Northern Ireland Assembly, 22 September 2008

263 contributions from 62 members. The official report.

Private Members’ Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes to make a winding-up speech, and all other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes. One amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List. The proposer of the amendment will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes with concern the impact that out-of-town retail centres can have on the viability of town centres; and calls on the Minister of the Environment to publish and implement PPS 5.

My party colleagues and I have two reasons for welcoming the fact that the motion was selected for debate. First, retailing and town-centre planning policy greatly impacts on the shape of town centres, which, in turn, affects citizen’s lives.

Secondly, the updating of planning regulations on retail outlets in town centres and commercial leisure developments has become a drawn-out, almost never-ending saga that has entered the realms of farce. Today’s debate must spell out what has happened to the new retail planning policy and when draft revised Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS 5) will be implemented.

A brief history of draft revised PPS 5 will enlighten Members. Planning policy statements are policies on land use and other planning matters. They set out the main planning considerations that planners take into account when assessing individual planning applications.

The current planning policy for retail outlets in town centres is set out in PPS 5, which is titled ‘Retailing and Town Centres’. That document was published in June 1996. Significant changes have taken place since then. Members need only think of towns in their constituencies to get an idea of how many new supermarkets and out-of-town shopping centres have been built since 1996.

If one takes that into consideration, it will be easy to appreciate that PPS 5 is now badly out of date. Although PPS 5 originally made noises about the importance of sustaining and enhancing town centres in an:

“efficient, competitive and innovative retail sector”,

it was, and is, widely criticised as being weak and ineffective.

To quote from another place:

“after several judicial reviews and other legal challenges, PPS5, which was meant to protect town centres, was so watered down that it was almost meaningless and certainly did not protect town centres.”

Those are our Minister of the Environment’s words, spoken at Westminster. I hope that he still believes what he said then and will be implementing the new policy as soon as possible.

In 2000, the then Minister for Regional Development, Gregory Campbell, announced a major policy review of PPS 5, which was expected to take between 18 months and two years to complete. During that period, however, we reverted to direct rule. Some three years later, on 5 February 2003, in answer to a parliamentary question, the then Minister with responsibility for the environment, Angela Smith MP, said:

“The final draft report of the retail consultancy is due to be issued within the next few days.”

I remind Members that that was in 2003. She went on to say:

“The new draft planning policy statement is scheduled to be issued for full public consultation during the next few months.”

Of course, that did not happen.

Later, the Northern Ireland Independent Retail Trade Association (NIIRTA), in its report ‘Nightmare on Every Street’ — I recommend Members either acquire a copy or view it on the NIIRTA website — stated that the Department had advised it that the draft revised PPS 5 would be published in September 2004. Again, that did not happen. It was July 2006 before draft revised PPS 5 was produced and put out to consultation, which was to last until November of that year.

Then, on 15 January 2008, the Department of the Environment (DOE) assumed responsibility for draft revised PPS 5 from the Department for Regional Development (DRD). However, in April, there was a legal challenge to that, and the issue is currently before the High Court. I hope that our courts and the Department will ensure that the matter can be dealt with expediently so that no further undue delays to the long overdue policy change occur.

In an answer to an Assembly question for written answer that I submitted, published on 4 July this year, the Minister confirmed that the consultation period ended on 3 November 2006, but that draft revised PPS 5 is:

“currently subject to Judicial Review and will be published as soon as possible.”

I welcome such comments from the Minister, and I ask that he and his Department ensure that no more delays emanate from that Department, that the final delay in this lengthy process is the court decision, and that all other issues are resolved, excluding any court decisions that may have to be taken into consideration.

The Programme for Government, which has been approved by the Assembly, states:

“It is clear that climate change is one of the most serious problems facing the world. While we recognise that it requires action internationally, we are determined to play our part in addressing this challenge by reducing our impact on climate change.”

Given the Minister’s rather eccentric view that man has not been contributing to climate change, he may need to clarify his view. In particular, he should clarify whether he remains committed to the Programme for Government on the issue, and whether he accepts that implementing draft revised PPS 5 would assist the Planning Service and the Northern Ireland Executive in delivering the commitments that they made in the Programme for Government.

It is now some eight years since Gregory Campbell announced the policy review. That is a ridiculous length of time to develop a new policy. I am not a conspiracy theorist, although others do not share my lack of cynicism — some people do believe in conspiracies, and not just climate-change conspiracies.

Speaking in a Westminster Hall debate on Northern Ireland planning on 1 November 2005, our present Minister of the Environment, when talking about research undertaken by Roger Tym and Partners, said:

“The report, which was published in February 2003, indicated that the Northern Ireland food market was reaching saturation point, with growth down from 1.28 per cent. to less than half that figure. Obviously, that did not suit some people in the Department, because at that stage there was an influx of major food retailers such as Tesco, Sainsbury’s and ASDA into Northern Ireland.”

That report was published in 2003, yet there has been a huge number of out-of-town shopping centres developed since then. Therefore, the balance has shifted.

Indeed, in that same debate, our current Minister of the Environment went on to say:

“The document was delayed, but it now seems to have fallen off the radar completely.”

Again, I ask the Minister to examine carefully how the development of a huge number of out-of-town shopping centres has been allowed to happen since that date. Clearly, there is an urgent need for a review of that policy.

Perhaps when he is summing up, the Minister will reveal whether his planning department is still — metaphorically — in bed with the multinational retailers, which is something that he hinted at some three years ago.

To a lay person, draft PPS 5, which was published in 2006, seems to be a clear and concise document. Draft PPS 5 proposes a more stringent approach to retail development in town centres and out-of-town locations. It also ensures a restriction on commercial leisure development beyond town centres.

The proposed sequential approach would ensure that town centres are considered as the first possible location for new developments, thereby contributing to their sustainability and regeneration. The draft —

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Is the Member saying that he is against out-of-town development and competition coming into Northern Ireland? People are encouraged to see the major retailers coming to Northern Ireland, especially when those large retailers make the press on the issue of their fuel prices. Indeed, another large retailer that has been consistent with its fuel prices is attempting to come into the Province.

With the credit crunch and the current status of the market, is the Member against that competition?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has not listened to what I said. In support of the draft policy, there should be an increased, stringent requirement to consider seriously locations in existing town centres. That does not rule out development elsewhere. However, it places a greater onus on those who wish to develop outside of town centres to provide a stringent case as to why that proposed development cannot be developed in town centres.

The policy has changed in Great Britain, and it is shown to have assisted in securing town centres. Perhaps the Member wants town centres with vacant shops.

My colleague Mr Cree will refer to the difficulties that have arisen in the Bangor area following the development of a significant number of out-of-town shopping centres. Balance is important in all of this, and the new policy will provide that.

William McCrea (DUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

No, my time is nearly up. I hope that the Minister will also ensure that no further delays emanate from his Department.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member’s time is up.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move the following amendment: Insert after the second “centres”

“, whilst recognising the benefit to the Northern Ireland retail sector of some development of regional significance”.

Although I have proposed the amendment, I have some sympathy with the motion. The issue of how we keep small businesses and, more importantly, businesses in town centres must be addressed.

There are some shocking statistics. For example, over 2,000 local shops close each year, and there are issues about how to make and keep those shops sustainable in town centres. Furthermore, over 50,000 businesses will go out of business by 2015. Therefore, we need to take a more balanced approach to the whole aspect of where shopping facilities are developed in town centres.

The other aspect of moving to out-of-town centres is that — and I know that the Minister could not possibly disagree with me — burning more fossil fuels and increasing one’s carbon footprint contributes, in some way, to climate change. That would never do. [Laughter.]

Iris Robinson (DUP, Strangford)

Does the Member agree that there has been a significant climate change, in that the DUP won the seat in Fermanagh and trounced the Ulster Unionist Party very well?

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, there is definitely some sort of carbon footprint all over Fermanagh at the minute.

On a more serious note, we must take issue with where and how we develop town centres. We must recognise the economic and social benefits of developing our town centres. However, do we do that at the expense of a lack of competition in the retail sector and, more importantly, without recognising areas of regional significance? That is why I have introduced this amendment. Three areas of regional significance are identified in the proposed PPS 5: Belfast city centre; Londonderry city centre; and one non-city regional centre, Sprucefield.

There is a need for such out-of-town regional centres. It is unreasonable to make the argument that anyone will shop every week in the likes of IKEA; that is impossible. People will travel long distances to places such as IKEA once or twice a year. I have no difficulty with the fact that we have an IKEA store in Belfast. People were travelling to Scotland by the busload and taking much-needed finance out of the Northern Ireland economy before the store came to Belfast. We need those businesses in our regional centres.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Three areas are recognised for their regional significance. Does the Member believe that other areas — possibly in the west — should be designated for their regional significance?

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Those are the three areas identified under draft PPS 5. It is up to the Minister to decide whether any new areas should be added, or for the Member to take up the matter with the Minister.

Some businesses are needed in the regional centres, and one controversial business is John Lewis, which has made up its mind to go to Sprucefield or nowhere else in Northern Ireland. The same argument applies to John Lewis as does to IKEA. People are continually taking cheap flights to England to spend their money, and that hard-earned money should be spent in the economy of Northern Ireland. John Lewis is needed at Sprucefield, and it is talking about bringing 1,500 much-needed jobs to Northern Ireland. Will that be to the detriment of some of the local businesses? I doubt that. People have already made their choice and have travelled and spent their money in John Lewis stores in the UK. It is better to keep that business in the Northern Ireland economy.

Another issue — and no Member will disagree with this — is that we need construction jobs to kick-start the construction industry in Northern Ireland. John Lewis would be a major investment of over £200 million, and Northern Ireland sorely needs that investment at this time in view of the crisis in the world economy. Can we afford not to have John Lewis in Northern Ireland? In light of the current situation, the answer is no, as that business would be drained out of the Northern Ireland economy.

We have an amazing planning system in Northern Ireland. There has been a five-year delay on the John Lewis development, and that delay — whether we like it or not — is costing Northern Ireland. It has cost us 200 jobs so far.

Of the 900 jobs that John Lewis originally proposed to create, only 700 remain. The five-year delay has cost 200 jobs, and it will cost many more. The proposed 1,500 jobs will not be available if we continue on the road down which we are going. A decision must be made about that particular planning matter. However, a decision must also be made about draft revised Planning Policy Statement 5. That is the end of my little rant about John Lewis. However, there are significant regional centres where regional businesses such as John Lewis and IKEA must be placed.

William McCrea (DUP, South Antrim)

I accept that regional centres should be developed in their own right. However, towns such as Antrim have, in many ways, been decimated by out-of-town shopping centres. We must be very careful. It is essential that we put life back into town centres, and planning policy can assist that.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

That is why I stated that a balanced approach is required and why I had no great problem with the motion. However, we must take cognisance of the fact that regional businesses need a regional centre. A more balanced approach on town centres is required.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Member for saying that he has no particular difficulty with the motion. Will he explain to the House how the amendment would benefit the motion? What is missing from the motion that the amendment will add?

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

It seems that the Member has difficulty in listening to what people say in the House. I have stated several times that regional businesses must be located in regional centres. Does the Member argue that Belfast, Londonderry and Sprucefield should not be designated as regional centres? That suggestion would not be received politely in those areas.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

No, I have very little time left.

That is why I moved the amendment that the Assembly accept that regional centres be allocated in draft revised Planning Policy Statement 5 when it is implemented.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the Speaker back after the recess.

Tyrone is also undergoing serious climatic change, and I congratulate the county on winning the all-Ireland senior football championship for a third time.

I thank the Members who have brought the motion to the Chamber. Sinn Féin understands the reasons for raising the issue and sympathises with the sentiments that have been expressed. Smaller retailers have genuine fears that they will be squeezed out by multinationals building superstores on the outskirts of towns.

Draft revised PPS 5 recognises Belfast, Derry and Sprucefield as regional shopping facilities and aims to direct new retail developments of regional significance to those areas. That will help to attract major new investment to the region in a way that will also sustain and enhance town centres in the North.

The draft policy promotes the primary retail core of the other cities and towns as first choice for the location of new retail developments, but it must also reflect the Programme for Government’s commitment to tackling regional disparities. The valuable and enjoyable shopping experience of existing thriving town centres will be sustained, and existing town-centre businesses will reap the benefits of increased trade from a higher footfall in the town and city centres.

Sinn Féin acknowledges and supports the contribution of small-to-medium traditional businesses, many of which are family-run. Those businesses make up the vast majority of the retail sector here, and they enhance the economy greatly. Many people feel that the implementation of a policy to protect our town centres from becoming ghost towns is long overdue, especially in the current economic climate, when many job losses in the retail sector are feared.

Sinn Féin believes that any policy that is implemented must ensure that small businesses can play their part to bolster not only the economic vibrancy, but the social fabric of our towns and cities. The draft policy makes provision for retail development in those towns and cities that cannot accommodate large retail development in their centres due to historical or heritage constraints or lack of suitable sites. That will allow towns and cities that wish to expand the retail sector and challenge similar-sized competitors for a share of the market base to do so, which will, in turn, attract shoppers to the nearby primary retail core.

Any policy that is published must be capable of being implemented. It must allow our urban areas the capacity for economic growth, while protecting the vitality and viability of our existing town centres. Ultimately, it must benefit the consumer by offering best value for money.

In conclusion, we recognise the need for the publication and implementation of PPS 5, as called for in the motion. However, we must also ensure that, under the current reform of the planning system — which was initiated by the previous Minister of the Environment — measures are put in place and proper guidance is provided for local government to protect town centres and existing businesses while achieving the necessary economic growth. Go raibh maith agat.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

When a motion of this type first came before the Assembly on 2 October 2000 — a long time ago — it was enthusiastically voted down by the DUP and some Ulster Unionists. We were given a lecture by Ian Paisley Jnr on natural market forces. Nothing was said about balanced communities or the excesses of the multinationals. The present Minister of the Environment made a contribution at that time, too — he told us that one can buy Tayto crisps at Tesco in Knocknagoney.

Today, there appears to be a realisation in both parties that there is a need to regulate out-of-town shopping centres in a manner that provides for some sense of reality and acknowledges that those shopping centres wipe out our town centres, promote degeneration and leave the most vulnerable people with no shops, no banks and no post offices. Eight years on, post offices are now an endangered species. The whole process of killing off businesses in villages and small towns is already well under way. Members should know that, in Britain, more than 60% of villages and sizeable towns are left with no shopping facilities at all — not a single shop is left; no bank, no post office, no pharmacy.

A couple of years ago, I visited a town in Ohio called Ashtabula. I am sure that most people have never heard of it, and I cannot think of any good reason why they should have. The shops are mostly closed, as they have all fallen victim to out-of-town shopping malls. There are still a couple of pubs, and, as it was St Patrick’s Day, I decided to have a tipple. I met a man who claimed that he was a direct descendant of an Indian tribe. He was a nice individual who told me that his wife had gone to do the shopping. When I asked him whether he was expecting her back soon, he told me that shopping was a two-day event. His wife had to stop overnight at her sister’s house because it was too far to make the journey in one day. That is the reality of out-of-town shopping centres, and if legislation is not introduced soon, we will head down the same dreary road.

