in the course of the past few years, seen a situation develop in which people in our society think that it is sensible to burn schools and attack chapels, churches and Orange halls. All those attacks are inexcusable and unacceptable, and it is the responsibility of elected representatives and community leaders to be at the forefront of making it clear how unacceptable such attacks are. I hope that people will recognise that the Department’s resources are limited.

The Department always intends to put as much money as possible into classrooms and schools to benefit children. We all know that unless that behaviour is ended as a matter of urgency, those bills will mount and will put intolerable pressure not only on the Department of Education but, indeed, on the entire Executive.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I speak on behalf of the Committee for Education and Ulster Unionist Party members to condemn unreservedly all sectarian attacks on schools, pupils, parents, property, teachers, principals and staff. There is no place in any decent society for people who carry out such attacks.

The Minister will be aware that attacks have taken place on various schools, not only in Belfast but across Northern Ireland. I draw his attention to the sectarian attacks on Strabane Grammar School, in which the school transport was attacked.

I am concerned that the Minister has hinted that his Department will not make available any additional resources to counter those attacks. On behalf of the Committee — [Interruption].

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

Will the Member ask his question, please?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Will the Minister raise the matter with the Executive to ensure an early release of funds to assist schools that, through no fault of their own, are at the sharp end of the sectarian conflict?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I agree with Mr Kennedy. He specifically mentioned the situation at Strabane Grammar School. I found that attack deplorable, and I have no hesitation in saying that everyone must do everything in his power to convince those people that it is not sensible to attack schoolchildren, school property or transport, no matter from where the children come. The people responsible need to catch themselves on and recognise that their behaviour is unacceptable.

I replied to Ms McWilliams that, to meet various pressures, my Department is making substantial bids for additional resources under the Executive’s reinvestment and reform initiative and the 2002 spending review. That will include a bid for additional capital funds to enable the Department and boards to respond to schools’ requests for additional security measures.

Ultimately, we all know that such initiatives could become a bottomless pit. We must address the reason for the attacks, which is why political and community leaders have a responsibility to lead by example. We must show compassion for one another, and we must recognise that we are on the one road together to a new future and that part of that new future is a society in which all children, no matter where they come from, can be educated in peace and with some hope of permanent employment and real prosperity in life.

John (Speaker, Belfast East)

The House will resume with questions to the Minister of Education at 2.30 pm.