However, we cannot put all the blame on the planners. If the opening of a new multinational store were to be announced today, I know Members who would be scrambling for airtime to welcome the hundreds of new jobs promised. Yet does anyone ever try to research the impact on the hundreds of people who will lose their jobs as a direct result of such developments? I do not think so. Does anyone attempt to evaluate the jobs on offer? How many of them offer the minimum wage? Has any research been carried out on the impact on family life as pressure is exerted on employees to work antisocial hours away from family and loved ones? I think not.

Those matters must be controlled in a way that creates a level playing field and curtails the power of the big retailers that do not care about local communities — their only interest is in sending the profits back home. Those profits do not circulate locally, and such development does little to promote other businesses.

In recent times, multinationals have made an interesting switch from groceries to drapery, electrical goods, banking, insurance, and anything else that fills their shelves. Yet — and I hope that Sammy Wilson is listening — a small business in the countryside cannot get off the ground because of PPS 14, which bans development in the countryside. Not only is there no control over the size of the multinationals, but there is a bias against local people who wish to start up their own businesses. Even inoffensive advertising signs, which cause no harm to anyone, are being taken down, and the business people who erected them are being dragged through the courts.

It has been eight years since the issue was first debated in the Chamber. That is too long to wait for action if we are serious about retaining our town centres and villages. If we do not take action now, we will end up with a situation similar to that in Ashtabula.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I, too, welcome the motion. As John Dallat said, there is a significant difference between the attitudes expressed in the Chamber this morning and those expressed when we last discussed the issue.

The present retail planning policy in Northern Ireland is around 20 years behind that in Great Britain, and Roy Beggs outlined some of the reasons that have led to that delay. I am sure that all Members can provide examples of excessive commercial development, specifically in the retail sector, outside historic towns across Northern Ireland, rather than it being used to regenerate town centres and to promote a more sustainable future. One only needs to look elsewhere in the world to see that if we do not modify our planning policies soon, we will go down a very dangerous road and encounter serious problems.

Economic activity varies in historic market towns across the region. Such activity overwhelmingly relates to whether there has been modern shopping development in those town centres, or whether it has been displaced to out-of-town sites. If one looks at comparisons between Ballymena, Omagh, Newry and Downpatrick, one will see different activities taking place inside and outside the core centre. In almost every case, developments that are situated in town centres have thriving social lives and economies, but developments that are situated predominantly outside town centres experience the complete reverse.

I named Omagh and Newry among the list of market towns, and I was amazed that Cathal Boylan, as an Armagh man, referred to Tyrone winning a certain match at Croke Park yesterday afternoon. As Lord Morrow has disappeared, Mr Bresland has not mentioned it, and most of the Tyrone Members are not here, perhaps I should flag up my Tyrone roots and congratulate the team on its success. I apologise; Lord Morrow is in the Chamber.

There are real issues that must be addressed. We have totally failed to ensure that we maintain the vibrancy of those towns and the vibrancy of community life, which crosses over into other aspects.

I confess that I was slightly surprised by the wording of the amendment. I wondered why it did not include the word “Sprucefield”, because PPS 5 readily acknowledges that there is a regional case for it. Planning Policy Statement 5 is designed to protect the integrity of district towns across the whole of Northern Ireland.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Does the Member recognise that, under the current wording of the motion, the IKEA development would have been turned down?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am not sure whether that is entirely the case, but there is a significant difference between IKEA-type developments — so-called roof-rack shopping — and the difficulties that have arisen from out-of-town convenience shopping.

I reiterate the point that my constituency colleague from South Antrim made: there are real differences between the shopping niches that were originally outlined for Junction One and The OUTLET outside Banbridge and those centres where retailers are given permission to add on normal convenience shopping, which should be located in a town centre, rather than at a regional or special-day-out centre.

Planning policy has completely failed to learn that lesson by first allowing some of those developments to proceed and then changing the internal nature of those developments. Those points are relevant when it comes to Sprucefield, but they are also relevant to the way in which other centres are used in other places.

On that basis, I welcome the points that were made specifically about the strategic nature of town centre development. The draft revised PPS 5 contains key points, such as greater accessibility, the protection of existing retail provision, the addition of other suitable town centre uses and the promotion of urban renewal, whose implementation will be vital if town centres are to be kept as living, working places. If we do not address those points, and if we allow commercial activity to be driven out to out-of-town centres, all sorts of other activity that characterise a town centre will be lost.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I presume that the Member has already made the same points that my colleague from South Antrim Dr William McCrea made in relation to Antrim town. Will he identify where Antrim town centre is and where the retail centre is, because the town has not had one? The retail outlet at Tesco moved before Junction One was opened.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

We will debate the minutiae of Antrim town’s edge-of-town or out-of-town centres elsewhere. The Member has made a valid point, but what matters is the difference between those places that have developed centres at the edge of town, such as in Newry, and those that have done so completely out into the countryside. There are two key aspects to the enhancement of town centres; first, they promote the opportunity for shared space and a neighbourhood’s social cohesion; secondly, they are far more sustainable. That is something that all of us, including the Minister of the Environment, should recognise.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

Politicians and the owners of small businesses across the Province have been calling for the publication of the draft revised PPS 5 for many years. More than ever, we are witnessing the increasing pressures that small and medium-sized businesses in Northern Ireland are facing. We must recognise that the vast majority of businesses in the Province are small. However, thousands of people are employed by small and medium-sized businesses, many of which are family-run and are the heart and soul of many local communities.

It has been predicted that many such businesses could be lost over the next few years as they come under increasing pressure from larger superstores and out-of-town shopping centres. The effect of that can be that local shops close down, and residents must travel longer distances to buy basic necessities such as milk and bread. There is little doubt that some towns and villages across Northern Ireland are at risk of being gutted out, although the premise of the motion — that all out-of-town shopping facilities are somehow bad — is false.

I support the amendment tabled by my party colleagues from Lagan Valley, which is more balanced in its recognition of the impact of some out-of-town shopping developments.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member should look carefully at the motion, which did not rule out — nor did I in my comments — the potential development of some out-of-town shopping centres. Town centre developments, or edge-of-town developments, which some Members mentioned, could be more stringently assessed before greenfield sites are chosen at separate locations. I ask the Member to reflect on that and not to try to change the comments that I made.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I welcome that clarification. It is important to point out that the amendment mentions the development of sites of regional significance.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

No, I will not give way again. I will allow the Member’s colleagues to sum up whatever he wants to say at the end of the debate.

I welcome the amendment, which is more balanced in its recognition that some out-of-town shopping developments can be important for the region and the locality. They can also be important to local people. We must remember that many of our constituents want access to a range of products at a competitive price at a location at which they can park easily. That is particularly important now, as families face tighter economic pressures and economic considerations are the top priority.

If new facilities are handled correctly, many of them can provide jobs for local people and generate economic prosperity for a certain region. Members have mentioned many towns that could be under threat from out-of-town developments, including Larne in my constituency.

There are plans for a large supermarket in Larne, near the harbour. There will also be a bowling alley and a cinema as part of that overall development. Far from being bad for the town, the development will provide many desperately needed facilities. The majority of people in Larne travel to Carrickfergus or Ballymena for their weekly shopping and go to neighbouring towns for entertainment. It is better that they can buy their weekly shopping in their own locality and have somewhere to go at weekends and evenings, rather than leaving the town for both shopping and leisure.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

Is the Member seriously suggesting that people from Larne travel to Ballymena — two towns that have been grouped together in the new council boundaries — given his previous assertions about how utterly disconnected the two towns are?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I appreciate that it is a two-day trip, as Mr Dallat mentioned, and I shudder at the thought of such a journey. However, it is important that people can shop in their local area and that, where those facilities are not available, we should be supporting efforts to make them available. It must also be recognised that although major developments should be located in town centres, ideally, as proposed in the draft revised PPS 5, it is often the case that the company in question will decide where it wants to locate. It is then for the town to decide whether to let the opportunity pass by.

I listened to the comments from the proposer of the amendment, who made reference to the proposed John Lewis development in Lisburn. In such a situation, when the choice is between Lisburn and Dublin, it is fairly clear which will benefit the local region more. Nonetheless, it must be recognised that town centres are under threat from large superstore developments, and we do not want our town centres becoming deserted. It is, therefore, important that the policy makes clear that out-of-town developments should be avoided unless they bring something of particular significance or importance to the local area or region or the development is not viable in a town-centre location. The key is achieving the right balance between safeguarding town centres and allowing major out-of-town developments that can be of regional importance.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Does the Member also accept that if too many restrictions are placed on developments that are not accepted as regional centres, the viability of those already in place could be affected?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I concur with the Member’s comments; they match some of the things that I have said. In fairness, the aim of the policy is to ensure that town centres are promoted as the first choice for such developments where possible: therefore, Members should have no difficulty in supporting the amendment.

The Department for Social Development (DSD) is also seeking to regenerate many town centres, and it is important that DOE works with DSD to prevent town centres being killed off before efforts to regenerate them can begin. A blanket ban on out-of-town develop­ments cannot be introduced, as that may not always be in the best interests of local people or towns that may benefit from such developments. I support the amendment.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the three Members for bringing the motion to the House. It is vital that PPS 5 is published and implemented, notwithstanding any legal difficulties, and that the Assembly demonstrates that it is acting in the best interests of small and indigenous retail businesses.

Local retail businesses reinvest profits into the local economy rather than taking them out, and they are much more likely to give financial support to the local community, through sponsorship of local sports, to take just one example.

If Members have looked at the Northern Ireland Independent Retail Trade Association’s document, ‘A Nightmare in Every Street’, to which Mr Beggs has already referred, they have seen that it shows that local food schemes return 50% of turnover to the local economy compared to as little as 5% from the much larger stores.

The inclusion in draft revised PPS 5 of the possible adverse effects on the vitality and viability of existing town centres is to be welcomed. The sustainability of the retail sector in towns and villages is an issue that the Assembly must prioritise because that also has an impact on those who supply the retail sector, local farmers being the prime example. The draft revised policy identifies town centres as the first choice for new retail developments and establishes a number of common-sense criteria for those seeking to develop away from the retail core of a town or village.

Many town centres, some of which have been referred to, are beginning to resemble ghost towns, and the smaller local hub towns are particularly vulnerable to out-of-town development. Therefore, there is already a need to examine economic regeneration in such areas to ensure that consumers have a good variety and choice of services in their own community, on their own doorsteps, rather than driving 10 or 20 miles to the bigger towns and cities.

In the South, retail planning guidelines similar to those proposed were introduced as far back as the year 2000, which, in itself, demonstrates how far behind we in the North really are, as other Members have already mentioned.

When we are talking about bringing more retail businesses into town centres, we should be considering the traffic implications also. The requirement for more park-and-ride schemes and better public transport to ease the pressure on town centres should be incorporated into any future planning policy.

The pressure on small retail businesses in our economy must not be underestimated. In addition to pressure from multinational companies, the businesses face competition from the new market of Internet shopping and the increasing costs of overheads. A level playing field is needed, so the sooner that PPS 5 is published and implemented, the better.

The planning policy statement has been left on the shelf by direct rule Ministers for many years, and I hope that the Minister will provide assurances that it will be implemented when the legal issues have been dealt with, because many small businesses are already under severe pressure and are trying to keep their heads above water. Go raibh maith agat.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

There was much press comment when the Minister of the Environment, Mr Wilson, was appointed, and it overshadowed his first, and best, decision. Mr Wilson turned down the planning application for a Tesco hypermarket at The OUTLET in Banbridge. Like many public representatives, I welcomed that decision strongly. It was a courageous decision, given the nature of the company involved and the huge pressure that was on his Department to approve the planning application.

Why did I, and practically every other public representative, welcome the decision, given that the new store, based on Tesco’s figures, would have had an income of £72 million in its first year? We welcomed the decision because that figure is more than the combined total annual income of all the shops in Banbridge — the impact on the town would have been enormous. That is an example of the problem that we face. In addition to £72 million income, which many regard as a conservative estimate, there was sufficient land on the site to double the size of the store at a later date. We have discovered that, if the principle of a large out-of-town shopping complex is accepted, it is almost impossible to resist applications for further expansion, as is happening in Newry. The impact of a store that had the capability of expanding would have been devastating to Banbridge, as similar stores have been to other parts of South Down.

Thirty years ago, Rathfriland was a bustling rural town that served the requirements of a wide hinterland. Today, many shops there are empty, and all that is left are takeaways, charity shops and solicitors. Any town that gets into that predicament is in difficulty. A drift of retail out of Kilkeel has already begun, and it does not take a genius to see what is happening: stand in any town in the South Down area on a Saturday morning and one will see the traffic heading to Sprucefield, Forestside and Newry. The powerful attraction of such shopping centres is leading to a loss of fabric in our small towns.

I also represent Ballynahinch, where a major application has been submitted for a large out-of-town shopping centre. Although the anchor tenant is unknown, we suspect that it will be one of the large multinationals, excluding Marks and Spencer and Asda. The impact of such a shopping centre will be phenomenal, because the town is already showing severe signs of economic stress. It takes very little for a trend of closure, where stores such as Iceland and SuperValu leave a town, to become inexorable. Once that happens, the town is on the skids.

It is important that there is a policy to provide guidance. There was an application for a Tesco store in Ballycastle, which had more square footage than all the retailers in Ballycastle and its surrounding towns and villages combined. The impact of such a store on places such as Bushmills, Armoy and Cushendun would have been enormous. Therefore, a consistent policy is required. I understand the difficulties that the Minister faces, but tackling that difficult issue must be one of his priorities.

I am glad that, in Banbridge, when councillors met traders and realised how much they would lose, they, at least, changed their minds. Initially, they supported the application.

I have become the patron saint of lost causes in Down District Council. It voted in favour of the new superstore by 21 votes to one — the one being my vote. Councillors see the pound signs on the large rates cheques that will come in every year from one multinational food purveyor. They do not see how that will result in gradual loss of income to the district as shop after shop in the town closes and, therefore, no longer pay rates.

I hope that councillors will have a bit of sense and realise that it is absolutely vital to maintain the vibrancy of town centres for future generations. The opening of big multinational stores is a quick fix that must be avoided, because it ruins the special character of many of Northern Ireland’s towns.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Much has been said during the debate about the market position that is enjoyed by large multiple-retail businesses and about how their out-of-town centres disadvantage small and medium-sized businesses, leading to the running down of town centres and depletion of shopping facilities in local villages. Those points are crucial and have been articulated well by my colleagues and other Members. However, PPS 5 should also be considered alongside wider political and economic concerns.

The Assembly must grapple with rapidly rising fuel and food costs and how to ameliorate their impact in the short term, during the coming winter, on the most vulnerable people in society. In the short term, fuel prices have steadied and, in some cases, abated. Fierce competition has reduced food prices. The hard fact that we must face, however, is that the era of cheap food and fuel is over. Government and society will be forced to make adjustments in order to accommodate the impact of that. How the Assembly shapes the future will affect how people fare with increasing food and fuel bills in the long term. The Assembly must help people to use less fuel and to eat healthily with less money.

Where does PPS 5 come into that? It is tied in with the trend towards high-density development in town centres, coupled with the drift away from low-density out-of-town sites. That is reflected in the move away from private to public transport, walking and cycling. In order to make that happen, town centres must be regenerated and their daytime and evening economies promoted. Bangor’s town centre is an example of that, which has been caused by what the Americans call the “doughnut effect”. In Bangor’s case, it is half a doughnut, because it is surrounded by the sea on one side. Many other towns have been similarly affected, some of which have been mentioned in the debate — Ballynahinch, Comber, Ballyclare, Omagh, and Larne, to name but a few.

Town centres already have the necessary public-transport linkages to enable people to move away from increasingly costly private transport. Northern Ireland has a significantly higher than average carbon footprint. People here burn more fuel for each person than in other parts of the UK, whether they consume that fuel directly or as electricity.

Irrespective of arguments on global warming and mankind’s contribution to it, fuel has become relatively expensive and is getting scarcer. It costs more to heat a home and to get around. The Assembly must facilitate the public in order to reduce their needs. PPS 5, which supports town-centre regeneration and development, is essential to ensure that people do not need to burn unnecessary fuel to heat their homes and to shop, and makes living in easy reach of a town centre more attractive when that is set against less dense and more remote housing.

Another factor that PPS 5 will buttress is freedom of choice and flexible retail development throughout Northern Ireland. It ensures that a wide range of shopping activities is open to the entire community. That flexibility and access to a wide range of shopping activities maximises comparison shopping — consumers can easily compare prices, quality and other considerations when making purchases. A more competitive and less captive retail environment leads to increases in the range and choice of goods. That is at the very heart of the healthy operation of free competition; the mechanism that ensures benefit to consumers. Out-of-town shopping centres benefit major multiples precisely because that environment curtails comparison shopping and enables the store to dictate the range and choice of goods. That acts to the consumer’s disadvantage.

PPS 5 will improve the facility for comparison shopping and add to the quality of life in our towns and cities. Additionally, it has the potential to reinvigorate local communities through providing local services and shops that are responsive to local people and can take their needs into consideration. That has the potential to benefit the elderly and vulnerable, so it should be welcomed.

Let me be clear: we are not trying to exclude major retail companies and developers, but, if we are to help the public to cope in the longer term with more expensive fuel and food, we must enact those measures that shape our built environment and infrastructure so that people can cope better. Many of them will be in the hands of the Department of the Environment. PPS 5 is a step along that road, and it should be implemented without further delay. I support the motion and urge the Minister to take immediate action.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I support the motion and my colleagues’ amendment. I support the motion in spite of some things that Members from other parties have said in support of it.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Explain.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I hear a cry of “explain” from Mr McCrea. I shall refer to a couple of remarks that were made.

William McCrea (DUP, South Antrim)

That was Basil.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I should have said “Mr Basil McCrea”, lest either of my colleagues of that name be insulted.

Mr Roy Beggs Jnr referred to conspiracy theories that would fit in neatly with either ‘The X Files’ or an Oliver Stone movie.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

Mr Beggs has had his say. I have only a short time in which to speak.

We have also heard about the dreadful prospect of cohabitation, which Mr Beggs has supposedly identified. Mr Dallat painted a picture of working for a multinational company that was comparable to life in the Gulag. People who have the misfortune to work for such companies are evidently in some way detached from their families. It would appear to be akin to working a six-month stint on an oil rig, with the destruction of family life that that might entail.

When it comes to having retail choices, we want to see fair competition and a balanced approach to planning. It must be acknowledged that out-of-town shopping centres provide a useful service to people. The volumes of people who use those centres demonstrate that a demand for them exists. Bangor’s problems, which have already been mentioned in the debate, are well documented. I am also aware that Bloomfield Shopping Centre and Retail Park and Springhill Shopping Centre are geographically close to communities and have made a major, positive contri­bution to life in North Down. A balance must be struck.

We cannot go down the line of draconian economic protectionism that tries to shut out the real world and that, like some latter-day King Canute, tries to pretend that we can turn back the waves. We can, however, ensure that competition is fair, and fair competition lies at the heart of draft revised PPS 5. It is not about banning all out-of-town shopping centres but about creating an environment that benefits town centres. It gives a preference to new developments in town centres and focuses activity there. The reinvigoration of our town centres is vital.

Mention was made of the effects of out-of-town shopping centres on existing retailers. We should remember that, during the many years of the Troubles, when many multinational companies would not even look at Northern Ireland, mall traders kept the economy going.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

We owe a debt of gratitude to those people.

Vital environmental and social components are needed in order to reinvigorate town centres. All those issues must be taken into account. In ensuring that town centres are reinvigorated, it is crucial that we do not look only at draft revised PPS 5 and at planning issues but that we ensure that there is joined-up government.

Consider Holywood in my constituency of North Down. Leaving aside the long-running issue of Queen’s Parade, the redevelopment of the town centre and frontage is being held up at present by a legal dispute between DRD and DSD over a car park. Some of the solutions are planning related and concern retail, but others go beyond that and involve the provision of joined-up government. We must cast the net wider.

In the final minute remaining to me, I shall speak to the amendment.

It is also the case that, whatever protection we afford town centres and, indeed, however PPS 5 is framed, there are going to be developments of major regional significance, which must be allowed for.

John Lewis would be a welcome addition to Northern Ireland; unfortunately it has been held up for too long. Look at the benefits of IKEA, which is situated on the edge of North Down and Belfast. Although that type of development causes some degree of displacement activity, it is geared at a regional centre, which means that money that would otherwise be spent across the water or down South is retained in Northern Ireland.

I am strongly in favour of PPS 5. I am sure that the Minster will outline the principal problem of the legal difficulties regarding the Rushmere case. There is a strong commitment, from Members on these Benches and across the Chamber, to support PPS 5, to see it implemented as soon as possible, and to have it balanced with fair competition in our town centres.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I thank the Members who tabled the motion on this important issue, about which the public will want to hear the views of their public representatives.

A flourishing town centre can enhance the quality of life for those who live, work and visit there. Town centres are a key asset in many of our communities; they provide a wide range of shops, employment, leisure and cultural uses. They can, at least sometimes, be reached by public transport, and they give access to the essentials of living for so many.

Shopping has always been a key use of town centres. However, it is the diversity of uses, to which some Members made reference during the debate, that makes town centres successful. When we lose that diversity — whatever aspect that may be — town centres come under threat. Other uses, apart from shopping, have an important role to play. Indeed, with urban regeneration we try to attract people back into town centres, to live as well as to shop.

Of course, as mentioned by a number of Members during the debate, it is one thing to increase the number of shops in a town centre; however, if people do not have easy access to those — because of inadequate road systems, parking or public transport — the town centre will not thrive. People will simply turn their backs on it even though the facilities are there. There are a lot of ingredients involved, and the debate has been useful in highlighting that this is not just a single issue. The problem will not be remedied simply by increasing the number of shops in town centres.

I want to deal with some of the points that Members raised. First, I wish to deal with the proposer of the motion, Roy Beggs. I was pleased by his speech, and I hope that it gets full coverage in the local papers in East Antrim, because for the past number of months, he has been implying that I cannot do two jobs: the one that I do at Westminster and the one that I do here. I am glad that he has extensively reported my involvement in Westminster, the speeches that I have made there and my involvement in debates.

Secondly, I am glad that he recognised that much of the delay in publishing and implementing PPS 5 has been due to the period of direct rule. Promises about its publication and the consultation period were made mostly during that time. That was one of the problems that we faced during direct rule. Mr Beggs asked that there be no further delay, as did a number of other Members.

Indeed, the Member for North Antrim Daithí McKay made the same point about the legal difficulties and asked how quickly PPS 5 could be introduced. I will look at the legal situation, even though the judicial review has been delayed again until November. If it is possible, I will introduce PPS 5 — I do not want to see it being delayed.

Equally, however, I do not want to see PPS 5 issued and then further delayed because it has been brought forward prematurely. My intention is to publish PPS 5 as soon as possible.

William McCrea (DUP, South Antrim)

Will the Minister assure the House that the delay in the meeting of the Executive caused by Sinn Féin will not delay the issue of PPS 5?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

If that were the case, I would have made the point a long time ago and well before I reached this point in the debate. [Laughter.]

I assure the Member that I would not have missed that point: any delay has not been due to the fact that the Executive have not met. I hope that the Executive will meet so that if I get the go ahead to issue PPS 5, it will not be delayed because of the reason that the Member has suggested.

The Member for East Antrim Roy Beggs referred to the report prepared by Tym and Partners. Had he looked at the detail of that report he would have seen that there is still some potential for growth in retailing, albeit that Tym states that over the next five years the difference between demand and supply will probably be met as a result of the planning applications that are in the pipeline.

I expected the Member for South Antrim Mr Ford to mention climate change. I am disappointed that he did not — perhaps he thought that it was not necessary to do so because it had been raised by the Member for East Antrim Mr Beggs. There was some predictability that it would be raised.

To the Member for East Antrim, all I can say is that 97% of CO2 emissions are not produced by human activity. The UK produces 3% of the remaining 3%, and Northern Ireland is responsible for 3% of that 3%. The Member can do the maths if he wants. Even if we stop driving cars, heating our homes, producing electricity and other things that produce CO2 emissions, we would save three ten-thousandths of 1% of the CO2 emissions in the world. I do not think that PPS 5 is going to make a huge difference to climate change. I am glad that the Member clarified that he wanted a balanced approach, because that was not apparent in the speech itself.

I wish that the Member for Newry and Armagh Mr Boylan’s attitude and approach to PPS 14 had been as balanced as his approach to PPS 5. He made a number of very important points. First, we need regional shopping centres in Northern Ireland to attract people from outside Northern Ireland — from the Irish Republic or elsewhere. Those centres can play an important role in regenerating a larger area.

Secondly he pointed out, quite rightly, that not all town centres are suitable for large retail development, either because of historical significance or building constraints. Those towns should not be denied the opportunity to have large-scale retail facilities.

Another Member said that there are a number of largish towns in Northern Ireland that do not have those facilities; that, as a result, people travel long distances to other towns, and that that may rob town centres of the people who would come there for other purposes. He also made an important point about planning reform and the reform of local government in that there will be ample opportunity for public representatives not to blame the delay in PPS 5, not to blame the planners at headquarters and not to blame the planning officer at the divisional office, but to take those hard decisions themselves.

However, that is good, because all the issues that have been discussed here today can then be judged at a local level, where the local knowledge that people have demonstrated in this debate can be brought to bear.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Will the Minister give some consideration to the west in relation to developments of regional significance?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I think that draft PPS 5 is flexible enough to ensure that that will be the case.

Mr Dallat, as usual, was very good at overstating his case. He paints the picture that in the future, we will find a situation in Northern Ireland where we may have to travel for two days to do our shopping. I am not married; however, if I were, and my wife told me that she had to go away for two days to do her shopping, I would not look for a draft PPS 5 but a private detective. [Laughter.]

No matter how devastating the policy that is brought forward will be, I cannot see the emergence of the picture that Mr Dallat has described. Mr Dallat mentioned, of course, the delay in PPS 14 and the impact of that on rural businesses. I wish that PPS 14 had been introduced much sooner, although I have to say that Mr Dallat’s own party — and one of his colleagues in particular — was perhaps partly responsible for the fact that PPS 14 did not get through. However, when PPS 14 comes into effect, the policy on farm diversification will be in line with rural development policy. I accept Mr Dallat’s point: it is important that rural communities have the opportunity to have local shops and commercial activities. The policy should reflect that.

The Member for South Antrim Mr Ford made an important point in his speech —

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

Just the one important point.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Just the one important point. I know, I am handing out too many accolades today.

Mr Ford pointed out that in some cases, where edge-of-town, or out-of-town, shopping centres have been allowed, different activities have then developed in town centres. We cannot run away from the fact that we have a network of shopping centres, some of which could perhaps be described as inappropriately located; nevertheless, they are there. It is important that when we look to regenerate town centres — and it will be important for local councils in future — that sometimes we look for those town centres to offer different things rather than simply bringing the big shopping centres into the town. However, that is not always possible. If the shopping centre is at the edge of town, what can we do to ensure that the people who go there then come into the nearby town? What activities can we offer to encourage people to come into our town centres?

Mr Ross, a colleague from East Antrim, made the important point that we cannot have a policy that is totally restrictive. Some people have called for a moratorium on any new shopping centres in Northern Ireland; however, there is still some unmet demand for them. Mr Ross mentioned Larne, where a recent survey showed that 56% of people leave the town to shop in Carrickfergus or Ballymena. In doing so, the potential for those shoppers to drift into the town centre of Larne and do other shopping is totally lost. That illustrates the point that where there is an anchor store that attracts people to stay in their town, there is the potential for benefit to that town.

Mr McKay from North Antrim made the very useful point that if we are going to regenerate town centres and put commercial activity into them, we must make sure that people can get into them. Whether that is achieved through town-centre car parking, or through park-and-ride schemes — which may not always be possible in some of the smaller towns, because the economies of scale are not available — it is an important and necessary part of the whole regeneration action.

The Member also asked me — and I believe that I have already answered this question — whether, as soon as the legal issues have been dealt with, I will proceed with PPS 5. I have made it clear that, if it is possible even before the legal issues have been dealt with, PPS 5 will be proceeded with.

I welcome the endorsement from the green wing of my own party for the Banbridge decision. I am sure that I will not receive much more praise from Mr Wells, but he made an important point: even under existing planning policies, whether an application was turned down in Ballycastle or in Banbridge, the policy is not so loose that it cannot be used to turn down bad applications.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Minister’s time is almost up.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have only two other people to mention. The Member for North Down Mr Weir spoke about Bangor, where there is still a thriving town centre, and I hope that —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Minister’s time is up.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We live in a time of change. Industry has changed — Bombardier, for example, is embarking on a £500 million spending spree, as it were, in order to update its equipment and to make itself more competitive.

In agriculture, 100 years ago, people were working with horses and ploughs. Now, there is sophisticated machinery in the fields. In health, there is now keyhole surgery, open-heart surgery and transplantation, none of which would have been dreamt of years ago.

Retailing, too, has changed. I well remember going with my mother to the wee shop in the countryside where three ladies packed stuff into boxes, and off we went with our groceries. That was a Friday ritual. Then, along came Stewarts, Crazy Prices and Wellworth’s, and those wee stores gradually closed. Then, along came Tesco and Sainsbury, and Stewarts and Wellworth’s and Crazy Prices gradually closed. That is the nature of life — change takes place, and things move on.

I remember going into Lisburn town centre, as it then was, to a hardware store on Bow Street, where my father had an altercation with a traffic warden who was booking him while he was carrying bags of cement out of Jefferson’s to the boot of his car. The traffic warden thought that he should have parked 200 metres away, but I believe that my father got that situation sorted out.

That was the nature of shopping then, but things change and move on, and some people do not seem to realise that we are moving on. I am disappointed that Mr Dallat is the only SDLP Member present — oh, I see Mr Burns; I apologise. However, Mr Dallat was his party’s only contributor to the debate, and that did not go very well for the SDLP — it was rather an inept effort.

Two days’ travel time for shopping is something that would happen among the Amish, and perhaps Mr Dallat wants us to become an Amish-style community. That may be fine for some, but many people will move with the times. One cannot stop time. “Stop the world. I want to get off” is not a policy in which we will engage in Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland must, therefore, move on in respect of retailing. Change is the reality. There are, in fact, many women from Ulster who go for two days’ shopping, but they are going to London, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Manchester or Liverpool — and they are going to the big stores across the water in order to benefit from facilities that are not available in Northern Ireland.

The motion in the names of Mr Beggs and his colleagues, which Basil McCrea seemed to be supporting during his comments to Mr Craig, would have had the effect of stopping, and working against, the likes of IKEA coming to Northern Ireland. My wife, after a trip to IKEA in Glasgow, told me that 11 busloads of people had taken the boat over to IKEA that day. That is a fact of life.

Every year, thousands of people from Northern Ireland travel to mainland Britain to avail themselves of stores such as Harvey Nichols, John Lewis, IKEA, and House of Fraser, and they cannot be stopped from doing so. Consumers will go to shop in those stores whether or not branches exist here. Not to provide those stores in Northern Ireland serves only to lose business for Northern Ireland.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Does the Member acknowledge that, in the published draft PPS 5, Belfast, Londonderry and Sprucefield are designated as “regional shopping centres” of “regional significance”? Therefore, large stores, such as those to which he referred, could qualify for planning permission under that new criterion in the future.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Mr Beggs omitted to raise the issue that I highlighted and has missed the point, but that is not unusual. Under the terms of the motion and the original PPS 5, IKEA’s planning application would have been turned down. Is IKEA’s presence in Northern Ireland good or bad? Anyone who goes to the IKEA car park will discover that a considerable number of cars have Southern registration plates. IKEA brings money and jobs into the Northern Ireland economy, whether Members wish to acknowledge it.

In Banbridge, The OUTLET’s car park also contains many cars that are registered in the Republic of Ireland. That fact that is backed up by retailers in the town centre who confirm that, since the opening of The OUTLET, they handle many more euros than was the case previously. Therefore, out-of-town shopping centres are not necessarily evil or detrimental to existing town centres.

When Marks and Spencer originally opened at Sprucefield, business increased in Lisburn town centre, as it was then. The Marks and Spencer store generated an increased footfall, and the town rose to the challenge and developed in association with it. In fact, Lisburn’s main shopping streets — Bow Street and Market Square — suffered not because of Sprucefield, but as a consequence of the development of Bow Street Mall.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member must bring his remarks to a close.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

People must recognise the facts that I outlined.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I am not sure whether the Member who provided a summary of the amendment is for or against the main motion, because his argument seems to be that it was better to allow the development of out-of-town centres. In fact, the main tenor of the debate has been one of confused rambling from many Members.

I was pleased to hear from Mr Craig, who reached his normal heights by making an interesting, erudite, thought-provoking and generally well-presented case. I am sure that the BBC will pick up on the manner of his contribution. However, I am not sure that he addressed the main issue.

I hear an interesting interjection or two from the Back Benches. I acknowledge that Mr Paisley Jnr, who has just spoken from a sedentary position, has an intense interest in planning, as does the previous Minister of the Environment, Mrs Foster.

However, as Mr Dallat said — and he took some abuse for trying to explain his point — people’s positions change. He also highlighted some inconsistencies in past approaches, and it was right and proper for him to do so.

The DUP has an undoubted interest in planning, and I share Mr Wells’s view that it is, perhaps, one of the most pressing issues that the Assembly can tackle. I am genuinely looking forward to seeing how the Minister, Mr Wilson, will deal with it. I am confident that he will bring his normal flair and elan to the process and take note of the point that Mr Wells raised about the flood of people who are leaving Kilkeel and where they go. In fact, he said as much about Larne and various other places.

On the topic of interjections and contributions from Members, I am interested in Mrs Robinson’s inter­vention, during which we could not get through the issues without hearing about a change of climate in Fermanagh and a change of climate in Tyrone. The Minister of the Environment said that climate change may be happening, but that it is not his fault. However, the real change of climate is the deep freeze that has set in about the Assembly. The Executive are not meeting, and not a single Front-Bench Member of Sinn Féin is here to talk about these issues. Where are they?

[Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member has the Floor.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Some Members do not understand the metaphors that they tried to develop about climate change and freeze. This place is going into deep freeze because two parties are incapable of governing. That is why those parties are over at the Labour Party conference. They are trying to work out a shoddy, back-room deal — as they normally do — instead of being here to deal with real issues. I welcome the Minister’s assertion —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. It is important that the Member returns to the motion.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I welcome the Minister’s assertion that he will push PPS 5 at every available opportunity. The UUP motion calls for that, and we want that to happen. The content of PPS 5 and the points that the Minister will take on board as part of the consultation process should rightfully be debated and brought to the attention of all Members.

Some Members were unsure about what my colleague Mr Beggs said. He argued for a proper, sequential assessment of whether it is right to put a —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member’s time is almost up.

Ian Paisley Jnr (DUP, North Antrim)

Your time is up.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

In fact, the Member’s time is not up. Mr McCrea, you have 10 minutes.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Speaker. No doubt, I will be allowed some injury time as well.

As other Members have said, we want an opportunity for fair competition. I recognise Mr McKay’s point that 50% of income that is generated in local stores is returned to the economy, whereas in multiples, the figure is sometimes only 5%. However, one must also recognise that people shop in multiples because they are cheap and convenient; they provide a service that people want. They also provide distribution channels throughout the United Kingdom for many local food producers.

As has been mentioned, parking is one tool that should be provided to planners and local councillors. One of the biggest issues in planning is accessibility. A way must be found to get over the tyranny of the parking warden, which Mr Poots raised with reference to Lisburn. It is certainly necessary to have people to try to manage the traffic, but a lack of convenient parking is a disincentive for shopping.

Let me just mention dual mandates. We were encouraged by the Minister’s comments in the House of Commons, which were made when the Assembly was suspended and more time was available. The Minister suggested that there was some sort of confusion or conspiracy.

We want clarity, forward motion and an end product, because the lack of a clear and concise planning policy is hindering our economic development.

I turn to the wording of the motion. Alastair Ross, quite properly, outlined that the John Lewis store must be built at Sprucefield; otherwise, it will be built in Dublin. It is obvious that it should be built in Lisburn. That project should begin now, and we should provide tools and appropriate legislation to ensure that quick and timely decisions can be made. Furthermore — and I know that some other Lagan Valley colleagues have spoken — there is a discussion about the expansion of Tesco in our fair city. Mr Ford said, and he received an accolade from the Minister for the contribution —

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Please do not mention that.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I will mention it. The problem is that, once a development is agreed, will it be utilised for the prupose for which it was originally intended? Other Members said that development breeds further expansion that changes the character of the process.

As I said earlier — and Mr Speaker, rightly, directed me to return to the motion — it is important that the Assembly starts to work together on issues of mutual importance. It is important that Members identify issues that unite us and on which we agree. Therefore, we are happy to accept the amendment proposed by our friends and colleagues in the DUP, despite — as Peter Weir said — some of the arguments that could have persuaded us otherwise. We hope that the entire House will urge the Minister to introduce a timely, well-considered PPS 5 in order to enable our country’s economy to progress. I support the motion and the amendment.

Question, That the amendment be made, put and agreed to.

Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes with concern the impact that out-of-town retail centres can have on the viability of town centres, whilst recognising the benefit to the Northern Ireland retail sector of some development of regional significance; and calls on the Minister of the Environment to publish and implement PPS 5.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

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

Alban Maginness (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes the concerns regarding the conviction of John Torney who maintained his innocence up to his death in July 2005; recognises that evidence has emerged that was not made available at the trial and that the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has yet to investigate fully all aspects of this new evidence; expresses concern at the lack of progress by the CCRC in complying with the Order of the Divisional Court in the High Court made on 22 June 2005; and calls on the CCRC to review all aspects of the case with a view to its referral to the Court of Appeal.

The motion refers to the murder convictions of John Torney at Belfast Crown Court on 4 March 1996. At that court, presided over by the then Lord Chief Justice, Lord Carswell, John Torney pleaded not guilty. However, by a majority of 10 to two, the jury convicted John Torney — a serving RUC officer — of the murder of his wife, Linda, his 11-year-old daughter, Emma, and his 13-year-old son, John Jnr.

The dreadful events of 19 and 20 September 1994 in Lomond Heights, Cookstown, which resulted in the death of Linda Torney and her two children, represent an appalling loss of human life and devastating tragedy for the Torneys and their extended family.

In April 1997, an appeal by John Torney Snr against his conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. In July 2005, aged 50, John Torney suddenly died in prison of a heart attack. He protested his innocence to the very end.

If one accepts the prosecution case, the cold, calculated murders were clinically carried out by John Torney Snr using his service revolver. Worse still, he cynically and audaciously blamed his young son for carrying out those killings. As the trial judge said in his concluding remarks, the murders were planned and executed with fiendish ingenuity and ruthless precision. If that remark were true, he was caught in flagrante delicto. In that situation, how could one really say that those murders were ingenious? If he planned to do something such as that, why did he do it in such outrageous fashion? There is a question mark over that conclusion.

On the other hand, John Torney’s defence was that his son killed his mother, Linda, and his sister, Emma, with John Snr’s service revolver and then committed suicide. On the basis of the evidence presented to the court, the jury preferred the prosecution case. Both before and after John Snr’s death, the Torney family — in particular, Hilary Torney — has pursued a relentless campaign to have John Snr’s murder convictions overturned. They have done so with great courage, dignity and impressive industry, and they have lobbied many people. They have come to the Assembly today, Mr Speaker, to seek your support and to advance his case with the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in order to seek a referral to the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal.

None of us can determine the truth of what happened on that tragic night in 1994. However, as Members of the House, we can consider a number of factors that have come to light since the trial and the unsuccessful appeal to the Court of Appeal. Those are factors that the Torney campaign and I believe cast a significant doubt on the way in which the police originally investigated the killings and on John Torney’s ultimate conviction for murder, based, as it was, on the evidence that was gathered as a result of that investigation.

On 31 October 2000, BBC ‘Spotlight’ broadcast a documentary about the Torney case. That documentary was seen by Dr Samuel McGuinness, the former headmaster of Cookstown High School, which both Emma and John Jnr attended at the time of their deaths. The programme reminded Dr McGuinness that he had had a conversation with a senior investigating officer in the week commencing 26 September 1994. That senior officer told Dr McGuinness that there was evidence of sexual activity between John Jnr and his sister, Emma, on the night of the murders and that semen was found on the girl’s body. The same police officer indicated that no mention of that would be made at the trial, as they did not want to rub John’s nose in it.

During the programme, Dr McGuinness realised that the defence at the original trial had not known about that at the time of the trial. He reported his conversation to the defence solicitor, Mr Keith Burrows. That was — and still is — a very significant development and was referred to CCRC and the Police Ombudsman’s Office for further investigation. Neither of those investigations was exhaustively concluded, and the Police Ombudsman’s investigation is still notionally extant. A formal decision by the CCRC not to refer the case to the Court of Appeal was made in 2002.

Ultimately, that led to a judicial review in 2005, in which Lord Justice Kerr ordered the CCRC to carry out further investigations to identify the police officers who spoke to Dr McGuinness.

Despite being investigated by the CCRC and the Police Ombudsman, the three police officers who were recorded as having been in contact with Dr McGuinness at the time gave statements denying that a conversation of the sort described by Dr McGuinness ever took place. Indeed, one police officer, whom I will not name, claimed that he had not spoken to Dr McGuinness about any sexual history between John Torney Jnr and his sister, Emma. However, he went on to state:

“In fact I do not recall being aware of any information regarding possible sexual history between the two during my time on the investigation team.”

That is an extraordinary statement, which demands careful explanation, because the same officer took a statement from Miss Laura Mattingley on 24 September 1994 in which she recalled how Emma Torney told her, inter alia, that her brother, John, had sexually abused her during the summer holidays.

Despite Dr McGuinness’s assertion that he would be able to identify the investigating officer by sight or photograph, no opportunity has been afforded to him to do so, and, therefore, the matter is stuck at that point. The significance of Dr McGuinness’s allegation, if true, is that at an early stage of the police’s investigation, they ignored or suppressed evidence of actual sexual contact between brother and sister. Either allegation, if proven, would have had a major bearing on the case if it had been raised at the original trial or subsequently at the appeal. Therefore, it is essential that that matter be exhaustively investigated by CCRC or the Police Ombudsman. It is crucial that Dr McGuinness is afforded an opportunity to identify the police officer. Such an opportunity has been withheld for technical legal reasons, which, in such a grave case, must be removed in order to determine the truth.

It is clear that at an early stage of the police investigation, two schoolgirls recorded in written statements Emma’s allegations of sexual abuse by her brother. That opened up an alternative line of inquiry, which the police, for whatever reason, did not pursue. Presumably, believing that it was an open-and-shut case, they deemed that no further lines of inquiry were necessary.

Dr McGuinness’s serious allegation is, in effect, the key to having an in-depth review of the case. The CCRC takes the view that there is insufficient evidence to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal and, although the Police Ombudsman’s investigation is not yet concluded, no formal communication has been received from that office since 2006.

Members should note that at no stage did Mr Torney make any allegations of sexual abuse by his son. That allegation arose from the statements made by the two pupils at his daughter’s school.

My time is short; there are other matters that should be covered, which I cannot cover. There are aspects of the forensic evidence in the case that are unsatisfactory — for example, Emma Torney’s pyjama suit was lost, and, therefore, it was not possible for it to be forensically examined. That might have revealed evidence of abuse. Furthermore, the absence of gunpowder residue on John Jnr’s hands raises serious questions. Those matters must be thoroughly reviewed in order to bring some sense of finality and justice to the case.

Any reasonable observer would agree that there is grave doubt about this case, and it should be further investigated by CCRC until firm conclusions are reached and the matter can be referred back to the Court of Appeal.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member’s time is up.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I support the motion. However, leaving aside matters of justice and the rights and wrongs of what was done in court, we should, above all, keep in mind the fact that we are faced with a human tragedy.

It was a tragedy that led directly to the deaths of three people — John Torney Jnr, Emma Torney and Mrs Linda Torney. John Torney Snr is also deceased. Above all else, our thoughts should be with the families concerned — not just the Torney family, but the Duff family as well. The Duffs are Mrs Torney’s relatives.

The Assembly must, and I believe that it does, adopt a solemn approach to such issues and treat them with gravitas, sensitivity and caution. I say caution because I appreciate that the Torney family has been told by its legal team that this motion may be the best way to apply pressure on the issue.

However, I am reluctant in principle for the Assembly to deal with individual court cases. It is wrong to have a trial by Assembly. As has been indicated, this House is not a court of law. Indeed, because neither Mr Torney Snr nor Mr Torney Jnr are here to answer the allegations against them, it is difficult for Members to make judgements or to stray into the area of allegations.

I appreciate that, in proposing the motion, Mr Maginness had to outline the circumstances of the case. However, it is difficult when people are not able to defend themselves or comment. As the Assembly is not a court of law, I do not intend to go into the details of the case. I cannot say whether Mr Torney Snr is guilty or innocent. I cannot say whether the conviction is safe or unsafe. Even if I were to have a clear view in my own mind, it would not be appropriate for the Assembly to pass such a judgement.

After reading the case files, I am convinced that, as Alban Maginness said, there are a range of issues that must be considered. They include the evidence of Dr McGuinness, the procedures that were applied, some of the evidence that has come to light since the case was last considered by CCRC and concerns about the forensic evidence. I do not know whether those issues are enough to say that the conviction was unsafe. That is not my judgement to make. However, they raise serious questions, and there must be a proper examination of the Torney case.

Alban Maginness (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast North)

The Member is right to say that the Assembly is not a court of law, nor does it intend to act as a court of law. The facts that I adverted to provided a necessary foundation for the debate.

The Member should know, however, that whether or not one is convinced of Mr Torney’s innocence, the fact remains that doubt is caused by the allegation raised by Dr McGuinness. That doubt and those allegations must be investigated thoroughly and brought to a conclusion. One cannot predict what those conclusions will be, but, nonetheless, the doctor’s allegation raises such serious doubt that the CCRC must be urged to reinvestigate thoroughly, as suggested by the High Court.

That is the substance of the motion, and I welcome the Member’s support in that respect.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mr Weir will be allowed an extra minute for that intervention.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

As I said, I am reluctant to go down the road of opening up court cases in the Assembly, however justified that action might be. I am concerned about the precedent such that that would set. There are clear issues in the Torney case. I am not in a position to judge whether that will lead to a declaration that the conviction was unsafe. That would also be wrong for me to judge. However, it is clear to me that there are serious issues that must be examined. Consequently, in order to ensure that the maximum amount of scrutiny is brought to bear on the case, it is right and appropriate that the evidence in the case be re-examined by the CCRC.

Members on this side of the House support the motion.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. In a way, I broadly endorse Mr Weir’s comments. On behalf of my party, I support the broad thrust of the motion. Like Mr Weir, I do not want to delve into the poignant and difficult issues that have been raised in the Chamber this afternoon.

This morning, I had a first-hand briefing from members of Mr Torney’s family, and I appreciate the time that they took to do that. In the early hours of 20 September 1994, three members of the Torney family lost their lives in tragic circumstances, and that was followed by Mr Torney Snr losing his life in 2005. We are discussing an immense and horrific family tragedy, and I extend our sympathy for and solidarity with all the family members concerned.

I am not in a position to second-guess the original judgement or what may be produced in a further trial or review, but some of the issues that have been raised seem to resonate with previous experiences, unfortunately. I do not intend to single out what may or may not be deficiencies in the original case. However, issues have been raised in relation to forensics, the identification of officers, and additional evidence that may have come to light recently.

Therefore, Sinn Féin supports the motion on the broad basis that a wide range of issues has been raised by the Torney family and others, such as the legal advisers and other experts. Indeed, the courts have asked for several of those matters to be examined. On that basis, we call on the CCRC to consider the case afresh and examine any new evidence. Ultimately, people have been bereaved and have suffered, so if there is evidence of an injustice or of a failure of the justice system, we want to see that redressed. On that basis, Sinn Féin supports the motion.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful for the opportunity to lend my support and that of my party to the broad thrust of the motion. The circumstances surrounding the death of the Torney family in 1994 were harrowing, and it must be very difficult for the wider family circle to come to terms with that. Equally, the death of John Torney in 2005 must still be difficult for those who are trying to clear his name.

I agree with the comments made by Mr Weir, a Member for North Down, that this is a legislative Assembly and not a court of law. Therefore, all Members must take due care and consideration with what we say and how we say it.

I, as well as other Members, have met representatives of the Torney family on several occasions. They have presented the evidence surrounding the case and conviction of John Torney Snr to me. Having considered the material presented, I am confident that significant evidence is now obtainable that was either not considered or not made available at the time of the trial. I am also convinced that avenues of investigation exist that must and should be followed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

The testimony of Dr Samuel McGuinness, former head of Cookstown High School, is crucial to the case. In October 2000, Dr McGuinness provided a sworn affidavit in which he stated that he had been informed by a policeman of significant evidence that could have altered the outcome of the murder trial. However, that evidence was not used. Dr McGuinness has not subsequently been given the opportunity to correctly identify that police officer. However, in June 2005, just weeks before Mr Torney’s death, the Lord Chief Justice ordered the Criminal Cases Review Commission to take such steps as it may to utilise the evidence that was presented by Dr McGuinness. To my knowledge, that has not happened.

I am also disappointed that the former Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, when asked to investigate the allegations made by Dr McGuinness, apparently concluded that she found no evidence to substantiate those allegations. From the evidence presented to me and others, that seems a peculiar decision.

In any potential miscarriage of justice, there will always be grey areas and intangible aspects that cannot be measured. However, Mr Torney and his family have always protested his innocence. The prosecution’s case must be further scrutinised and any evidence that was missed or lines of investigation that have not been pursued must be examined.

The basis of every democratic society is the rule of law and a fair trial. The great thing about democracy is the influence and input of ordinary people, but that also can be a weakness. Human frailty can lead to mistakes — intentional or unintentional — and those can lead to miscarriages of justice. A measure of any democratic society is its ability to limit the occurrence of miscarriages of justice and the steps that it takes to investigate those, if and when they occur. It is not inconceivable that any one of us, or our families, could be accused of a crime. In that event, we would hope that the correct processes would be applied and the fullest investigations made to ensure the right and truthful outcome.

The circumstances and potential new evidence surrounding the case warrant further and fuller investigation by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. It must comply fully with the order of the divisional court of the High Court in 2005 —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member must draw his remarks to a close.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

To fail to do the aforementioned would be an affront to the Torney family, and a slight to the legal and democratic principles of Northern Ireland. I support the motion.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The Alliance Party also supports the motion. First and foremost, the events under discussion must be viewed as a tragedy for the Torney family and the wider family circles of those involved. I include Mr Torney Snr, who died in prison while still protesting his innocence. As we have heard, a number of issues — seemingly unresolved — may have impacted on his incarceration.

However, the Assembly is not a court of law and, specifically, it is not a court of appeal. None of us in this Chamber can say with any degree of authority what did or did not happen on that night in 1994. Our concern must be whether justice has been done. To know that, we must be sure that the various agencies involved have considered all the material facts and evidence, and that the checks and balances that exist in our criminal justice system have operated properly.

Several issues of dispute and uncertainty are still outstanding and relate to the motive of those convicted and potential scenarios; forensics, relating specifically to the night in question and the issues raised by Mr Maginness regarding evidence that had not been properly examined or seen to be examined; and the nature of the family relationships, including the allegation of sexual relationships in the family, which has not been explored fully in court.

Where can we go from here? There are two issues to be considered. The first, and probably the more minor issue, relates to the performance of the Police Ombuds­man’s office. The family reported, disappointingly, a lack of response from that office to allegations that they made as to how the case was investigated. Indeed, they have not had an acknowledgement of those allegations.

The second, and broader issue, relates to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which is a UK-wide body and not directly accountable to the Assembly. Nonetheless, there are issues as to whether it sufficiently and rigorously implemented the decision of the Court of Appeal in 2005. That alleged failure may be an issue that the family might wish to challenge further through a further judicial review. The broader issue is whether the case should be referred back to the Court of Appeal on the basis of new evidence and facts that have come to light or have been reviewed and reanalysed?

I recognise that the Assembly should tread with a certain degree of trepidation when looking at individual cases. However, while bearing in mind that the CCRC is not accountable to the Assembly, we, as elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland, have a duty to speak out when we believe that there have been systemic failures or the potential for systemic failures. Public interest warrants a fuller examination of the situation, and there is the potential for further consideration under our legal system.

Alex Attwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast West)

I welcome the debate for the reasons outlined by Stephen Farry, who said that there is a duty to speak out when there has been potential systemic failure and injustice. That should be the touchstone against which the Assembly should be judged and should judge itself. We have a duty to speak out when there is potential systemic failure and injustice. If, during its life, the Assembly uses that touchstone to guide it in respect of such cases, then it will affirm itself as being responsive to the community in the North that it serves.

The motion is one of a school of motions to have come before the Assembly in the past few months and, no doubt, will come before the Assembly again. In April this year the Assembly endorsed unanimously a motion in respect of the case of Raymond McCord Jnr. Without trying to usurp the authority of the courts or second-guess any other criminal justice institution in the North, the Assembly, nonetheless, made a decision on what could be a case of injustice.

A few months before that, a DUP motion on the case of a miscarriage of justice in the Republic of Ireland was similarly endorsed unanimously on the Floor of the Assembly.

I hope that, in the coming weeks and months, the Assembly will have an opportunity to debate similar cases of alleged miscarriages of justice, or alleged cases of injustice, not least the case of the people killed by the British Army in Ballymurphy in 1971.

I acknowledge Peter Weir’s comment that the Assembly must not usurp the authority of other justice institutions in the North. However, when families have little option, it is appropriate for the Assembly to make statements about alleged miscarriages of justice or cases of injustice. We have done that in the past, and I trust that we will do so in future. Although we must act judicially, we should not shirk that responsibility.

That is the best way in which to view this debate. The debate should reassure everyone in the Chamber and outside that we are acting appropriately and with discretion in such cases. Sadly and necessarily, as Alex Maskey indicated in his intervention, a new profile and new energy is often required in cases of miscarriages of justice or cases of injustice in order for the wrong to be remedied. John Torney’s family are strongly convinced of his innocence, and they hope that the Assembly will help to give a new profile and new energy to the efforts that they have made over many years to rectify what they and many other people see as a great wrong.

Four essential issues arise in the case of John Torney, and other authorities must deal with those issues quickly. Alban Maginness referred to the first issue — the allegation that there was an abusive relationship between the son and daughter who so tragically died with their mother. If the police knew of that allegation in the hours immediately after the tragic murders, was that evidence ignored or suppressed, as the family and Alban have said? If proven, the suppression of that evidence would give rise, prima facie, to whether there should have ever been a prosecution, trial or conviction, never mind a life sentence. That matter goes to the heart of the case but is still not being fully faced up to by the authorities with the relevant responsibilities.

The second issue concerns the conduct of the police officers who had responsibility for investigating the case. According to a sworn testimony, one of the three police officers told a witness — a former headmaster of Emma and John Jnr — that, although there was evidence of a sexual and abusive relationship, it would not be pursued by the police. In statements to the Police Ombudsman, all three police officers denied that one of them gave the witness that information, despite his sworn evidence to the contrary. That is at the heart of the level of confidence that we can have in the police’s investigation of criminal matters.

The third issue concerns the continuing role of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which is responsible for dealing with miscarriages of justice in Britain and Northern Ireland. As Stephen Farry indicated, the High Court directed the CCRC to take all necessary steps to identify the officer who gave the information to the headmaster. That was three years ago. If any of our constituents told us that a court of law in Northern Ireland had directed another responsible body to conduct all necessary steps to identify those officers more than three years ago and that that had not yet happened, what would we say about the inordinate delay and the alleged technicalities, which Alban Maginness mentioned, that caused the delay?

That matter goes to the heart of the process and affects confidence in how the CCRC conducts its affairs, and it must be addressed immediately.

The fourth point was highlighted by the Member for Newry and Armagh Mr Kennedy; namely, that a Police Ombudsman investigation returned a negative outcome in respect of the family’s complaint. A further complaint was raised with the Police Ombudsman over two years ago, but, at this stage, no conclusion has been reached, and no information was brought to the family’s attention during that period.

It is more than legitimate for the Assembly to shine a spotlight on cases of that nature when responsible bodies such as the CCRC on the one hand, and the Police Ombudsman on the other, have not, after such inordinate delay, reached conclusions or completed the task set for them by the High Court in the North. It is legitimate for the Assembly to say that justice delayed is justice denied. A case that takes so many years to come to the point of review and satisfaction is surely one about which the Assembly should speak out loudly.

In conclusion, I welcome the support of Members, particularly the comments from members of the Ulster Unionist Party and the Alliance Party. Although I am aware of the words of caution that have been expressed in other places, I will repeat what I said at the outset of the debate: if this House cannot speak up for those families who no longer have the opportunity to speak for themselves, we will have failed in our responsibility and obligation to them. As our history of the past 40 years has shown, there are many families like the Torneys. Many people have suffered wrongs that need to be rectified and much hurt endures. We should judge ourselves on how we have helped those people when we consider what we have contributed to the betterment of our society.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes the concerns regarding the conviction of John Torney who maintained his innocence up to his death in July 2005; recognises that evidence has emerged that was not made available at the trial and that the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has yet to investigate fully all aspects of this new evidence; expresses concern at the lack of progress by the CCRC in complying with the Order of the Divisional Court in the High Court made on 22 June 2005; and calls on the CCRC to review all aspects of the case with a view to its referral to the Court of Appeal.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

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

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I beg to move

That this Assembly calls on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to introduce policies to reduce the level of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder; where necessary co-operating with other agencies and Departments; and to introduce dedicated teams to assist families affected by Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.

I did not bring this subject to the House to be negative or judgemental or to scaremonger. I state categorically that I understand that no one deliberately intends to harm an unborn child. This debate is not an attack on the Minister or the professionals who deal with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) daily. I sincerely believe that they deserve our utmost respect and admiration. I tabled the motion to raise awareness of the effects of the disorder. I want to highlight the devastating effect that alcohol or drug misuse can have on an unborn child and the need of families, who live daily with FASD, for diagnosis and a support network.

This debate is about the well-being of future generations. Some people may not fully appreciate the damage that alcohol can cause to the unborn child. Problems affecting a child with FASD include: varying degrees of facial disfigurement; brain damage, resulting in poor social skills; inability to learn simple tasks; behavioural problems; and an impact on co-ordination and motor skills. Those problems affect the entire family of a child with FASD.

As the term “spectrum disorder” implies, there is a wide variation in the severity of the condition and in the level of support required. FASD is not a well-publicised condition, but that does not mean that we, as a society, can afford to overlook the daily needs of the families and children who are affected by it. Their needs must be identified and addressed. Everyone in the Chamber must play a part in getting the ball rolling today.

The effects of alcohol on the unborn child are permanent — they do not go away. However, they are entirely avoidable. An interdepartmental co-operative approach must be adopted to achieve the objective of reducing the number of children affected by FASD. It must involve the Department of Education, the Depart­ment for Employment and Learning, the Department for Social Development, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and national organisations who can supply the knowledge on which new policy and structures can be firmly based. Such a multi-agency approach will ensure that all resources are utilised efficiently and effectively — in short, joined-up working.

The problem of drinking before and during pregnancy must be raised early with young people. I say young people, rather than young women, because research has shown that alcohol consumption during adolescence can also have a detrimental effect on the fertility of young men. It may permanently alter the DNA that they pass on to their children, increasing the risk of birth defects such as FASD.

We must examine the dual issues of whom we should target and how, operationally, that can be achieved. It can be done through the education system, youth groups, family planning clinics or anywhere that young people get together. The means of delivery must be relevant and must utilise multiple threads of communication, such as leaflets, social networking websites and the traditional media. The policy in Northern Ireland should be to prevent, rather than deal with, birth defects caused by alcohol. There is an old adage, “prevention is better than cure”.

General public awareness must be raised. Even in today’s society, parents have an important role to play. In the interests of public health, a publicity campaign should be undertaken to help to raise awareness of FASD among our citizens.

In the education sphere, some of the possible problems of FASD include: a reduced attention span; frustration; poor problem solving; the feeling of difference and exclusion from their peers; and delays or defects in speech and language development. However, every child with FASD is an individual and will have different needs.

Many children with FASD have exceptional abilities in one area, be it music, art or mathematics. Therefore, the people of Northern Ireland should be responsible for ensuring that such children achieve their maximum potential. We need better diagnosis and specialised services. At the moment, there is no accurate information on the number of children with FASD.

Some parents have told me that they have had difficulty getting an accurate diagnosis of the disorder. In fact, last week one parent told me that their child’s diagnosis of FASD had been overturned. The implications of that are huge, as the support services that have been in place, and even benefit entitlement, may also be removed from that family.

From my perspective, that is a shocking state of affairs. How can that family be expected to cope physically, emotionally or financially? I secured this debate in order to urge the Minister to put in place a comprehensive service designed for those children and families who, sadly, have to live with FASD. As with any medical condition, there must be, primarily, an accurate diagnosis so that families are not left in turmoil because of medical inconsistencies.

I can almost hear the Minister screaming in my ear, “George, what about the cost?” I ask the Minister: what is the cost of doing nothing? There is a continuing need for lifelong medical assistance, special arrangements for education and medication to treat the secondary symptoms of FASD, all of which cost, at best, millions over each generation. Many of the specialised services and personnel required to supply those services are already available in the different systems. It is not a long journey to make in order to utilise them. However, every journey begins with one step, and I ask the Minister to take that step by liaising with other Departments and support organisations in order to ensure that those communications are embedded and developed. After an accurate diagnosis, families must have barrier-free, easy access to the services that are beneficial to them.

I am fully aware that there is no quick fix for this problem, but we have to start somewhere at some time. That time and place is now. Children with FASD carry the effects for their lifetime. That is why parents need accurate diagnostic and support programmes that are obviously and desperately required in order to achieve the objectives that I have brought to the attention of the House today.

The FASAwareUK website states that FASD:

“is the biggest cause of non-genetic mental handicap in the western world and the only one that is 100% preventable.”

Let the Assembly encourage the Minister to take the first step on the journey.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I support the motion and welcome the opportunity to speak on it. The motion calls on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety:

“to introduce policies to reduce the level of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder … and to introduce dedicated teams to assist families affected by Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.”

Drinking during pregnancy may give rise to foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and babies who have been subjected to alcohol while in the womb are also more at risk of sudden infant death. That is a cause of great concern, especially as we appear to have a culture of binge drinking. According to a representative of the Royal College of Midwives, many women carry a binge-drinking habit into their pregnancies.

In general, more people are aware of the dangers that are associated with smoking during pregnancy, but there is much less awareness of the effects of alcohol while pregnant. In the past few years there has been increased awareness-raising of the effects of alcohol consumption by pregnant women and those trying to conceive. However, more must be done, especially as some health professionals suggest that foetal alcohol spectrum disorder is increasing and that, due to the complexity of the disorder, many cases are not being diagnosed.

Foetal alcohol spectrum disorder is the umbrella term used to describe a range of effects that can be caused by maternal alcohol exposure. Children that are identified as having FASD show signs of behavioural, intellectual and physical difficulties, including learning difficulties, poor language and memory skills, and attention problems. Who would willingly subject their child to such problems? Who would willingly drink alcohol, knowing that those difficulties could be the outcome? We must provide targeted support and advice, so that women are made aware of the effects of the condition and can make an informed choice.

We have sought changes to the advice that is offered to women about drinking alcohol during pregnancy. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines were revised in recent years to reflect the change in thinking. NICE now recommends that alcohol should be avoided altogether during pregnancy, but it says that those who wish to consume alcohol should minimise the risk to the baby by refraining from drinking alcohol in the first three months of pregnancy and thereafter consuming only a few units a week. Even that advice is confusing and is causing a great deal of concern. Women are asking whether they should or should not have a drink during pregnancy.

FASD is completely preventable through the elimination of drinking during pregnancy. Therefore, we have a duty to ensure that every possible effort is made to raise awareness and to bring down the level of FASD, or, if possible, to eliminate it. The dangers of drinking too much alcohol have been well documented for years. However, in recent times, healthcare professionals have made more concerted efforts to increase public awareness. I want to commend those professionals involved in the campaign, and pledge my support to help them along the way.

In order to lead an informed campaign, there is a need for more information, a good understanding of the continuum of permanent birth defects associated with FASD, and an increased awareness of the risks of pre-natal alcohol exposure among the general public, in particular among women who are pregnant, or considering pregnancy. That has been made more difficult by the fact, for which there is evidence, that FASD consists of a set of conditions that are poorly understood, not only by the general public, but by health professionals. Therefore, there is a need for more studies of the effects of those conditions, so that the best support can be provided.

It appears that the best advice for pregnant women seeking clarity on whether they can drink alcohol or not is to refrain altogether, because there is no definitive research to suggest that there is a safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy. If a pregnant woman consumes alcohol, it will go into her bloodstream, and, from there, straight into the baby’s bloodstream. In some cases, that alcohol can have a toxic effect on the foetus. Surely, that is enough to deter any mum-to-be. If you are drinking, your baby is drinking. I support the motion. Go raibh maith agat.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Question Time is about to begin, and yet again, four of the first six questions to be asked are from the party of the Minister who will receive those questions. We have been assured that the selection of questions is a random process. Clearly, it cannot be, and I would like an explanation of that.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

All I can say to the Member is that the questions are selected by random ballot. Neither I, nor my office, take any part in that procedure.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I thank you for the clarification, and I realise that that is the case. I am not a statistician, but, although the process appears to be the chance selection of a ballot, four, five or six of the first six questions are regularly asked by the party to which the responding Minister belongs. There is something not right. I am not saying that something is wrong, but something is not right.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I understand that the Member has made a very valid point. [Interruption].

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

What about Dromore?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

As Question Time commences at 2.30 pm, I propose that Members take their ease until that time. This debate will resume after Question Time, when the first Member called to speak will be Mr Gardiner.

The debate stood suspended.

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

Education

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

1. asked the Minister of Education to confirm if she is aware of any proposals on post-primary transfer from the Democratic Unionist Party. (AQO 230/09)

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Is mór an díomá dom é nach raibh an Coiste Oideachais ná páirtithe polaitíochta eile ábalta aghaidh a thabhairt ar na buncheisteanna a bhaineann le haistriú iarbhunoideachais go fóill. Go dtí seo, níor tháinig aon chomhdhearcadh chun solais agus níor cuireadh aon mholtaí eile ar an chlár ach amháin mo mholtaí-se.

I am disappointed that the Education Committee and other political parties have not addressed the real issues on post-primary transfer. No consensus has emerged, and mine remain the only significant proposals on the table. When I brought my proposals to the Executive on 15 May 2008, and during discussions with the Education Committee the following day, I made it clear that I was happy to listen to constructive comments about the proposals and that I would engage constructively with anyone who has ideas that improve them.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her reply. Have there been any proposals from the Education Committee that could, even now, offer the prospect of a consensus?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin agus as an phointe sin. Two comments struck me from the comments that I received from the Committee. First, some Committee members feel that some breathing space is required. To an extent, I agree, which is why my proposals include the partial continuation of academic selection during its phased abolition between 2010 and 2013, which was a difficult feature for me. However, there will be no distortion of the primary-schools curriculum as a result.

Secondly, the Committee showed interest in an important feature of the proposals that has received relatively little attention — the development of academic streams, which could be academic schools within clusters of schools. Academic provision will continue to exist, and I have always made it clear that it should continue to be a key part of our system at all ages, but particularly from 14. I propose that curricular provision be all-embracing in all areas and offer the full entitlement framework to all children. However, I envisage that school diversity and specialism will continue and flourish.

My position has always been that academic selection is unnecessary. By that I partly mean that there are ways to have schools with a strong academic emphasis in their provision that are fairer, better and more flexible than academically selective admissions procedures conducted at ages 10, 11 or 14. Academic selection is unnecessary at 11 and at 14.

Throughout the process, I have listened carefully to all the main interests — educational and other — and worked to achieve a consensual way forward. My proposals offer a compromise solution for those who, like me, do not regard the current system as the way forward and do not hang on to the past. There are areas of commonality, but the Committee has failed to make any consensus proposals.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Mr Deputy Speaker, will you rule on whether the Minister’s previous answer has any relevance to the question that she was asked? Despite being asked a question about proposals from the DUP, all the Minister did was attack the Education Committee. Obviously, that was the statement —

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order. Will the Member ask his question?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

In her answer, the Minister tried to do what the rest of her party has been doing over the past few days — abdicate the responsibility that comes from being part of the Executive. [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Minister accept that her proposals have not received consensus, and will she agree to meet me after today’s sitting to consider further proposals from the DUP? The DUP put proposals on the table — we went to the public with them. Mr O’Dowd is going round the country doing the same because the Minister has little support.

Will the Minister agree to meet me and discuss my alternative proposals in order to see whether consensus can be reached? Then, perhaps, that will remove the confusion that exists among parents of children who are in P6. The blockage remains with the Minister.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

There is no confusion among parents of P6 children. Some people have tried to create the myth that there is confusion. A Chathaoirligh, primary-school teachers and principals are well aware of what they will be teaching, which is the revised curriculum. Teachers like the revised curriculum. The teaching unions are opposed to distortion of the curriculum.

I have always said that I am available to meet the Chairperson of the Education Committee. I have yet to receive the Committee’s consensus proposals. I look forward to receiving them. In fact, I will attend the Education Committee, where a good discussion on the matter can take place.

Let us not play politics with children’s education, which is what Mervyn Storey is doing. I am glad that people have reached consensus that change is needed and that they understand that the current system fails many children from different communities. Progress must be made. I have made proposals after engaging extensively with all of the different stakeholders during several months of consultation. The Member’s party did not even discuss those proposals in the Executive. I look forward to the Executive’s discussion, because I will bring — [Interruption.]

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

If I may finish my answer —

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Please take your seat for a moment, Minister. Mr Storey, you are aware that no points of order are taken during Question Time. All remarks must be made through the Chair. Last week, I told Members that all remarks must be made through the Chair — not over it, nor under it.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I look forward to the Executive meeting at which my proposals are discussed. Progress must be made on the basis of equality, partnership and respect. That is the greatest message that the Assembly can send to children in every class from P1 to P7. Children need to see politicians engage with each other on the basis of equality and partnership. Go raibh maith agat.

Ken Robinson (UUP, East Antrim)

Despite what the Minister has just said, will she accept that both the public and schools are mystified as to what her proposals entail? Will she undertake to bring a motion to the House that will enable each party to set forth its ideas in public?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Ní ghlacaim leis sin. I do not accept that. The reason is that I go into schools and meet educationalists every day of the week. They understand the need for the system to be changed. They are crying out for change and are thankful that the Department is bringing it about. They are also well aware of who resists and blocks change. The message that comes from schools in every community is that blocking change disadvantages working-class children on the Falls, on the Shankill and in Ballymena, Coleraine, Derry and all parts of the North of Ireland. Let us continue to make change, rather than try to interrupt and block ministerial proposals. Let us move forward and bring about change for the children who need it. [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

2. asked the Minister of Education to confirm that she will take action against any school attempting to divert feeder primary schools from teaching the revised curriculum. (AQO 226/09)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

5. asked the Minister of Education what sanctions she will take against a school that plans to administer a breakaway entrance exam. (AQO 222/09)

Séan Neeson (Alliance, East Antrim)

8. asked the Minister of Education what advice her Department has given to primary schools in relation to the transfer procedure for pupils currently in P6. (AQO 194/09)

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Le do thoil freagróidh mé ceisteanna, 2, 5, agus 8 le chéile.

With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I shall answer questions 2, 5 and 8 together.

Tá ceangal dlí ar scoileanna an curaclam reachtúil a sholáthar do dhaltaí den aois éigeantach scoile.

Schools are required by law to deliver the statutory curriculum for pupils of compulsory school age. The revised curriculum was not designed with testing for the purposes of selection in mind.

Over the years, the transfer tests have had a damaging effect on the delivery of the primary school curriculum. I am mindful of that in the proposals for which I seek a legislative framework. In the interests of consensus, they include a transitional test for a three-year period, which is available to schools that feel that they need time to adjust to the reform.

Chuir mé in iúl go soiléir gur mhian liom go mbeidh bunscoileanna ag díriú a n-iarrachtaí go heisiach ar mhúineadh an churaclaim athbhreithnithe nuair a thagann deireadh leis na teisteanna aistrithe atá ann faoi láthair.

When the current transfer tests end, I want to see primary schools focus entirely on teaching the revised curriculum. I expect every teacher and principal in our primary schools to fulfil the statutory duty of delivering the revised curriculum to our children and not to be diverted from that important task by the particular admissions requirements of any post-primary school. I can rely on the teaching profession in the primary sector to do the best for children in their schools.

However, let me be clear, if any school is found to flout the law, I will take action.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her forthright reply. Will she tell us what the Education and Training Inspectorate will do if it encounters evidence that schools set aside the requirements of the curriculum to focus on test preparation?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

The Education and Training Inspectorate is an independent means of reporting occasions in which the statutory curriculum is distorted by testing for the purposes of selection. If it encounters evidence that the revised curriculum has been set aside for any reason, it will report that as part of the inspection procedures. Any such report will be published on the departmental website. Therefore, parents and the Department will be made aware of such evidence, and appropriate action will be taken to protect the education of the young people in that school.

Boards of governors have a statutory duty to secure the delivery of the statutory curriculum in their schools. If parents feel that their child’s school is not delivering the broad and balanced requirements of the curriculum, they have a right of appeal to an independent curriculum complaints tribunal. Following such proceedings, the Department has the power to direct a school to fulfil its duties. Furthermore, teachers’ unions can report to the Department if they feel that teachers or schools are not fulfilling the statutory duties that are outlined in the curriculum.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Minister assure the House that the transitional test will not distort the revised curriculum?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Is féidir liom sin a dhéanamh. Before I do so, I congratulate the Member on her county winning the all-Ireland final yesterday. I was privileged to be at the match. My own county, Mayo, unfortunately drew with her county, but that result might be rectified next week. [Interruption.]

I am answering the question on the revised curriculum. I am sure that children in many schools in Tyrone are preparing artwork for the return of the Tyrone team. I am sure that the Member will attend the return of the team. Sport is also education.

The transitional test will not distort the revised curriculum. It will be focused on the expected levels of literacy and numeracy at transfer age in a manner that does not require either a skewing of the curriculum or prior practice. It should be taken on a single day, and last no more than one hour. It should rank children on the basis of ability within the cohort sitting it. It is my intention that such a test will be taken in the post-primary setting, not in the primary school. For too long, the primary curriculum has been distorted by the unnecessary testing of our children. That is the difference between the transitional test and the transfer test. The transitional test is also different to the sort of test that a number of grammar schools claim that they will carry out, not only in the flexibility that it indicates on my part, but in its regard for the education of children in primary schools.

Let me be clear, the test that I propose is a concession in the interest of consensus, and it is a means to an end — the end of academic selection.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I propose that this test operates for a three-year period, during which its application within admissions will reduce. [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order, please. The Minister has the Floor. She is entitled to be heard.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Yes, I have heard “never” on many previous occasions.

I want to return to the issue of the test. Grammar schools will have time to adjust; however, many are going with the new proposals. I will welcome the decision of any grammar school which chooses not to use the test. No child will be compelled to take the test. I have reluctantly conceded the test, because I consider it to be an unfortunate necessity on the route to the abolition of academic selection. If political debates suggest to me that the test is not a necessary means towards that end, I will be delighted.

Séan Neeson (Alliance, East Antrim)

As the Minister knows, my party and I acknowledge the need for change. As a former teacher, I know that there is extreme confusion among pupils, teachers and parents about what changes are being brought about. Will the Minister explain exactly what information her Department is providing to primary schools?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin. We have been out and about visiting schools and holding public meetings right across the North of Ireland. I plan to continue doing so. I met all the post-primary principals in Fermanagh. Last week, I was in Ballinascreen, where we held a public meeting. We have held many different meetings so that we can have a genuine discussion about the proposals.

The Department and I have clearly said to primary principals and to teachers of P6 pupils that they must teach the revised curriculum. I do not know how much clearer I can be. There is a revised curriculum in place, which is a good curriculum. Yesterday, as I was going to the match in Dublin, a teacher told me that the revised curriculum is working.

I have also met all the different trade unions —

Iris Robinson (DUP, Strangford)

More resources?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Of course, people want more resources, and we are doing everything that we can to ensure that education gets the resources that it needs. My colleagues are ensuring that we have those resources.

We have also written to school principals to explain that they have a statutory duty to teach the revised curriculum.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Does the Minister intend to name and shame those schools which attempt to help their pupils in the new test? Will she publicly publish a target list of schools that she thinks are likely to default on the issue? Will she give an assurance to the House that she intends to set up surveillance cameras in every school so that she can pick out the teachers who do not do what she wants? In practice, will she use the so-called anti-terrorism laws under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 to ensure that every teacher does exactly what she says?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Although the Member asked about 20 different questions, I have already answered his question about what I will do, and I have explained what the inspectorate and the teachers’ unions will do. If the Member had listened, he might have got his answer. [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order, please. I must ask Members again to allow the Minister to answer the question.

Have you finished giving your response, Minister?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Yes, I have finished.

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Does the Minister agree that instead of taking action and sanctions against schools, she should be apologising to schools —

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Newry and Armagh)

Does the Minister agree that she should be apologising for the consternation in schools where parents are asking principals for advice on the Ruane 11-plus, and where principals are unable to answer those questions?

Does the Minister agree that she has left parents and teachers in an invidious position, which has been made worse by her failure to attend Executive meetings?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I do not agree with any of the points that the Member has made. [Interruption.] Until I came into this job, I thought that the SDLP were anti-academic selection and pro-change. I was obviously mistaken. [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

4. asked the Minister of Education what bid she made for extended schools in the September Monitoring Round. (AQO 235/09)

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat. I congratulate the Member on his football team, because I do not discriminate on grounds of gender.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Who won the Ryder Cup? [Laughter.]

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Who won Wimbledon?

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order. It is Question Time and there are serious issues to deal with.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I am glad to see that there is such interest in the House in such a wide variety of sport.

Mar is eol do Chomhaltaí, thug mé an-tacaíocht don chlár um scoileanna sínithe. I gcás na tairisceana ar £5 mhilliún a lorgaíodh i dtosach i mbabhta mhí an Mheithimh, lorgaíodh arís í i mbabhta monatóireachta Mheán Fómhair.

I have been highly supportive of the extended schools programme. The bid for £5 million, which was originally logged in the June monitoring round, has been re-submitted in the September monitoring round. The earlier bid was not met by the Finance Minister. However, in his statement to the Assembly on 24 June 2008 on the outcome of the June monitoring round he assured Members that every effort would be made to provide additional funding for the extended schools programme at the next monitoring round. I look forward to that.

In light of those positive indications about the potential to meet the bid for £5 million, I wrote to the current Finance Minister to outline the fact that I had asked my officials to put arrangements in place to ensure that additional allocations were made in July to allow for school planning and continuity of the programme. The Finance Minister welcomed that course of action in his reply but highlighted that the scope for the Executive to meet that bid in the September round would depend on the amount of funding available for reallocation.

I have been delighted to receive letters of support and thanks from school principals and pupils for the restoration of previous funding levels and widening eligibility criteria.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Minister confirm how schools are being identified as in need of funding and what level of funding is expected?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat. Priority for funding has been given to schools serving areas of greatest social disadvantage, and it has been targeted at children and young people who are disadvantaged, marginalised, or who have the most limited access to current services. The additional £5 million funding means that we can restore previous years’ funding levels for 2008-09 and reintroduce those wards, identified as being the most deprived under the education domain, to the selection criteria. The education domain measure had been used in 2006-07 and 2007-08. However, due to the reduced level of funding, the multiple-deprivation measure has been adopted for 2008-09.

Schools eligible for the programme are as follows. Primary, post-primary and special schools are eligible for the programme if: 51% or more of their enrolment is from a neighbourhood renewal area; 51% or more of their enrolment is from the 30% lowest ranking wards in the multiple-deprivation measure; 51% or more of their enrolment is from the 30% lowest-ranking wards in the education domain, or if they have a free school meals entitlement of 37% or higher.

Nursery schools are also eligible for the programme if they have 37% or more children who are entitled to free school meals and/or 37% or more pupils’ families claiming jobseeker’s allowance.

Schools are being allocated funding amounts of between £5,500 and £48,000, depending on their size and the uptake of the clustering incentive. Funding was decided on the basis of a formula as follows: first, there would be a block allocation to every school of £3,000; secondly, there would be a sliding-scale whereby the first 100 pupils are funded at £100 each; the next 100 at £75 each; the next 100 at £50 each; the next 150 at £25; the next 100 at £20 each; and the remainder at £10 each. Where schools join with other schools in a cluster arrangement, they will be entitled to a 15% additional allowance as an incentive for partnership working.

Iris Robinson (DUP, Strangford)

Will the Minister, while she is on her feet, tell us how many times she has been in her Department? This is my only opportunity as an elected representative to ask a question of the Minister as she refuses to meet me in my constituency. I make no apology for repetitiveness in asking the question, although I may be accused by a certain member of Sinn Féin of being obsessed; apparently when you speak about one subject you are obsessed.

Will the Minister indicate when we are going to see a newbuild for Tor Bank School for special needs? The Minister talked eloquently about equality and therefore, I would like to know when that newbuild will commence? The state of the shanty town that currently acts as a school is an absolute disgrace to the Department of Education and to the Minister in particular.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I have met with the Member on a number of occasions; however, her supplementary question is not relevant to the initial question. I ask that in future the Member’s questions be relevant —there are rules governing that.

I have visited Tor Bank School — [Interruption.]

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

Order, order. I know that it is not popular to suspend people from schools any more but somebody is going to get suspended here if you do not respect the Chair.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

In relation to Tor Bank School, I will write to the Member with the information, as I have done before. I have visited Tor Bank School. Tremendous work is being done there, and I pay tribute to the principal and the staff.

Mary Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Is the Minister aware that her failure to properly fund the extended schools programme through the education budget — and I am talking about schools that are in areas of high deprivation — has done irreparable damage to many projects?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I think that the Member has left out some information. There were four Departments funding the children and young persons’ package: the Department for Social Development (DSD); the Department of Education; the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. In the Department of Education, we mainstreamed a sizeable proportion of the extended schools budget. I asked the then Minister of Finance and Personnel for more money for extended schools; I wrote to him on many occasions outlining my concerns about the cutting of that programme, and that is on record. Thankfully, we have managed to mainstream a large section of the extended schools programme in the Department of Education, and we have, hopefully, managed to get extra money. I look forward to DSD funding the projects that it is also responsible for.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

6. asked the Minister of Education for an update on the work of the area based planning groups. (AQO 182/09)

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I have been in regular contact with the chairperson of the central group for area-based planning and, in my view, an excellent start has been made on that important exercise. The chairperson and vice-chairperson of the central group, and the five chairpersons of the local area groups, have had a series of meetings to reach a shared understanding of the exercise and to prepare discussion papers for consideration by the central group.

The central group met on 27 June and on 4 September; a further meeting will take place in early October. Initial guidance on the process of seeking submissions has been agreed and will be issued in the near future. Nominations have been received for the five area groups and a two-day residential meeting, which will allow them to analyse the available data and identify the key issues in their respective areas, will begin on 30 September. I have requested an interim progress report from the central group by the end of October.

In the meantime, I have been meeting principals in all parts of the North; I have had meetings with many of the principals in Fermanagh, and this week I am meeting some of the principals in County Down. For the first time ever in the North of Ireland, we have all the different education sectors sitting down together and planning on an area basis, rather than, as in the past, all the sectors — the Catholic sector, the Irish-medium sector, the integrated sector — meeting separately. As part of the review of public administration (RPA) I have regularly chaired a high-level group made up of all the different sectors so that we can move towards area-based planning.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Is the Minister aware that she is already six months behind schedule with her programme? Has she given any steer or advice to the area-based planning groups to help them to maximise the potential for outside organisations to use schools after school hours for community activities?

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

I ask the Minister to be very brief as we have moved beyond the 30-minute limit for questions to the Minister of Education.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

As I have stated, I am very pleased with the progress that has been made. I pay tribute to the chairperson and the vice-chairperson of the central group, who are doing tremendous work. While others may have been on holiday, they were working away, and I place my appreciation to them on record.

Schools have an enormous role to play in local communities, and that is part of post-primary area-based planning and the area-based planning process that the Department will introduce. The more that buildings and resources are maximised and the more that Departments work together, the better.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

I appear to be getting some help on how best to chair the meeting. The 30-minute period ended while the Minister was answering, and I permitted a further two minutes to allow her to conclude. This is in line with the Speaker’s ruling.

Employment And Learning

Billy Armstrong (UUP, Mid Ulster)

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how many students entered St. Mary’s University College in each of the past five years. (AQO 163/09)

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The number of first enrolments at St Mary’s University College in each of the past five academic years for which data are available are: 350 in 2002-03; 360 in 2003-04; 295 in 2004-05; 310 in 2005-06; and 365 in 2006-07.

Billy Armstrong (UUP, Mid Ulster)

Is it true that had previous trends been allowed to continue, teacher training would have ceased to be the main activity at St Mary’s University College and Stranmillis University College?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The way that things were going, there was a risk that in two to three years, non-teacher training would have been the main activity at not only St Mary’s University College but at Stranmillis University College. Given that both colleges have built significant reputations in initial teacher education, I felt strongly that it was important to ensure that that was the key ethos at not only St Mary’s but at Stranmillis. I hope that we can steer things firmly in that direction in the Department’s discussions with the college and with the Minister of Education.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister is aware of a case that arose in my constituency earlier this year regarding the sudden death of Shauna McCann, a student who attended Liverpool Hope University. At the start of this new academic year, have any provisions been made to advise students and to protect them from being tied into payments for accommodation if they have to leave third-level education through illness — mental or physical — or, in the case of Shauna, because of a tragic death? As the Minister knows, the letting agents have pursued her parents relentlessly for outstanding rent.

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

Although that matter is not specific to the question, the Member asked me about it before the summer recess. He raised it in a debate or through a question, and I believe that we have corresponded on the matter. I am sympathetic to the particular case that he drew to my attention. All Members find it a sad case, and I am sorry to hear that the family is continuing to be traumatised. However, it was a matter for civil law. I will ask the Department to examine the Member’s point, and I will write to him after the record has been reviewed.

Declan O'Loan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, North Antrim)

St Mary’s University College has an exceptional profile: it attracts students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, it has high entry requirements, and, despite the recent uncertainty, it succeeded in filling all its student places this year. Given that profile, the history of the college, and the affection in which it is held, how can the Minister credibly argue that the potential expansion of the University of Ulster’s York Street campus — as yet unannounced, unfunded and uncertain — would put St Mary’s University College, which offers a highly appealing degree in liberal arts, at great risk? He made that argument during an Assembly debate on teacher training on 23 June 2008.

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The activities of other institutions are relevant, particularly those that are located nearby. However, no one doubts the excellent record of achievement of St Mary’s University College. It has succeeded, and marginally surpassed other institutions, in attracting students from difficult socio-economic backgrounds. Indeed, all Northern Ireland’s institutions have a better overall record in that area than most in GB.

No institution is an island, and, therefore, every event is relative. The students’ feedback on their experience at St Mary’s University College has been extremely positive, and we should concentrate on the positive. In consultation with the Minister of Education, the Department is examining the entire ambit of issues that affect the college, and discussions over the past months have been good. An excellent debate was held in the Assembly, and the issues are rapidly becoming clear. If the issues surrounding particular areas of continuous professional development can be resolved, the college undoubtedly has a very positive future.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning what steps he is taking to improve access to training for people with hearing impairments. (AQO 204/09)

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

I apologise in advance for my rather long answer to the question, but it is important to address the issues fully.

A range of measures and initiatives is in place to provide and improve support for people with disabilities, including those with hearing impairments, to access training. Among those measures is a register of support providers that is available to all disabled students in higher education and colleges of further education, and through which a range of support services, including sign-language interpreters, can be provided.

The Department secured £1·3 million through the comprehensive spending review to enhance the provision of both British and Irish sign-language tutors and interpreters in Northern Ireland. Moreover, as recommended by the Committee for Employment and Learning when it was scrutinising the Training for Success programme, my Department established a working group, which includes representatives from disability organisations and which carried out a review that focused on the needs of people with disabilities in the context of the provision of Training for Success. The group recently submitted its report to the Department, and to increase access to that training provision for people with disabilities, including those with hearing impairments, I will ensure that all its recommendations are considered.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. What measures can be taken to ensure that interpreters who support deaf learners in further and higher education are of an adequate standard, and are monitored?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

A range of measures in the further education sector is in place to provide support for students with hearing impairments, depending on the degree of impairment and the nature of the course. Those measures include signers, the provision of hearing induction loops, assistance from note takers and the availability of lecture notes.

To ensure that my Department does everything possible to help learners with disabilities, the Education and Training Inspectorate was asked to review the provision of services and to identify any gaps. I hope that that comprehensive review will be able to identify any weaknesses. The Education and Training Inspectorate is thorough and, in consultation with groups connected with those who have hearing impairments, it is happier now that at least some additional provision is being made. I sound one note of caution: only a finite number of tutors can train the trainers. That bottleneck in training must be addressed, but the Department is fully aware that it exists.

Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)

I, too, thank the Minister for his comprehensive and extremely helpful answer. Earlier today, in the Long Gallery, there was a presentation from the National Deaf Children’s Society (NDCS). Those young people, some of whom used sign language, spoke extremely well.

I raise that point because that organisation’s knowledge would be helpful for the Minister’s proposed review. What discussions has the Department had with the NDCS to ascertain what it feels should be part of the review process? Such discussions would be helpful.

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his contribution. I agree that the people whom we met that day were impressive; they were also keen to point out issues that do not often register with us. For instance, people with hearing impairments who go to see a doctor at a hospital are perhaps unable to point out some obvious mistakes. As we all know, mistakes can happen, so that is a serious issue.

The review will include everyone who is deeply involved in such matters. The Department already provides funding to Belfast Metropolitan College in order to increase the number of fully qualified sign-language interpreters. As I said earlier, one area on which we will concentrate is the question of who trains the trainers. We will consult NDCS. It is essential that the review comes to an early conclusion, given that there has been a backlog; we want to get the outcome of the review to the colleges as quickly as possible.

The previous Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure was helpful in that our Departments worked together on the issue. The Department’s Disablement Advisory Service provides a range of programme support to help people with disabilities, and Access to Work helps them to obtain suitable employment. Therefore, I am confident that a process is in place that will lead to the correct measures being implemented. The fact that we received extra funding through the comprehensive spending review was also helpful.

Ken Robinson (UUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. What steps will the Minister take to ensure that the number of sign-language interpreters will be significantly increased, given the bottleneck to which he referred? What assistance can be provided for people who require extra aid in a job interview?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

In my earlier response, I said that my Department had secured an extra £1·3 million in the CSR, specifically to increase the number of people who are trained. Under the communication-support-at-interview process, the Department, through the Disablement Advisory Service, will meet the cost of providing communication support at employment interviews for people who are deaf or who have hearing disabilities. In other words, the Department will send and pay for someone to go to an interview with an applicant so that the applicant has the necessary support and help to conduct a proper interview, which will level the playing field for that individual. I confirm that the Disablement Advisory Service will do that and will pay for it.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party, East Londonderry)

The Members who were due to ask questions 3 and 4 are not in their places.

Séan Neeson (Alliance, East Antrim)

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning if he has reviewed his strategy for sectors to target in light of the global economic downturn. (AQO 203/09)

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

My Department has commissioned a forecast of future skill needs in Northern Ireland based on short-, medium- and long-term economic predictions. In conjunction with other forms of labour market information, that will inform the Department’s decision on whether it will be necessary to review the sectors that it targets for future skill work.

Séan Neeson (Alliance, East Antrim)

We all recognise the complexities of the global economy, but will the Minister consider developing skills academies or apprenticeship academies, as has happened in other parts of the UK? Will he consider the development of industrial hubs?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

I have no doubt that the Member is aware that the Department has a skills expert group and workforce development forums, which have been established to bring together the providers of education through the colleges and local employers to ascertain the needs in any particular area.

The Department has an agreement with 23 of the 25 sector skills councils in Northern Ireland. They have a key responsibility to ensure that qualifications are of a high standard and meet the needs of local employers.

We must consider future plans for academies. We have, potentially, an important structure in place, whereby the applicants and the sector skills councils work in conjunction with the colleges and local employers. In the northern region and the Ballymena area, Michelin — one of the large employers — has a training centre in the local college. That could be described as a centre of excellence. However, it is a matter of opinion whether that can be defined as an academy.

Given how international labour markets have changed in the past couple of months, we must examine closely the whole gamut of prioritising skills for the future, because the situation today differs from that of six months ago. I thought, perhaps, that the Member was driving at that point.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

The Minister stated previously in the House that he will introduce a demand-led strategy; given that, Mr Neeson’s point is well made. Sectors of the Northern Ireland economy are buoyant, yet employers cannot recruit qualified graduates. Those shortages are, generally, in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) areas. Will the Minister outline what steps he will take to meet graduate demand from engineering and technology companies?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

Two weeks ago, I attended Queen’s University’s open day, and I visited the Bernard Crossland Building, which houses engineering and technology activity. In the current year, that university filled its places in the broad STEM areas, although I am unsure of the situation at the University of Ulster. However, I accept entirely the concept of a demand-led process.

At the end of 2007, the Department launched the ‘C’Mon Over’ initiative, through which we will visit various university campuses — many, in fact, this month — in the United Kingdom, and we will visit Dublin in late 2008 or early 2009. Employers will accompany us to try to convince students who have trained in universities in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Liverpool, Dublin and Dundee to return to employment in Northern Ireland. Those employers will offer real jobs to students. The Department wants to recover skilled students who have left Northern Ireland.

A combination of that process, work in schools and efforts to encourage more children to study STEM subjects, such as Queen’s University’s decision to offer bursaries — and the University of Ulster is considering that, too — will improve the situation. People take key decisions at the age of 13 that determine which subjects they can learn in future. It is a comprehensive proposal, and I assure the Member that I am focused on ensuring its delivery. As the Member realises, that is the only way to retain a competitive position.

George Savage (UUP, Upper Bann)

What role do the skills expert group and the workforce development forums play?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

Workforce development forums are based around the six regions in which the principal colleges of further education are located. They provide meeting places for the colleges of further education and local business communities. It is as easy and cost effective for colleges to teach qualifications with positive outcomes to students as it is to teach qualifications for which there are no jobs. Therefore, it makes sense — for the colleges and the students — that people are supplied with the skills that are needed by the local communities and employers.

A further initiative is the all-island skills conference that will focus on border areas, and it will take place in early October 2008 in the north-west. The conference will be hosted jointly by the Northern Ireland skills expert group and the expert group on future skill needs. It is a joint operation with my counterparts in the Republic — I believe that Tánaiste Mary Coughlan will be one of the Ministers involved. In that context, we are seeking to have the right mix of labour-market intelligence present so that colleges in the border regions can ensure that the skills and qualifications being taught there match the needs of local communities. I encourage all employers to become involved, because they will find it useful.

Carmel Hanna (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

6. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning if he is satisfied that Stranmillis University College fully considered all options, for its future, prior to the decision of its board of governors to endorse a proposal to merge with Queen’s University Belfast. (AQO 149/09)

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The governing body of Stranmillis University College made the decision, in principle, to merge with Queen’s University, Belfast. That decision was based on the consideration of options arising from the Taylor Report on the long-term strategic options for Stranmillis University College, which was published in July 2007. The governing body voted unanimously for the option.

Any decision to merge will require the consent of my Department. We will conduct a rigorous evaluation process that will include the setting out of all options, and the decision will be subject to the consideration and approval of the Committee for Employment and Learning and the Assembly.

Carmel Hanna (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

The Minister approved two-year conversion funding in respect of student numbers for Stranmillis and St Mary’s. As he said, that will create space so that all issues can be explored.

Does the Minister understand why Stranmillis and Queen’s told the Committee for Employment and Learning that they plan to make their decision for merger in 2009? Will he confirm that he will not consider accelerated passage for any legislation concerning the matter?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The answer to the Member’s second question is yes. In response to the first question, I was promised that the business case would be available in July 2008. I have not received it yet, and I understand that it will be some weeks before it comes into my possession. The Department has not had the opportunity to see the business case yet.

When the business case is received, it will go through a rigorous evaluation process that will include, by definition, consideration of all the options. After that is done, we will consult with other Departments that have a keen interest. We will then come to a view and discuss it with the Committee. It will be a matter for the House to deal with any legislation that flows from that, because the merger cannot take place without legislation.

I already gave an undertaking to the Committee for Employment and Learning that I will not be seeking accelerated passage for the process. I cannot be specific about the timetable, but my view of the process — which I highlighted at a meeting with representatives from the college and the university before the summer break and which I clarified twice in writing — is that it is nearly October and I have not received the report, and that time is rapidly running out. The practicalities dictate that it will not be possible to complete the process within the time available. It is up to the college and the university to submit their case. I will deal with the case when they submit it.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

The Minister will be aware that the day before the Stranmillis University College board of governors made its announcement, its representatives gave a presentation to the Committee for Employment and Learning, and, to say the least, everyone on the Committee was convinced that a deal had been done prior to that meeting.

It is strange that there was only one option on the table. Can the Minister confirm whether the Stranmillis board of governors considered all other options, and is it not the case that the University of Ulster, which was also thought to be a player in the process, pulled out because it knew that a deal had been done with Queen’s University’s board of governors prior to the meeting at which the decision was supposed to have been made?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

I cannot confirm all that the Member said, but he raised questions that I know have exercised his mind and the minds of Committee members.

The Committee took evidence from the University of Ulster’s vice chancellor and others, and met Stranmillis University College representatives, about which the Member will form his own opinion. All that I can say is that the college’s board must take the initiative. If the college has a proposal, as I have indicated, we will consider all the options, which must be set out in detail.

I make it clear to the Committee — and I repeat for the second or third time — that there will be no attempt by my Department to steamroller anything through the House. It is not my fault if the proposal comes to me late. I have made it clear that there is a process, and the process will be adhered to. Given that I must review the options that were considered, some matters that the Member raised may emerge when I receive the business case.

The Stranmillis University College board of governors commissioned the Taylor Report, which was published in 2007, and although it was not terribly specific, nevertheless, at that stage, the board was already considering options. However, that is a matter for the college’s board. When the Department is asked, it will deal with the matter, and it will seek legislative consent from the Assembly for a full and proper Bill, which must pass through all Stages in the House before any changes to that institution’s status can take place. The Assembly will have the final say on the matter, and I hope that that reassures the Member.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Since 2003, a review into teacher education in Northern Ireland has been under way, and I believe that a draft review document was provided for the stakeholders’ group in January 2008. For the benefit of all concerned, will the Minister inform Members about the review’s progress and clarify the Department for Employment and Learning’s position on teacher training?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The Member is correct about the timescale, and that concerns me. As the Member is aware, the review is a joint effort with the Department of Education, and I recently wrote to the Minister of Education to seek clarity on when her Department will conclude its deliberations. My Department has signed off on the latest draft, and I await a response from the Department of Education.

I accept that the review has taken far too long. Nevertheless, during the Christmas holidays last year, I saw an earlier draft, and the final report will be an important piece of work, containing some excellent proposals, which I am sure that Members will be pleased to see on publication. I am conscious of the need to get the report into the public domain as soon as possible, and I await a response from the Minister of Education.

Alan McFarland (UUP, North Down)

7. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how many students entered Stranmillis University College in each of the past five years. (AQO 164/09)

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

The first-year enrolments to Stranmillis University College for each of the past five academic years for which data are available are: 460 in 2002-03; 435 in 2003-04; 480 in 2004-05; 395 in 2005-06; and 385 in 2006-07.

Alan McFarland (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer. If the merger goes ahead, what are the implications for Queen’s University of having all those extra students? Are there savings implications? When did the Minister first become aware that Queen’s University and Stranmillis University College were seeking a merger?

Reg Empey (UUP, Belfast East)

I formally became aware of a merger on 17 April 2008, when a decision was taken. I knew that a merger was an option that was being considered.

The implications are fairly far-reaching. In Northern Ireland, there are five providers of initial teacher education: Queen’s University, the two university colleges, the Open University and the University of Ulster. Queen’s University and Stranmillis University College tell me that they envisage a centre of inter­national excellence. The absorption of that number of students into Queen’s University will be a significant development. Further details will appear in the proposals that will be put to me by Queen’s University and Stranmillis University College. That issue will be taken into consideration by the Department in reaching a recommendation on the way ahead. The Committee for Employment and Learning and the Assembly will have the final say on any proposals.

Enterprise, Trade and Investment

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

1. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what her assessment is of the contribution of this year’s marching season to tourism. (AQO 191/09)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

There has been no formal assessment of the impact of the marching season on tourism, but the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and Tourism Ireland are in regular touch with representatives of the Loyal Orders to see how events such as the Twelfth of July parades can be developed as tourist attractions.

The Northern Ireland Tourist Board worked with the Orange Order to help to broaden the appeal of this year’s Twelfth of July demonstrations and identified four flagship parades — Belfast, Tandragee, Dromara and Coleraine — as those with the most potential appeal to visitors. The Northern Ireland Tourist Board provided “welcome host” training for stewards at those parades.

Tourism Ireland also helped to raise the profile of this year’s parades; for example, its website had a link to the BBC’s live coverage of the Twelfth. I understand that considerable interest was generated, and I am optimistic that such events have the potential to make a real contribution to the Northern Ireland tourism product.

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for her answer. I know that she is a family-oriented person, and I hope that she, like me, enjoyed a family day out at one of the Twelfth spectaculars this year.

Will she indicate whether any representative from the Northern Ireland Tourist Board or Tourism Ireland took the opportunity to attend a Twelfth of July celebration in an official capacity?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. I availed of the tremendous family day at Kesh’s Twelfth of July celebrations. I met many visitors who had travelled up Lough Erne to be in Kesh for the festivities.

Representatives from the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and Tourism Ireland attended the Twelfth of July parade in Coleraine and will be meeting Orange Order representatives to provide feedback. The Orange Order has expressed its thanks to the tourist authorities for the advice that it has received to date.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Given the contribution that local historical and cultural events can make to tourism by exploiting the uniqueness of the North, will the Minister detail what plans her Department has to ensure that the Tourist Board will supply funding and resources to local community-based tourism projects that promote such events? I have in mind places such as west Belfast, where such projects have been organised for years. Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for her question. Indeed, earlier this year, I attended a very good fair day at Irvinestown in Fermanagh. I assume that that is the type of small-scale cultural event to which the Member refers.

A cultural tourism strategy was commissioned by the Tourist Board in March 2005, and it is currently being developed. The draft Northern Ireland Tourist Board corporate plan for 2008-11 also identifies cultural and heritage tourism as a key product development priority.

The Tourist Board is developing a cultural and heritage tourism product framework that covers four broad areas — heritage, living culture, creative and the arts — all of which are further divided into subcategories.

A great wealth of cultural activity exists that can act as a stimulus for the tourism market. I look forward to seeing the plans develop.

Declan O'Loan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, North Antrim)

Although I acknowledge and commend the Orange Order’s initial efforts to engage with the Catholic community, does the Minister agree that if the Orange Order is serious about turning the Twelfth and other parades into tourist events, it will have to revise fundamentally what it represents to the Catholic community, including its written principles? Does she also agree that it will have to revise the culture associated with those parades, which includes alcohol and bonfires? I note that DRD has estimated that it costs £60,000 to clean up such bonfires.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am not here to be a spokesperson for the Orange Order, however it should be noted that that organisation is based on the reformed Protestant faith, and, as such, it is fundamental to that organisation to promote that faith, so I do not see its principles changing any time soon.

With regard to the Member’s other comments, particularly the one about alcohol, I know that the Order has been working very closely with the police and I encourage them to keep doing that and to eradicate the abuse of alcohol at the parades. I know that, as well as anything else, such behaviour is a blight on those parades.

Billy Armstrong (UUP, Mid Ulster)

2. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what communication he has had with his counterpart in the Republic of Ireland concerning a joint grading system for bed and breakfasts. (AQO 184/09)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I have not discussed that issue with my counterpart in the Irish Republic. My officials are currently engaged in a review of the certification and classification of tourist accommodation in Northern Ireland. As part of that exercise, they will consider best practice in England, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland.