Northern Ireland Assembly, 8 February 2010

336 contributions from 62 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I wish to inform the Assembly that I have received a letter from the First Minister, dated 3 February 2010, revoking with effect from that date his earlier letter, in which he had designated the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to exercise the functions of the office of First Minister.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I beg to move

That Standing Order 20(1)(a) be suspended for 8 February 2010.

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

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I refer you to the first item of business that you dealt with, namely the letter from the First Minister in which he revoked his decision to step down as First Minister. Given that his decisions to step down and to step back into the office of First Minister were important political developments and matters of high public interest and that those decisions affected the authority and standing of both the Executive and the Assembly — Mr Robinson is not just First Minister but a Member of the Assembly — is it not in order that the terms of the opinion given to the First Minister by Mr Paul Maguire QC should be lodged in the Assembly Library? Is it not in order that the terms of reference given to Mr Maguire when forming his opinion should be lodged in the Assembly Library? Is it not —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. Those are matters for the First Minister to deal with. It is not for the House to judge what the First Minister might do now or in the future. What I have said this morning clarifies the situation as far as I am concerned. Thereafter, those are decisions for the First Minister.

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

I understand why you have said that, Mr Speaker. However, the First Minister is a Member of this House, serves at its discretion and was nominated to his position by it. Therefore, matters in respect of stepping down from and back into that office, on which I make no particular value judgement —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member should take his place. There are avenues open to the Member, and, if he wishes to pursue the matter, he can do so through questions to the First Minister or through a motion in the House. Raising the matter through a point of order will not be effective. I remind the House that there are procedures: Members can speak to the Clerks about the procedures and conventions through which they can raise issues properly in the House. It should certainly not be done through points of order.

We shall return to the business. Before I put the Question, I remind Members that the motion requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That Standing Order 20(1)(a) be suspended for 8 February 2010.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

As there are Ayes from all sides of the House and no dissenting voices, I am satisfied that cross-community support has been demonstrated.

Ministerial Statement

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

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

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Tá brón orm go raibh an ráiteas deireannach. I apologise to the House for being late in getting the statement to it. I finalised it on Friday night, and my officials made final amendments this morning. This is an important issue, and I wanted to ensure that we got the statement right.

Ba mhian liom ráiteas a thabhairt faoin láithreán gréasáin acmhainní múinteora SparkleBox. SparkleBox is a website that contains resources for primary-school teachers that can be downloaded for classroom use with pupils. The site was owned and operated by Samuel Kinge, a teacher who had been jailed in Warwick in January 2005 for possession of child pornography.

Kinge started SparkleBox in February 2006, having changed his name to Daniel Kinge. In September 2009, he was arrested again for making and possessing indecent images of children. On 8 January 2010, Worcester Crown Court sentenced him to 12 months in prison and served him with a 15‑year sexual offences prevention order, which bans him from using a computer unless it has a police detection programme installed. The site was used by teachers in Ireland, North and South, and England, Wales and Scotland.

Bhí scoileanna anseo ábalta teacht ar SparkleBox tríd an líonra C2k, a sholáthraíonn seirbhís bainistithe TFC do gach scoil dheontaschúnta. Bainistítear soláthar na seirbhísí thar ceann gach bord oideachais agus leabharlainne ag Bord Oideachais agus Leabharlainne an Iarthair.

SparkleBox was available to schools here through the Classroom 2000 (C2k) network, which provides an ICT-managed service to all grant-aided schools. The provision of the service is managed on behalf of all the education and library boards by the Western Education and Library Board.

I am advised that C2k became aware of the issues surrounding SparkleBox in December 2009. I understand that C2k liaised with the regional broadband consortia in England, a number of which had blocked access to SparkleBox until they were satisfied that suitable safeguarding arrangements were in place. It appears that C2k took the view that sufficient arrangements were in place to ensure the safety of users; so, initially, it did not remove access to the site. It is C2k’s position that its system has automatic filters in place to block any possible interactive component in the site, such as blogs and toolbars.

On 28 January 2010, a parent from a Belfast primary school who had heard of Kinge’s conviction informed the school, which instructed its teachers not to use SparkleBox and reported its position to C2k.

Ar 28 Eanáir 2010 chuala tuismitheoir a raibh páiste acu i mbunscoil faoi chiontú Kinge agus threoraigh bunscoil Bhéal Feirste múinteoirí gan úsáid a bhaint as Sparklebox, agus a chuir a seasamh in iúl do C2k.

On Monday 1 February, C2k changed its decision from not blocking the site to blocking it, and I am advised that it informed schools of that decision and that the site remains blocked.

Fuair mé fios ar an tsaincheist seo ar 29 Eanáir. D’eisigh mo Roinn preasráiteas le dearbhú go bhfuil scagairí i bhfeidhm ag an chóras C2k le bac a chur le hinneachar dochrach gréasáin, agus tá an Roinn ag comhoibriú le C2k ar an tsaincheist seo.

I became aware of the issue on 29 January. My Department issued a press statement to confirm that the C2k system has filters in place to block potentially harmful web content and that the Department was liaising with C2k on the matter.

Mar is eol daoibh, glacaim an-dáiríre dualgas mo Roinne le cinntiú go gcosnaítear sábháilteacht páistí i ngach gné dá n-oideachas. Is fíor-thábhachtach dom a sábháilteacht, agus féachaim le mé féin a chinntiú ar bhonn leanúnach go bhfuil na polasaithe agus nósanna imeachta atá i bhfeidhm iomchuí agus éifeachtach.

As Members will appreciate, I take very seriously my duty and that of my Department to ensure that the safety of pupils is safeguarded in all aspects of their education. I regard their safety as of paramount importance, and I seek to ensure, on an ongoing basis, that the policies and procedures in place are appropriate and effective. On a without-prejudice basis, I remain to be convinced that responses to the particular situation were proportionate and timely.

Dá bhrí sin, scríobh mo Roinn chuig príomhfheidhmeannach Bhord Oideachais agus Leabharlainne an Iarthair lena iarraidh air iniúchadh a dhéanamh ar an dóigh ar bainistíodh an tsaincheist seo agus moltaí a dhéanamh ar cad iad na ceachtanna is féidir a fhoghlaim ón cheist maidir le polasaithe agus nósanna imeachta a fheabhsú chun sábháilteacht páistí a chosaint.

Accordingly, my Department has written to the chief executive of the Western Education and Library Board to instruct him to investigate the manner in which the situation was handled and to make recommendations on what lessons can be learned from that to enhance further the policies and procedures for protecting the safety of children. I expect a full report on or before 24 March 2010.

Maidir leis an ráiteas seo, beidh mé ag scríobh chuig Batt O’Keeffe TD, an tAire Oideachais agus Eolaíochta sa Deisceart, agus chuig mo chomhghleacaithe aireachta i Sasana, in Albain agus sa Bhreatain Bheag le mo chur chuige ar an tsaincheist seo a chur in iúl dóibh.

On the basis of this statement, I am writing to Batt O’Keeffe TD, Minister of Education and Science in the South, and to my ministerial counterparts in England, Scotland and Wales to inform them of my approach to the matter.

Cuirfear cóip den ráiteas seo chuig gach scoil agus eagraíocht eile atá faoi chothabháil ag mo Roinn.

A copy of this statement will issue today to all schools and other bodies that are grant-aided by my Department. My Department will issue follow-up guidance to the circular on Internet safety that was issued in June 2007. That new guidance will specifically refer to safeguarding arrangements in light of the SparkleBox experience.

Ina theannta sin, fanaim mo chuid feidhmeannach go hiomlán i ngleic le hidirghúpa aireachta na Roinne Sláinte um chosaint páistí. Tá an grúpa seo ag obair ar phlean gníomhaíochta a chuirfidh bearta i bhfeidhm le ríomh-shábháilteacht a fheabhsú do dhaoine óga.

Furthermore, my officials remain fully engaged with the DHSSPS interdepartmental group on safeguarding children. That group is progressing work on an action plan that will set in place measures to enhance even further e-safety for our children and young people.

Mar fhocal scoir, fanann an suíomh Sparklebox bactha ag C2k, iniúchfar go hiomlán bainistíocht an teagmhais seo, agus tiocfaidh mé ar ais don Tionól ar an tsaincheist seo chomh luath agus is féidir.

The SparkleBox site remains blocked by C2k. The handling of the incident will be fully investigated, and I will come back to the Assembly on the matter at the earliest opportunity. I am also writing to all the website providers to alert them to my concerns.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Obviously, this issue is of grave concern to the House, and we welcome the fact that the Minister has come here to make her statement. I inform the House that the Committee for Education requested and received a briefing from Department of Education officials in November 2009 on the measures that the Department had taken to provide protection for children at school.

The Committee was informed of new interagency structures, including, this year, the establishment of the Safeguarding Board for Northern Ireland and the current risk assessment arrangements for the supervision of convicted sex offenders as provided by the Northern Ireland Sex Offender Strategic Management Committee.

The SparkleBox case appears to expose a potential loophole that allowed a convicted sex offender to run a website that was aimed at schools and schoolchildren. Will the Minister assure the House that all convicted, registered child sex offenders are banned from having direct contact with children? Will she also explain what measures have been put in place in Northern Ireland to detect sex offenders who are seeking to set up websites that are aimed at schools and schoolchildren or seeking to work in such a business?

Speaking as a Member, I ask the Minister why it took a parent to notify the school of the situation, despite the information having been available since December 2009. Perhaps the Minister was being more than generous when she said:

“I remain to be convinced that responses to that particular situation were proportionate and timely.”

The response was highly inappropriate, as it was left to a parent. We must learn the lessons from that case.

Will the Minister explain what measures will be put in place immediately — as opposed to a review that will last for weeks — to protect children?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I pay tribute to the parent and the schools involved. It is important that, as parents, we are vigilant around Internet usage and safeguarding children. As Members know, the issues are complex, and there have been many similar Internet cases. Therefore, it is essential that police services across Ireland and between Britain and Ireland liaise closely. That is why, at some of the first meetings of the North/South Ministerial Council, child protection was at the top of the agenda, where all parties wanted it to be.

I share the Member’s concerns that all children in Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales need to be protected. I pledge to do everything that I can to ensure that that happens at all levels. It is a cross-cutting matter, across all Departments, and one which involves education, health and police services.

I asked to make a statement because I do not believe that any aspect of any issue that relates to safeguarding children should be hidden. I have come here openly to give a detailed statement. I have asked for the situation to be investigated — it is an investigation and not a review — because it is an issue that I take very seriously. I am not going to pre-empt the outcome of that. However, I have questions, which the investigation will look at, and I expect very clear answers.

One reason for the investigation is so that we can constantly learn and update our information. As I said, guidelines were brought forward in 2007. However, those guidelines need to be constantly updated. I, along with my Department, am contacting service providers in the North, in England, Scotland and Wales, and throughout the island of Ireland. We must block off all loopholes. I hope that that answers the Member’s question.

I want to talk briefly about child protection in schools. Through the curriculum, pupils are encouraged to develop strategies to keep safe. The personal development strand of the revised curriculum provides a vehicle for conveying messages about normal and acceptable behaviour, problem solving and sources of help and advice. Also, all staff, paid and unpaid, who are working in schools must be vetted to ensure that only suitable people work with pupils. In due course, they will be required to join the new vetting and barring scheme. Also, the arrangements set out in this paper for ensuring the appropriate response when concerns are raised about an individual pupil will aid child protection.

As the Member knows, all schools have a named designated teacher for child protection and a named deputy designated teacher. Go raibh maith agat.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her statement. What guidance or measures on Internet usage does the Department have in place to assist schools?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat as an cheist sin. Since April 2003, all grant-aided schools have been required to implement a child protection policy. When preparing its policy, a school must take into account the most recent advice from the Department of Education, the relevant education and library board and, in the case of Catholic maintained schools, the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools.

Advice to schools on child protection matters is issued by means of a departmental education circular. All advice issued by the Department is consistent with the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s document ‘Co-operating to Safeguard Children’ and the policies and procedures of the regional area child protection committee.

Schools are supported in their work to safeguard children by the Child Protection Support Service for Schools (CPSSS), which is based in each education and library board. The CPSSS operates a helpline for school staff on child protection issues and is accessible every day during term time. The CPSSS provides an extensive range of training and capacity building to designated teachers, principals, members of boards of governors and other staff who work with pupils and support schools with individual cases.

Every school inspection includes an examination of the arrangements for pastoral care and child protection by the Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI), and there is an agreed procedure in cases where a school’s arrangements are rated as unsatisfactory. In such cases, the ETI will reassess the position after six weeks, and, if the necessary improvements have not been made, the Department will intervene.

The advice and guidance given to schools are kept under continuous review. Within DE, the safeguarding advisory group comprises all key policy areas with responsibilities that contribute to child protection. It meets quarterly to review developments and exchange information. A standing group, the designated officers for child protection in education group (DOCPEG), has representatives from each of the education and library boards and is chaired by the Department. It meets monthly to consider emerging issues, such as the one that we are discussing, that arrive from casework in schools and developments in policy and best practice on safeguarding children in Ireland and elsewhere.

Representation of the schools sector’s interests at an operational level — on health and social services boards — is undertaken by members of DOCPEG.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

The Minister has outlined her concern on this issue. Is it possible to find out who has visited the website and discover whether any harmful material was downloaded?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

As I said, I do not want to pre-empt the outcome of the investigation. I will bring the Member’s question to the Western Education and Library Board. I was advised that there was no harmful content on the website, but I await the outcome of the investigation.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. This issue is of great concern to all Members. It is important that we reassure teachers and parents today that the system fully protects children in our schools and at home.

Instead of waiting for the outcome of any inquiry, will the Minister issue guidance today to C2k and the Western Education and Library Board informing them that immediate action will be taken and that schools will be informed directly if any similar situation occurs?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

My officials have been in touch with C2k. I will send a copy of the statement to schools, but I have informed the House first because it is appropriate to do so. There should be no hiding place for people who download pornography or have been convicted of offences that relate to pornography. The key issue is to protect our children and young people, and I will take every possible measure to ensure that our children are protected. I will take the Member’s comments on board. C2k and the Western Education and Library Board understand exactly the importance that I place on this issue, and they understand that harmful material needs to be blocked immediately.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I welcome the fact that the site has been blocked and that a full investigation will take place. Does the Minister have any information about the extent to which the site was used? The site provides resources for teachers. Has it been regarded as useful? I had never heard of it until recently. As Basil McCrea said, has any suspect material been found on the site? Lastly ― if I am allowed to ask another question ― it seems incredible that, given that the surname of the person in question has such an unusual spelling, he avoided the law at the outset of the episode by merely changing his Christian name. What checks are in place to prevent that happening in the first place?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I share the Member’s concern about people being able to change their name. The latest conviction was his second. The best check is for organisations in the health sector, the education sector and police services across Ireland and Britain to work together. We need to learn from this episode, and that is one reason why I will write to my counterparts in the South of Ireland and in England, Scotland and Wales. The best way to deal with the situation is to make information public so that the occurrence of a similar incident becomes much less likely. I have been informed that there was no suspect material on the site. However, I will await the outcome of the investigation.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I welcome the Minister’s statement. Is the Minister here today voluntarily, or was she advised by others to update the Assembly? Given that it is Internet safety week, it is timely to seek assurance that Internet safety is a key priority of the Department of Education. Will the Minister outline the input that her Department has given to the ministerial subgroup on safeguarding Internet safety? Moreover, will she provide an update on her Department’s interface with the work of the UK Council for Child Internet Safety?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I asked to make a statement in the House, because I understand the importance of the issues and I want to take appropriate action. As I said, child safety is paramount.

My Department actively works with the health sector and other organisations on Internet safety. I discussed suicide prevention and Internet use with my colleague Michael McGimpsey and the various working groups. That is a key issue, as is child pornography. I sit on the working group that deals with violence against women and children, and I take that issue very seriously. Indeed, my Department is working on a programme to consider the whole issue of sexual and domestic violence against women and children. This incident is part and parcel of that.

It is timely that this is Internet safety week. We need to learn from good practice not only on these islands but across Europe and across the world. The more we share good practice, the more chance we have of ensuring that individuals such as the person involved in this case cannot continue to operate as they have in the past.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the Minister’s statement and the importance that she has attached and attention that she has given to the issue.

It is important not to scaremonger, but parents have genuine concerns. Although the site is now blocked, what assurances can the Minister give to parents that previous use of the site has not allowed children to access questionable material?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

As I said, my information to date is that there is no harmful material on that website. Nevertheless, the investigation is continuing, and I will report back fully to the House on that. I want to reassure parents as best I can. I am a parent, and I understand the difficulties that surround Internet access. The Internet can be a very positive tool, but, equally, if it is not monitored and safeguarded correctly, it can be a very dangerous tool. As parents, we have huge responsibilities. Parents can be reassured that C2k has blocked the website even though no harmful material was found on it. It is right and proper that that website should be blocked.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

The Minister said that C2k became aware of this issue in December 2009, but that she had not been made aware of it until 29 January 2010. Will she tell the House why that was the case, and why she was not informed immediately about something of such magnitude? Will she tell the House what protocols exist to inform her immediately when something as serious as this occurs? When C2k took its initial decision, in the belief that adequate safeguards were in place, who did it consult to come to that determination?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I should have been informed as soon as C2k was aware of the situation. Indeed, I should have been informed in September 2009, when the individual was charged. The investigation needs to look at that. We must learn from that; procedures must be put in place across Ireland and Britain to ensure that action is taken to inform the relevant authorities as soon as someone is charged with such offences. The investigation will examine all my Department’s procedures and protocols as well as those of other bodies. This situation has an effect not just on education but on wider society, and it is an issue for police services across these islands.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

The Minister said that her officials are engaged in the investigation process. What has her personal involvement been in overseeing C2k’s protection policies?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I work very closely with all my officials on safeguarding and child protection. As soon as I heard about the matter in question, I called a meeting of senior officials. Safeguarding was one of the key areas of discussion. I told the meeting that I wanted to explain the situation to the Assembly immediately, and work began immediately to draw up my statement.

I am personally involved daily in child protection. I have worked with my officials to institute a new programme for safeguarding children in schools, and I will provide the House with details of that programme in the near future. It is starting in primary schools so that we can train teachers to look at the issues of domestic and sexual violence in an age-appropriate way and ensure that we deal with some of those issues at the earliest possible stage.

I have always said that violence against women and children at all levels is one of the key challenges facing our society, and I take it very seriously. We are looking at those issues from the point of view of our special educational needs and inclusion strategy. That is very important, and I am glad that some good may come out of my making a statement today. The more that we speak about this issue, and the more that we work across Departments, North and South, east and west, the better chance that we have of dealing with people such as the person who was found guilty of downloading images.

Conall McDevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I am sure that the House will be concerned to hear that I believe there to be a factual inaccuracy in the Minister’s statement. It was, in fact, on 28 December 2009 that a parent of a pupil at Stranmillis Primary School in south Belfast approached me in my capacity as a Member of the Assembly and made me aware of the situation. I, in turn, informed the school, and by way of a written question for two-day priority answer, I informed the Department of Education of the situation.

Why has my question for written answer, which was tabled on 28 January 2010 and was due for answer on 2 February 2010, not yet been answered? Furthermore, why was her Department asleep on its watch? What does that say about the record of the Assembly, the Executive and her party on child protection? It is simply not good enough. The answer to that question for written answer has not been received, and many parents will want proper answers as to why the Minister had to come to the House to make a statement for us to get the answers that we sought.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I have answered the Member’s question, and I welcome the tone of the debate. Nobody should play politics with this important issue. These are complex matters, and Internet safety is complex. I pledge to do everything that I can to protect our children.

I came to the House to explain what we are doing and to make sure that there will be a thorough investigation into the matter. I have answered the Member’s question, but before I could do so, I needed to investigate the matter fully and thoroughly. If there is an inaccuracy in the statement, I will correct it. The key point, however, is that we should not be playing politics. This is an issue that all of us must deal with together. Joint all-party working groups are dealing with issues such as violence against women and children. They are also dealing with suicide prevention, and the role of the Internet in that matter concerns us, too. Michael McGimpsey did very good work on that issue, and I was a member of the working group that dealt with it. Therefore, if there is an inaccuracy in the statement, I will correct it, but, please, do not play politics with child protection.

Conall McDevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I know that I am new to the House, and I may be forgiven for misreading Standing Orders, but I understand that the process for dealing with a two-day priority question for written answer is just that — a two-day process. That method was used on this occasion to expedite the information and to bring it into the public domain. I have still not received an answer to my question for written answer.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I certainly hear what the Member said. I have made it clear in the House and elsewhere on many occasions that I expect Members to get very prompt answers to priority questions for written answer that are asked of any Department. I have raised the matter in the past with the Executive, and I will do so in the future.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I raised with you previously the difficulty of receiving ministerial statements just as Members are about to speak on the matter in question. This is a serious issue; it is not an attempt to have a go at the Minister, because she apologised. I understand that, and that is fair enough. However, we need to find a way to get statements to Members in time for them to make proper responses. I need your help in that, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Once again, I hear the Member’s point of order. I have continually urged Ministers that they should, as far as possible, make statements available much earlier. However, the Minister apologised to the House, and she gave a frank reason as to why the statement was late.

Executive Committee Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

As no amendments have been selected, there is no opportunity to discuss the Water and Sewerage Services (Amendment) Bill today. Members will, of course, be able to have a full debate at Final Stage. Further Consideration Stage is, therefore, concluded. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

Committee 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 in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes.

Jim Wells, Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, was to move the motion. Unfortunately, Jim has been taken ill, and our thoughts are with him. Michelle O’Neill, the Deputy Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, has kindly stepped into the breach.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I also extend my best wishes to Jim, and I hope that he makes a speedy recovery.

The events of 13 November 2007 were appalling. Seven people, five of whom were children, died in a house fire in the Lammy area of Omagh. The magnitude of that outrage, which was one of the most horrific cases ever seen, warrants a public inquiry.

However, the Committee thought long and hard before agreeing to table the motion. Members did not want an inquiry to rake up the tragedy of the events in Omagh or to cause more pain to the families and individuals involved. The Committee wants to take into account the feelings of the bereaved McElhill and McGovern families, who have suffered over the past two years. Those two families are not the only ones who suffered, as the tragic event had a considerable impact on the local community. That is why individual members of the Committee were tasked with discussing the possibility of a public inquiry either with communities in the Omagh area or with their local party representatives.

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

The motion calls for a time-bound inquiry into the multi-agency aspects of the tragedy, and it does not aim to rake up the events. From consulting individual members of the families involved, we understand that, in those limited circumstances, they would cautiously welcome an inquiry. A number of reviews have taken place since the Omagh tragedy, including the coroner’s report and the wide-ranging Toner report. It covered the health, social services and education aspects of the event, and it was welcomed at the time. The Committee heard from the Western Trust that the Toner report’s recommendations have been extremely useful. The recommendations were accepted fully and have helped to shape and improve children’s services across the North.

The Committee is aware that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has asked Henry Toner QC to revisit the Western Trust to find out whether and how his recommendations have been implemented. The Committee welcomes the Minister’s actions, but is still concerned that new information has come to light as a result of the coroner’s report. That information reminds us that numerous agencies, not only the Western Health and Social Care Trust, were involved in the awful tragedy.

The police, the Probation Board and the Prison Service also had roles to play. After the events, each of those organisations held an internal review in addition to a multi-agency case review. The Committee has seen and considered the multi-agency case review, which was highly specific. It focused on the inter-agency handling of Arthur McElhill as a registered sex offender from his time in prison until his death in November 2007. The Committee’s view is that the public inquiry should consider the roles of all those organisations and, specifically, how they interacted.

The Western Trust has been open and public about its role in the events. That is to be commended, as it helped to raise public confidence that the trust is not trying to hide anything. When the Committee spoke with the trust recently, members were impressed by how seriously it took the Toner report’s recommendations on child protection. We also became aware of the impact that the tragedy has had on staff in the Western Trust and the amount of stress and strain under which they have been placed. Social services staff were particularly devastated by the tragedy.

As Deputy Chairperson of the Committee, I acknowledge that people working in child protection have a difficult job. It is an incredibly complicated and stressful job, yet, every day, in a quiet and private manner, social services staff in the Western Trust work to protect and to look after children. I hope that I have been clear that the Committee is not interested in social-worker bashing. We recognise that they do a difficult job, often in trying and heart-rending circumstances, with little public acknowledgement but a high degree of professionalism.

However, the other organisations involved, such as the PSNI and the Probation Board, lie outside the remit of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Those agencies are not devolved and remain under the remit of the Secretary of State. Therefore, the motion calls on the Minister to seek the consent of the Secretary of State to the multi-agency inquiry. The Committee wants a public examination of how those agencies worked together, communicated, relayed information and acted on their joint concerns.

An inquiry should take account of that and, indeed, of the information that emerged from the recent coroner’s report. It should not focus solely on the Western Trust. The inquiry should be time-bound because we do not want an expensive inquiry that runs for months or even years. The Committee does not want any wallowing in the horrible details of the case, but it wants to ensure that such a terrible situation can never be allowed to arise again.

The Committee will soon focus some of its attention on the policy area of child protection. At the end of February, we will begin a detailed and focused consideration of the main issues and factors in relation to safeguarding children and how to improve multi-agency working. We have arranged to take evidence from a range of bodies, including the PSNI, children’s charities and health and social care trusts. We will use that opportunity to explore the issues concerning multi-agency working in an attempt to improve the situation. On behalf of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I ask Members to support the motion.

Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion and congratulate the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety for bringing the debate to the House. The tragic events of Tuesday 13 November 2007, when a fire killed seven people — two adults and five children — were traumatic for everyone concerned: the McGovern family, the McElhill family, the local community of Lammy in Omagh, the emergency services, social workers, the wider Omagh community and local elected representatives.

In coming to my decision to call for a public inquiry, I read the Toner report, the Watkins report and the inquest reports. I also had a number of meetings with various agencies and the two families concerned. Before Christmas, I met the personnel responsible for public protection arrangements, including the PSNI. Broadly speaking, their view was that the Watkins report covered all their responsibilities and that the new public protection arrangements had corrected any shortcomings that may have existed in the old multi-agency sex offender risk assessment and management (MASRAM) arrangements. The people responsible for the public protection arrangements did not see any great value in a public inquiry.

Before and after Christmas, I had meetings and conducted telephone conversations with the McGovern and McElhill families. The McGovern family and, indeed, the McElhill family were hugely concerned about the re-emergence of public focus on the case. However, the McGovern family felt that they would go along with a public inquiry if it could save any other person or family.

The McElhill family was hugely affected by the tragedy and felt that they, as an extended family, were being blamed for what happened; they were traumatised. Both families had a huge number of questions that they wanted to be answered. The McElhill family was not particularly convinced that a public inquiry would help; they were neither for nor against the idea. However, although the family was afraid of the public focus that may be placed on it, its members still had many questions that they wanted to be answered.

I met senior representatives from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety who felt that the 63 recommendations of the Toner report had met all the demands. On the same day, I met Paul Goggins from the NIO. He referred to the Watkins and Toner reports and said that although he was not minded to hold a public inquiry, he was minded to try to find a mechanism that would provide answers to the families’ questions.

I was also in touch with the Policing Board, and I am glad to say that it has made moves for social workers to work in co-operation with the PSNI. I meet the Lammy community representative regularly, and I am mindful that a spokesperson for the social workers’ trade union has called for a public inquiry.

Having read the Toner report, the Watkins report and the findings of the inquest, and having held all the meetings to which I have referred, I conclude that there was a lack of cohesion among the agencies. That can, and has, led to warning signals not being noted. Such warning signals can prevent tragedies from occurring. Therefore, I support the motion and call for a public inquiry.

As we strive to secure the Secretary of State’s agreement for a public inquiry, we must be mindful of the acute sensitivities of everyone involved, particularly those of the families and the local community in Lammy, Omagh. An example of that is the burnt-out remains of the McElhill home. However, communication is under way between the Housing Executive and the McElhill family to have that issue resolved. The community is well aware of that.

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

Will the Member please bring his remarks to a close?

Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I thank the Western Education and Library Board’s critical incident response team, which supported the local community throughout the trauma, and I thank the emergency services.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

Like others, I wish the Chairperson of the Committee a speedy recovery.

The tragedy that occurred in Omagh in November 2007 was a truly awful event for the families of those involved, the wider community, the town and the district. An entire family perished in the fire. It was a human tragedy, and it brings very sobering thoughts to us all. The whole House offers its sympathy to the families and the community on the memory of that awful event.

It is clear that there were failings in the system with respect to the McElhill case. In at least 10 points in the Toner report, the panel found instances when what should have been done was not done. Toner concluded that although none of the agencies involved had any indication that such tragic events were about to happen, those agencies identified processes that could have been better carried out. The files of previous relevant cases should have been sought by those involved in the McElhill case at particular points, but they were not. Information that should have been passed from one agency to another was not passed on. A risk-management discussion should have taken place, but it did not. The Toner panel identified those failings and drew them to public attention. They are now in the public domain, together with the panel’s recommendations, and that is important. Failings have been identified, together with recommendations on how to ensure that they do not recur. We can all read those recommendations, and Members, particularly members of the Health Committee, can check the progress made by the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety in implementing them.

The Toner inquiry was independent, thorough and covered all the relevant agencies. The report makes recommendations that involve the Police Service, and the panel included a senior police officer. Recently, the Minister asked Mr Toner to return to the Western Trust to ensure that those recommendations are being implemented. The Committee will want to make similar checks.

Let me reiterate: mistakes were made, they have been identified and steps have been taken to ensure that they are not repeated. The people involved have been informed of what they did wrong in this case. No useful purpose would be served by asking those people the same questions that Mr Toner asked them, simply so that they may be held up to blame. I do not wish to see the community in Omagh or the bereaved families put through another inquiry unless there is sound reason for it. There might be reason for it if a case can be made that Toner was not independent, was not sufficiently wide ranging, or did not cover all the issues. I remain to be convinced that that case has been made.

As the motion implies, the Secretary of State is responsible for initiating an inquiry. The Health Committee should, perhaps, ask for his opinion and seek to persuade him that an inquiry is necessary.

The Toner inquiry was independent and thorough. It also identified all the salient information about the case, so would a repeat of that process be a good use of time? I aired my concerns about holding a public inquiry when the matter was discussed by the Health Committee. Mr Doherty talked about the effect that such an inquiry could have on the families and the community, although I accept that he thought that a public inquiry was necessary. However, after hearing evidence from the communities and Ulster Unionist Party representatives in that area, I am certainly not convinced that a public inquiry would be welcomed by everyone.

When people talk about public inquiries —

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

Bring your remarks to a close, please.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

I have huge concerns about how a time-bound public inquiry would be held.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I associate myself with the Deputy Chairperson’s condolences to the families and the wider community who were bereaved as a result of that dreadful tragedy.

The Committee thought very seriously about the wording of the motion because this is a very sensitive subject. The last thing that anyone wishes to do is to make life more distressful for anyone involved or to open wounds that people are trying to heal. The length of time between the tragedy and the process of the coroner’s inquest has not allowed people an opportunity to grieve or to come to terms with their dreadful loss.

Mr McCallister made it clear that the Toner report and the Watkins report were very wide-ranging and that many lessons were learned. He asked whether there were any gaps, which is one of the areas that we need to look at. The Deputy Chairperson of the Committee said that if additional information came about through the inquest, there may well be a gap that needs to be addressed. That needs to be given some consideration.

Some Members paid tribute to the many good staff who work in very difficult psychological and emotional cases in which the best and worst of human relation­ships are exposed. We are told that 54 of the Toner report’s 55 recommendations in respect of trusts have been implemented. It would be helpful if the Minister could outline whether all those have been implemented fully and whether the lessons were learned across all the trusts in the North, because the lack of investment in social services goes much wider than the McElhill/McGovern issue.

I have been disappointed that the Health Committee has not concentrated on social services as much as it ought to. It has given a lot of consideration to health matters, sometimes to the detriment of other areas of responsibility that the Committee has to scrutinise.

I welcome the Minister’s presence for the debate. I noted that he said that an additional £20 million would be invested in social services up to the end of 2011. How much of that £20 million is new money and additional resource? Does it come from existing budgets? We all know how difficult it is to recruit social workers into childcare. Retaining them is even more difficult because of the emotional toil that it takes on their lives, never mind the work that it involves overall.

There are lessons to be learned by the police, the Policing Board and other agencies. There is also a real responsibility on us, as a society, to protect our children. So-called nosy neighbours who peek out from behind curtains and comment on what they see have a place in society. However, they must do something about what they see and report wrongdoing. We are all challenged not to stand idly by, merely look on or turn away from goings-on in our own communities.

Our party will carefully consider the call for a public inquiry. I look forward to hearing from the Minister. The motion has been carefully worded. As Mr McCallister said, we should find out what the Criminal Justice Minister, Mr Paul Goggins, has to say, because some of the responsibility for an inquiry lies with him. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety may have had those conversations, and I hope that he will inform the House of their outcome.

Séan Neeson (Alliance, East Antrim)

My contribution to the debate will be brief. I join other Members in wishing the Chairman of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety well. I hope that he makes a speedy recovery.

Alliance Party Members support the motion tabled by the Committee. The tragedy was yet another major blow for Omagh. I went to Omagh the day after the bomb in 1998, and the community has again been badly affected by the incident at Lammy Crescent, which should never have happened. The warning signs were already there and should have been acted upon.

The Toner inquiry was extensive, and many of its recommendations have been implemented. It is important to learn lessons from the tragedy. If the warning signs had been heeded, the event might not have happened. However, the final point that I want to make is that what happened was a tragedy and our condolences must go to the families concerned. If a public inquiry is held, I hope that it will not be lengthy or as expensive as so many of the public inquiries in Northern Ireland over the years.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I support the motion. I grew up near, and have close associations with, Omagh. The town is dear to my heart. I have been privileged to serve on its council since 1993 and to represent the area in the Assembly since 2007.

We all know that Omagh has experienced more than its fair share of tragedy. It is famous all over the world for the worst terrorist atrocity of the Troubles. In August 1998, 29 persons and two unborn children were brutally murdered; something that tore the town apart. It took quite some time to rebuild community relations in Omagh to the level that had existed before the bombing.

Just nine years later, tragedy struck again when, on 13 November 2007, a fire broke out in Lammy Crescent, in which a whole family — mother, father and five young children aged from 10 months to 13 years — perished. Unsurprisingly, there was immediate shock and horror at such a dreadful event.

The whole country was stunned by what, at first, seemed to be a terrible but natural tragedy. However, news began to emerge that the fire was started deliberately by a father, who had, himself, died, and feelings of shock and horror turned to ones of disbelief and anguish. We were faced with a suicide and multiple murder; an absolute nightmare. Then, as evidence began to emerge about Arthur McElhill, disbelief turned to anger. Everywhere I went, people rightly asked how on earth the authorities could have failed to heed all the warning signs. That question was very difficult to answer.

It is more than two years since those appalling events, but the pain and agony of the two families whose loved ones died in the fire is still very real. In addition, at the end of last year, they had to endure the ordeal of an inquest. Our thoughts and prayers must continue to be with the McGovern and McElhill families. We must remember that their pain will go on; it will not be forgotten, so they must not be forgotten. However, in this debate, it would not be fair to them to go into the events of November 2007 in any detail. Indeed, it is not necessary to do so.

To make sure that the Lammy Crescent tragedy never happens again, it is important that lessons are learned. In that case, the failures by the relevant agencies were among the worst to be found anywhere. They were basic, fundamental and, worst of all, totally inexcusable. Although failures were found in particular key agencies, there is also evidence of an amazing lack of co-ordination and communication between those agencies. Why, on the basis of clear and extensive evidence going back several years, was Arthur McElhill, a convicted sex offender, regarded by officials as only being at low risk to himself and others? Why was preventative action that might have spared his life and the lives of his innocent partner and children not taken? Arthur McElhill had been known to the criminal and care authorities since 1993, but he was able to slip through the net, with most dreadful consequences.

I welcome the 63 recommendations in the Toner report, which was published last July. I welcome the progress that has been made on implementing Henry Toner’s recommendations, but, to ensure that they are fully and swiftly implemented, I urge the Health Minister to keep the pressure on the authorities. Nevertheless, in light of what emerged from the Toner report and the recent inquest, there would be merit in holding a public inquiry. I know that inquiries can be costly and, sometimes, their conclusions can be ambiguous; however, in this case, the issues are so serious that a time-bound investigation would be a worthwhile exercise. Indeed, I go further and say that an investigation is vital to ensure that lessons are learned and such tragedies do not happen again.

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

The Member should bring his remarks to a close.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

We have no desire to go back over the events of the tragedy. Nothing that we do can undo what happened of that dreadful day in November 2007.

Mr Deputy Speaker has called on me to finish. I support the motion.

Claire McGill (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I also send my best wishes to the Chairperson of the Health Committee.

As a member of the Health Committee and as an MLA for West Tyrone, the constituency in which the awful tragedy occurred, I support the motion. There has been a lot of pain associated with the case, to which the local MP, Pat Doherty, referred, and he has spoken to the families. Therefore, I do not want to say anything that might add to the pain of anyone who was engaged with or in any way involved in the tragedy.

The McElhill/McGovern case is complex and multifaceted, and the two reports that are in the public domain, the Toner report and the Watkins report, illustrate those different aspects. Clearly, each report has a different focus and emphasis.

I commend the Western Trust for implementing the Toner report’s recommendations. It is obvious in that report that mistakes were made and that the system did not work for the family. However, I must say that my reading of the Watkins report gave me no sense that the same gaps, issues and difficulties existed. For that reason, I believe that the motion is appropriate in this case. I want to repeat that its aim is not to raise a sensitive issue again and to cause difficulty for anyone who was involved with that particular tragedy.

I shall quote from the Toner report to illustrate its points and to tie them in with the Health Committee’s motion. The report states:

“there were misconceptions on the part of many involved from the police and Social Services as to the role of the other agency and what might reasonably be expected from that other agency.”

It goes on to state:

“The Interagency/ multi-disciplinary working across the range of professionals and other agencies was weak, confirmed through the records examined, interviews conducted and comments received from the various agencies”.

As I have said, it is commendable that the Western Trust has implemented a number of the Toner Report’s recommendations.

I turn now to the Watkins report. Comments have been made about the NIO. It issued a press release after the publication of the report, stating:

“The report found that there were no material deficiencies in inter-agency co-operation in relation to the delivery of the MASRAM arrangements in the case of Arthur McElhill.”

The Watkins report’s introduction refers to the case, which, it states:

“did not appear to have any sexual dimension”.

Point 7 of the report states:

“Our approach has been, as required by the terms of reference, to retain the focus on McElhill as a sex offender”.

Point 11 states:

“McElhill was also required to be placed on the Sex Offender Register indefinitely”.

Finally, the PSNI visited the family many times. The Watkins report commends it for doing so. It states:

“The PSNI then visited McElhill again (and finally, as it turned out) on 5 November, noting no cause for concern.”

The entire McElhill family perished on 13 November 2007.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

The events that happened in Omagh were, undoubtedly, a tragedy. We were all shocked to hear initial reports and what subsequently came to bear. It is perhaps worth saying that just because a tragedy happens does not necessarily mean that everyone is at fault.

As a member of the Policing Board, I chair its human rights and professional standards committee. I want to clarify for the Deputy Chairperson of the Health Committee that the PSNI is under the oversight of politicians who represent all parties. The committee has looked at the issue.

It is perhaps worth adding that I have spoken to the senior police officers involved and to others, and they have said that the decision-making process would not have changed, based on the information that was put forward to them. There was an offence in 1993 and a further offence in 1998, and, in 2004, a review was undertaken and the priority for Mr McElhill was downgraded from category two to category one. On that basis, the responsibility moved to the PSNI, and the designated risk manager visited Mr McElhill regularly, in line with requirements under the MASRAM procedures. However, there is an issue about the message that we all send out to the general public. I think that we are in danger of castigating members of staff in the social services, the PSNI and elsewhere, who work in really difficult situations.

The point that I put to the House is that if lessons have been learned and the appropriate working relationships are now improved, one would have to consider whether a public inquiry is the right way to go, because there is a danger that an excessive amount of money could be spent on learning lessons that have already been learned. Therefore, perhaps a report should come from the House.

Our party will abstain from voting on the motion. We are open to persuasion, but there is sometimes a danger of having to be seen to be doing something because there has been a tragedy, and the public demand that something ought to be done about it. If all the right things had been done, or are being done, we would be better placed to use resources to prevent tragedies from happening in the future, rather than reporting on past tragedies.

At a senior level, we have not stepped up to the mark in respect of a number of issues. When the coroner’s report was published, the multi-agency response was abysmal. Nobody came forward to explain the situation, and none of the organisations said that they were going to step forward and explain it to people for fear of being castigated as the agency that was responsible.

The procedures must be tightened up. As things stand, Assistant Chief Constable Will Kerr chairs the committee, and I have told him that he has to decide which agency is responsible. Is the committee simply a get-together, or does it have some statutory responsibility? Are there other things that we need to do? The public confidence messages that we send out are important.

Having looked closely at the public protection units, the PSNI has brought in some excellent measures, and it carries out its work in very trying circumstances. Recommendation 54 of the Toner report states that the PSNI should consider the secondment of a social services staff member. However, the difficulty was that we could not get anybody to come and do that work because of recruitment issues. People are trying to work together on these trying, difficult areas, and they need support. I urge the House to send a clear message to the public that we are on top of the matter, we are working together on it, and we are going to make the appropriate decisions to safeguard the people of Northern Ireland.

Tommy Gallagher (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I, too, want to say at the outset that the families who have been caught up in the centre of this tragedy have suffered great hurt and pain. There is also sadness and sorrow in the wider Omagh community. The McElhill family home is in County Fermanagh, and some of the family still live there with their parents, while others live in Tyrone and elsewhere. The McGovern family home is across the border in County Cavan. For those families, pain is an everyday experience, and it is something that simply will not go away.

I have spoken to some of the family members, and they say that the wounds of the event can be reopened by an occurrence as simple as passing a shop, when they are out and about, and seeing newspapers or magazines that are reporting something to do with the tragedy. That is how they live.

I am not entirely convinced about the need for a public inquiry. We have to rely on the professionals and respect their advice on such sensitive issues as this. We also have to listen to the public. I am getting a strong message from the public, aside from the families who have been caught up in the tragedy. The public are asking why we would throw money on more inquiries. They are saying that there are serious problems in homes where children live and where they are at risk and that money should be spent in that area. We have to keep all those things in balance.

Reference has been made to the Toner report and to the other reports that look at the serious cases that are being covered by the PSNI and the Prison Service. We must ensure that every letter of every recommendation in those reports is implemented. Members will hear from the Minister shortly, but I believe that there is a case in favour of the Department appointing to the Western Trust an independent individual to ensure that every weakness that is highlighted is dealt with and that the same mistakes will not happen again.

In 2009, we had the death of a young baby girl in her home in Enniskillen. The report of the western area’s childcare committee was published recently, and we have to be concerned about its conclusions. In the past year, the PSNI in Fermanagh forwarded 52 prosecution files to the PPS. Those files related to child abuse, which, as Members know, could be physical or sexual abuse. That pattern is replicated across the western area in the Omagh and Derry districts. In addition, the number of children on the child protection register has grown noticeably over the past three years. That confirms that something has to be done now to ensure the safety of young children, even in their own homes.

Setting up public inquiries merely because of startling headlines might be a distraction from a growing problem, and I have mentioned some of the facts around that. There are, therefore, increased demands for assistance from social services and family support services and for the services that they provide, which, at present, are badly under-resourced and undermanned. Those services in the west are under a lot of pressure; the figures speak for themselves. We cannot continue like that. The Deputy Chairperson of the Health Committee said that there would be a Committee inquiry, and there is a possibility of a public inquiry.

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

Will the Member draw his remarks to a close?

Tommy Gallagher (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Those sorts of inquiries must not distract staff resources, which are already scarce, from a very serious problem. To do so, will demoralise the staff in the area who are working valiantly and leave them fed up, alone and isolated.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

The events of 13 November 2007 are forever etched in our memories. Even now, more than two years later, it is difficult to comprehend how such a terrible tragedy could occur. The tragic events have had a tremendous impact on the community in Omagh and, in particular, on the families and friends of the victims, who will have to live with the grief for the rest of their lives. I am sure that I speak for all Members when I say that they are in our thoughts and prayers.

As Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I have a shared responsibility for the issue with other Ministers, given that the Western Trust was one of a number of key agencies involved with the McElhill/McGovern family. Early on, I recognised the need for an inquiry, which is why, in January 2008, I appointed Henry Toner to investigate the role of the health and social care agencies that were involved with the family. Anyone who has read the Toner report will recognise that the investigation into the role that the health and social care agencies played with the McElhill/McGovern family was extensive and thorough. It identified a number of deficiencies and made 63 recommendations, 55 of which were directed at the Western Trust.

For many people, including Members of the Assembly, today’s debate shows that there remains the belief that there are unanswered questions regarding those events. Seven people died at Lammy Crescent. In the minds of many people, for something so terrible to have happened, someone must be to blame and someone should be punished.

The Coroner concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, Arthur McElhill and Lorraine McGovern had been up all night. She also concluded that Lorraine McGovern was about to leave and take some of her children with her when the fire was started by Arthur McElhill. All seven members of the family died as a result of the inhalation of fire fumes.

I recognise that there is a significant issue in relation to public confidence, which is why I asked Mr Toner to return to the Western Trust. His role will be to confirm that all of the recommendations in his original report have been implemented, and I expect his findings to be with me by the end of March 2010. Toner’s original report identified a number of deficiencies in the performance of social services in particular in the Western Trust area. However, Henry Toner also concluded that there was no evidence that any of those health agencies could have anticipated that the tragic events of 13 November 2007 were about to occur. He said that no reasonable person could have predicted those tragic events.

The protection of children is a key priority for me and for all of us here. The events at Lammy Crescent reinforce what we already know, which is that, overwhelmingly, children come to harm at the hands of people in their own family and friends of the family. We also know that a number of factors are often present in child protection cases, including domestic violence, substance misuse and mental health problems. To some extent, all of those issues appear to have been present in this case. The other major factor is deprivation.

In Northern Ireland today, 100,000 children live in poverty, 40,000 live in households where there is substance misuse, 11,000 live in families where they witness domestic violence on a daily basis, and many thousands of adults and children across society suffer from depression and other forms of mental health problems. Day and daily, social workers and other healthcare professionals are out there on the ground helping families and children to deal with those issues. Overall, they do an excellent job in extremely difficult circumstances. I am tired of hearing unfair criticism of the dedicated professionals who deal with extremely difficult and sensitive cases. We must never forget the thousands of cases where the intervention of social workers prevented children from coming to harm. Recent research has shown a 38% drop in the number of violent and unexplained deaths of children in England and Wales, and we operate the same system here. Social workers in Northern Ireland continue to make a real difference in the lives of children and families every single day.

Even if we had the best resourced and most effective service in the world, it would be impossible to ensure that no child or adult would ever come to harm. As Minister, I have sought to target additional resources at child protection, mental health services, domestic violence, substance misuse, and sexual violence. Despite that, those services remain comparatively under-resourced, compared to the rest of the United Kingdom.

The inquiry into the role of health and social services in the tragic events at Lammy Crescent identified the lessons that had to be learned.

It is not for me alone to decide whether a public inquiry should be held. Social services were only one of the agencies involved with the McGovern/McElhill family. The Northern Ireland Office and the police were also monitoring Arthur McElhill as a sex offender. I would not support a public inquiry into the tragedy unless I genuinely believed that it would reveal previously unknown information.

Henry Toner and his team produced an extremely detailed report, which clearly identified failings on the part of social services and other agencies in the Western Trust area. They also made several recommendations in relation to those failings. As a result, and on the basis of actions arising from those areas for which I have responsibility, no substantive grounds exist for holding a public inquiry into the tragedy. Furthermore, all Members should be mindful of the distressing effect that a public inquiry would have on both families, because of the ongoing and significant media interest in the case. The costs of a public inquiry would have to be met from budgets that are already under pressure. However, if I believed that a public inquiry would address any unanswered questions, and if the Northern Ireland Office and the police felt that an inquiry was required, I would support it.

All our efforts must be aimed at minimising the risk of such terrible events occurring in the future. However, to enable us to protect children and vulnerable adults to the best of our ability, those services must be properly resourced. If any Member seriously believes that the latest proposed £113 million cut in the health and social services budgets will not have a negative impact on those services, he or she is badly mistaken. Historically, family and children’s services in Northern Ireland have been under-resourced by some 30% compared with the rest of the UK. Those are not my figures; they were provided by the Department of Finance and Personnel and OFMDFM. I inherited that situation, but the demand for social services has not ceased. Indeed, it continues to grow, and during the past five years, the number of children referred to social services has increased by almost one third.

For the past two and a half years, I have been warning the Assembly about the dangers of underfunding health and social care. As the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I have increased spending on services for children by 14%. That has not eradicated the underfunding of those services, but at least I have attempted to close the gap. That historical underfunding is also the reason why the Department has driven forward improvements. Recently, for example, I secured £3·5 million of additional recurrent funding to help in the recruitment of around 70 more front line social services posts. That extra staffing compliment includes about 30 posts at principal practitioner, social worker, senior practitioner and team leader levels in front line child protection and family intervention teams, and it will, effectively, result in an extra team for each trust. However, those investments are now under threat.

In line with a key Toner recommendation, further posts will be created to assist with public protection arrangements and to enable trusts to discharge their role in monitoring sex offenders. The Department is, for example, funding pilot initiatives that will place social workers in police units in each trust area: the police are not funding that, health and social services are. Those social workers will work closely with the police on improving communication and intervention to help child and adult victims.

Family intervention teams play a crucial role in helping families in need to address problems before they lead to child protection concerns. Those teams undertake more detailed assessments and work with children and families in need, and the majority of the new posts are likely to be in those teams, which also have the most unallocated cases.

Child protection services are in the midst of a substantial and ongoing reform programme to introduce improved assessments of children in need and to ensure that better services are delivered. That programme will address several key weaknesses that were identified by child protection inspections and inquiries into cases, such as the McGovern/McElhill tragedy, in which children died or came to serious harm.

The reform programme includes the introduction of a single assessment tool for children; common standards of supervision for front line staff and recording of files and key documents; improved information sharing; common thresholds of need and intervention; common organisational structures across trusts; a pilot scheme to monitor social workers’ caseloads; and new arrange­ments to embed those standards and guidance into undergraduate training at Northern Ireland’s two universities. We also continue to monitor closely the number of unallocated cases in health and social care trusts. Trusts have received investment to help to reduce those cases, and we will continue to monitor that to see what additional actions may be necessary.

I know that, despite that, much more needs to be done. I worry about the level of resourcing that I have been able to deploy into all those services. I can only imagine how much more difficult it is for professionals working on the ground with families and children who desperately need help and support. On previous occasions I have said that, as an Assembly and an Executive, we must be mature about the difficult choices that we face. How we invest in and protect our children speaks volumes to the outside world about the type of Government that we are and about the sort of country that this is and what we hope it to be in the future. We need to look for opportunities when they arise to try to make things better.

I am awaiting Henry Toner’s follow-up report, and I fully expect that to provide assurance that actions have been taken to fully implement all his recommendations in the Western Trust. Members have asked about the outstanding issues that are being worked on in the Department. We still have to complete the child-protection guidance, but that is awaiting the new child-protection arrangements that will be introduced later this year, which will help to inform the final part of that work. The other outstanding recommendation for the trust is the timely distribution of minutes, which relates to ensuring that minutes of meetings are properly shared among the other agencies. Members have made important points about sharing across agencies in the field of health and social care for which I have a responsibility. That has been one of my key priorities, and the Toner report provides the blueprint and format for that.

That is where we are as far as the Health Service is concerned. I believe that I have taken all reasonable steps in the area of health and social care. However, if the Assembly votes in favour of the motion, I will write to the First Minister and deputy First Minister to ask them to raise the issue with the Secretary of State.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank Members for taking part in the debate and also for being mindful of the sensitivities around it. I hope that it has been made clear, through the contributions of members of the Health Committee and local representatives, that no one wants an inquiry simply to rake over old ground or to reopen wounds that were beginning to heal. As a Committee, we are very aware that it is not only the families that have been affected but the wider community. We have heard from senior social workers who have been incredibly stressed by events, as well as from local GPs who have evidence of the stress that people in the local community have been under.

The Committee is aware of the number of reviews and reports carried out on the events in question, all of which have been useful and have led to lessons being learned. However, it believes that more could be done and that all the reviews and reports have missed one very important area: how did all the agencies that were involved work together and communicate? The Committee believes that lessons can be learned about that. Inter-agency working is difficult, wherever the setting, but the issue concerns children’s lives, and the better that that inter-agency working is done, the better the protection that we can offer children.

The motion calls for an inquiry into the multi-agency aspects of the tragedy: that must be underlined. The Committee believes that that can be done without unnecessarily raking up events of the past. Members have spoken about cost. The Committee does not want to see an expensive inquiry that runs and runs. It has to be time bound and focused, and it has to consider the multi-agency aspects and how they work together. The Committee is aware that other agencies involved in such an inquiry are likely to be the PSNI, the Probation Board and the Prison Service.

We are aware that a case review took place on the inter-agency handling of Arthur McElhill as a registered sex offender. That review was commissioned by the sex offender strategic management committee and involved those agencies.

The Committee is also aware that it is not within the remit of the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to establish such an inquiry, but the Minister can ask the Secretary of State to initiate a review, and we call on him to do so. I welcome the positive comments that the Minister made at the end of his contribution when he said that if the House were to vote in favour of the motion, he would talk to OFMDFM about making that contact and taking the matter forward.

I will now turn to Members’ contributions during the debate. Pat Doherty spoke about the sensitivities of the families and of the local area, and he said that he had spoken to both families. Pat has spoken to many of the relevant agencies, and he believes that there is a lack of cohesion among those who work in child protection. He feels that more needs to be done and that a public inquiry is warranted.

John McCallister does not believe that a public inquiry is necessary. He said that the Toner report was wide-ranging and independent and that it covered all the agencies that were involved. The Committee does not dispute the findings of the Toner report, but we believe that lessons need to be learned in collective working, and we want the inquiry to focus on that. Mr McCallister recognised that during the handling of the case and leading up to the tragedy, mistakes were made, such as the fact that it was not ensured that case conferences happened. He said that the Toner report dealt with those mistakes and that an inquiry would serve no purpose. The Committee disputes that.

Dolores Kelly offered condolences to the family, welcomed the lessons that were learned from the Toner inquiry and the Watkins inquiry and paid tribute to the social services staff, who work in difficult conditions. The Minister referred to the unfair criticism of healthcare professionals in social services. The Committee is not for one minute suggesting that those staff should be criticised. We recognise that they do difficult work in difficult conditions. The Committee is not about bashing those staff. Dolores said that the lack of investment in social services was disappointing, and she questioned whether the additional £20 million promised for social care was recycled money or new money.

Sean Neeson said that the community in Omagh had been affected by the 1998 bomb, and he talked about the effect that this tragedy had on the Lammy area. He said that the terrible incident might never have happened if the warning signs had been heeded. Obviously, we cannot suggest that the tragedy would not have happened, but if proper and improved inter-agency work had been taken forward, at least we could have been more sure that the proper procedures had been applied. Mr Neeson supported the motion, but he said that any inquiry should be neither lengthy nor costly.

Thomas Buchanan supported the motion and said that lessons needed to be learned to prevent future tragedies. He welcomed the Toner report’s recommendations and asked the Minister to maintain pressure on agencies to make improvements. I welcome the fact that the Western Trust has implemented 53 of the 55 recommendations in the Toner report, but we want improvement in multi-agency working.

Claire McGill, who represents the area, said that the case is complex and has many aspects. She said that the Toner report and the Watkins report looked at those aspects, and she commended the Western Trust for implementing Toner’s recommendations, for recognising that mistakes were made and for its willingness to learn from them. Mistakes include misconceptions of the role of other agencies and lack of inter-agency working, and we need to get to the bottom of that.

Tommy Gallagher referred to the great hurt and pain of the families and the communities, but he is not entirely convinced of the need for a public inquiry. He has listened to the public, who were concerned that money spent on an inquiry could be better spent on child protection. Perhaps Tommy misunderstood me when he thought that the Committee was going to conduct an inquiry into child protection. Just to clear the matter up, we are considering a new piece of legislation on safeguarding.

Basil McCrea said that local politicians have a level of oversight for the PSNI. The PSNI has told me that its decision-making protocols would not have changed. Members of the public have suggested that the improvements that have been put in place are not working, but the message must be sent clearly to the public that we are taking the issue of child protection seriously and that we want to improve inter-agency working. Although individual agencies might have done their jobs, they did not do that collectively.

I now turn to the Minister’s comments. He said that responsibility for this is not down to him alone, and the Committee accepts that other agencies need to step up and take responsibility. The Minister said that he has done all that he can in asking the Toner inquiry to go back to the Western Trust and to provide him with an update on how the recommendations have been taken forward. We obviously welcome that, but we believe that all the other agencies need to take responsibility. We need to minimise risk, and that is what the Committee aims to do. Nobody can say for sure that an event like this will never be repeated. However, we must be confident that we have taken forward all the measures that we can to ensure that best practice is in place and that people work more efficiently together. We welcome all the improvements that have taken place in the Western Trust and across the board in the Department.

We fully recognise the difficulties that professionals face in doing their job. The Minister talked about public confidence — that is what today’s Committee motion is about. We want to ensure that there is public confidence in all the agencies that are involved in child protection. Child protection is a key priority for every Member in the House, including the Minister.

As I said earlier, the Minister talked about unfair criticism. I want to again put on record — I said this when I proposed the motion — that I commend the good work of the social services, because, quite often, that work goes unrecognised. The Minister said that the tragedy might not have been prevented, even if the best resources or systems had been in place at the time, and, of course, we agree with that. However, we need to be confident that we have taken all the steps and precautions that we possibly can, because this tragic event cannot be allowed to be repeated. We must be sure that we take all possible steps to improve systems and practice, and multi-agency working needs to be improved to maximise any chance of that.

I welcome the Minister’s closing remarks that he will write to OFMDFM to ask that it raise the issue of the way forward with the Secretary of State. Go raibh maith agat.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly calls on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to seek to secure the agreement of the Secretary of State to initiate a time-bound public inquiry into the multi-agency aspects of the McElhill/McGovern tragedy in Omagh.

Private members’ Business

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

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

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

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes the need for newbuild and ongoing maintenance to ensure provision of a schools estate fit for the twenty-first century; recognises the additional economic benefit of construction industry job creation; and calls on the Minister of Education and the Minister of Finance and Personnel to ensure that a procurement mechanism is in place, which expedites the provision of capital projects, and that adequate funds are provided to maintain our schools to the highest possible standards.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá áthas orm an rún seo a mholadh.

I am pleased to propose the motion to the House. It was tabled at a time when we were not aware of the swingeing cuts that all Departments now face. At that time, we knew about the huge backlog in schools maintenance that amounts to about £240 million. That amount is equivalent to a host of new primary and secondary schools, and it clearly points to the poor state of the schools estate.

The Minister says that she is aiming to create a world-class education system. How can we have a world-class education system when the schools estate is evidently in need of so much repair? Some will argue that it is not the school buildings that count but the quality of the teaching and learning that take place within them. However, if Members speak to teachers in recently refurbished or newbuild schools, they will hear about the clear, positive effects of modern, up-to-date facilities for the pupils and staff, and, indeed, for the way in which those schools are viewed in the local community.

Some teachers have to work in outdated and outmoded buildings with facilities that have long been in need of replacement. Past pupils, who have long left school, say that newbuild and refurbishment were promised during their school days, only to come to nothing.

The procurement process for newbuilds is extremely frustrating for education providers, staff, parents and pupils. Usually, dates are given and projections are made, only for those to be dishonoured and delayed by further bureaucratic stalling. Not only are newbuilds slow at coming on stream but basic, badly needed repairs are not being done and are piling up, year on year. The longer that repairs are left undone, the more the schools estate deteriorates and the worse the conditions in which children and teachers have to work. The longer that maintenance is delayed, the greater the bill will be. Lack of investment now is a false economy, and, in the long term, the cost will be even greater.

We are told that further pressures on this year’s education budget mean that no newbuilds will go on site in 2010-11. At least, that is what senior officials from the Department of Education (DE) told the Committee on several occasions. However, what they tell us varies, to some extent, from what the Minister tells us. On Wednesday 3 February, the Minister appeared before the Committee for Education, and she said that that is not the case and that, depending on the outcome of the ongoing strategic review, there may be some newbuilds during the coming year. Such mixed messages emanating from the Department are frustrating and disappointing for the teachers, pupils and parents associated with schools, such as those in my constituency — in Forkill, Drumantine, Maddan, Carrick, and so on — which were promised that their newbuild would be on site in spring 2010. They want to know whether that is true, but the messages from the Department are mixed: “no” from the officials but “maybe” from the Minister.

Many Members are aware of similar situations in their constituencies, and they will also be disappointed that no building work will be done in the coming year. That is largely due to a £22 million cutback in the Department’s capital budget, alongside a £52 million reduction in the Department’s resource budget.

On 14 January 2010, the Minister kindly wrote to the Committee:

“to obtain the views of the Education Committee on how we can deliver these savings and address pressures within the overall context of my priorities for education.”

A cynic might say that the Minister is quite willing to invite the Committee to help her to make cuts but that, when money was available for investment, she was happy to do that without the Committee’s help.

The Minister and her officials outlined five areas in which savings can be made to make up for the shortfall in resources. Those include reductions in bureaucracy in C2k, the CCEA, the entitlement framework and the school improvement programme.

All those issues are associated with the resource budget, but we have no detailed information on the Minister’s plans for the capital resource. We know that her Department would need in the region of £70 million to progress the 100 or so schemes that are still in the pipeline. Under present economic conditions, that resource will not be available.

We need to know the results of the strategic review of the capital programme that the Minister has undertaken. Schools that are awaiting projects will expect to know where they stand, and it is important that there be a clear and transparent process. Having already received mixed messages from the Department, I would like the Minister to tell us what lies in store for the new school building programme. Is the review finished? If not, when will it be finished? What criteria will she use to determine the projects that will go ahead and those that will not? The Minister may wish to tell us how much resource she intends to set aside for minor works and for much needed maintenance respectively. Those are very important areas, especially at a time of slowdown in capital spend.

After the High Court ruling on the schools modernisation framework agreement for tendering procedures, which was originally aimed at expediting new school builds, will the Minister tell us what her Department is doing to accelerate the procurement process? It is important that we get an answer to that question.

As we all know, the education and skills authority (ESA) was originally designed to save £20 million a year, which would go to front line services. Some of the money that was originally intended for the ESA has had to be submitted to the Department of Finance and Personnel because of delays. I am sure that that has had a knock-on effect in other budget areas.

Once again, I remind the House of how important it is that our teachers and pupils work and learn in the best possible facilities. That is not the case at present, and, with an outstanding bill for maintenance of £240 million, it is imperative that we continue to invest in the schools estate in order to aim to have the best possible facilities available to our children and to our teachers. Gabhaim buíochas leat, a LeasCheann Comhairle, as an deis seo a thabhairt domh labhairt ar an ábhar seo.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

The Committee receives regular briefings on the education budget from senior officials in the Department of Education. On 18 November 2009, the Committee questioned departmental officials on how the £70 million capital requirement for 2010-11 would be addressed. The Committee also asked how further additional efficiencies in the Executive’s spending plans for 2010-11, which amount to some £22 million of capital pressure or 11·5% of the 2010-11 educational capital budget, would be found. As Mr Bradley mentioned, the question of the £240 million deficit in the maintenance budget also arose.

In their response, departmental officials said that the Minister was reviewing capital expenditure plans and that information would be available to the Committee early in 2010. The Committee then heard from the officials that, in the absence of any additional capital funding, the Department of Education would not release any further new capital projects into 2010-11 and would cease work on bringing new projects into the process. However, the Minister seemed to be at variance with her officials on that issue when she met the Committee last week, and we would appreciate it if she could provide clarity to the House today on that issue.

The Committee was also concerned about a specific DE briefing on the Department’s capital spending programme at its meeting on 9 December. It confirmed the serious position of the capital programme, which will be restricted in 2010-11 to minor works spend that is needed to meet statutory requirements. The Committee reaffirmed its request for information on the Minister’s review of the capital programme. Moreover, the Committee had serious concerns when it was informed of the £240 million backlog of requests for maintenance from schools.

The Committee received a letter dated 14 January 2010 from the Minister setting out the Executive draft proposals and plans for 2010-11, which identified £22 million in capital expenditure reductions. However, the letter proposed no measures to address the problem or to highlight the serious position of the education capital programme in 2010-11. That was a serious deficiency in the correspondence. Furthermore, the Committee has received no information on the Minister’s review of the education capital programme, even though it asked officials in December to provide the criteria for selection of capital projects and any proposed outcomes. The Committee understands and is concerned that the Minister is reviewing the capital programme on the basis of how projects fit with her policies on area-based planning and the entitlement framework.

I will now move to issues that I have as a Member of the House. I declare my membership of the board of governors of Ballymoney High School. I urgently need an assurance from the Minister that there will be movement on capital projects in 2010-11. In my constituency, Ballymoney High School has been waiting for six years, and as the proposer of the motion said, I hope that the Minister will not target schools on the basis of non-compliance with her priorities.

We are not here about the priorities of an individual Minister; we should be here about the priorities for education in Northern Ireland. Therefore, it is totally unacceptable that this Minister is overseeing a review of capital build programmes, yet has not informed the Education Committee, to date, about the criteria that she is using. The Minister told the Committee that the information will be disclosed at the appropriate time, which will be after she has made the decisions and has choreographed the estate in the education system to create losers instead of winners. I want the Minister to tell the House what the situation at Ballymoney High School is today, and what is happening with the capital programme for Ballycastle High School, which is held up as an example of cross-community collaboration?

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

The Member should bring his remarks to a close.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Finally, will the Minister bring to the House a decision about ―

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

Time is up.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

― Garryduff Primary School outside the village of Dunloy ―

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

Time is up.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

― in my constituency, which has been waiting for seven years ―

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

I call Mr John O’Dowd.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom tacú leis an rún.

I support the motion. It would be difficult for anyone to speak against the intent of the motion, which calls for more finance for a school build programme and for a procurement policy for a build programme. We are all aware that the previous procurement procedures were challenged successfully in the courts and had to be revised. That caused a considerable delay to building projects across the North.

It is not surprising that MLAs will rise to speak about schools in their constituencies, because many schools across all constituencies require newbuilds or major renovation works to ensure that our children are taught in a welcoming, safe and open environment.

I have looked jealously at some of the schools that I have visited across the North, especially Holy Cross College in Strabane, which opened recently. Anyone who visits that school can only be impressed by the facilities that are available to its pupils, and I wish them all the best for the future.

I welcome the education debate. Observers of the debate might come to the view that nothing else matters in education other than the transfer procedure, having listened to the media and certain politicians who, when they make their single transferable speech on education, are referring to the 11-plus and can offer no broader policy proposals beyond that issue. Today’s debate is refreshing from that point of view.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Would it not be advisable that the Member inform the Minister that, when it comes to devising policies on capital, she should take the transfer procedure out of the equation? It is obvious that she is judging schools on the merits of a policy that is based on transfer 2010. That does have something to do with the transfer procedure. While I am on my feet, I congratulate the children who, at the weekend, received the results that prove that academic selection is here to stay.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I often speak to the Minister about many issues and will continue to do so. Surely all Departments are run on the basis of policy. I would be shocked if, for instance, DETI was being run on policies to which its Minister did not adhere. It is foolish to suggest that Departments are not being run according to their existing policies.

I add my congratulations to the children who sat the tests and got their results at the weekend, regardless of what those results were. I wish all the children who are transferring to post-primary schools in the autumn the best of luck in their educational future, regardless of whether they sat a test.

We are now entering the realm of what the public call bread-and-butter politics. As local politicians, we will have to make some difficult decisions in the months and years ahead. The recent Budget cuts that were agreed by the Executive are only the beginning of a hard fiscal period for the Assembly and for society as a whole. If we are to continue to table motions on spending, we must craft them in a way that suits our political train of thought and offers viable and credible fiscal alternatives. That is where the debate is going and where the general public expect us as politicians —

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Just give me one second, Dolores.

The general public expect that we, as politicians, will ensure that in tabling motions we offer an alternative. All Ministers could stand up and do what Margaret Ritchie does — I congratulate Margaret on her election as leader of the SDLP — all Ministers can stand up and say that they cannot do their job because they need more money. That rhetoric is no longer satisfactory. We have to plan a way forward with the limited fiscal capacity that we have.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will the Member outline why Sinn Féin is not challenging its partners in the DUP to open the books on the Budget and the Programme for Government? In light of the difficult economic climate, will they have a real look at this year’s Budget and Programme for Government?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

If the Member for Upper Bann checks, she will discover that Margaret Ritchie is not only the leader of the SDLP but a member of the Executive. The Executive discussed in detail the required £300 million of savings and the Programme for Government and agreed the Budget in detail. All Statutory Committees, including the Committee that is chaired by the Member, are scrutinising Budget bids by their respective Departments. It is not Sinn Féin’s fault if the Member has not seen the Budget; it is her own fault. Even as a Committee Chairperson, she should be analysing in detail the Department of the Environment’s budget. If she is not, she should be asking serious questions of her fellow Committee members.

Back to the point in hand —

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

Will the Member give way?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have only a few moments left.

I welcome the motion but, if we are to move forward in serious political debate and offer alternatives, not only should we table motions —

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

The Member must draw his remarks to a close.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Members must table motions that outline how those alternatives can happen.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

It has really surprised me that no one has been talking about education over the past week. We have been at Hillsborough talking about parades, policing and justice, a new future and how we are all going to get on together so much better. Yet no one has mentioned education.

As Mr O’Dowd said, this is real politics. We are in one unholy mess. Last year —

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Will the Member accept that Reg Empey, who is a party colleague of his, is the Minister responsible for further and higher education? If education is in a mess, that is an indictment of his own colleague.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

It is always good to hear from the honourable Member on the opposite Benches, and it is good to hear that he is as entertaining as usual. I am not sure what point he is making, but thanks anyway, Barry.

The issue comes along —

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

Order. Once again, I ask Members to make their remarks through the Chair. If it continues, I will name the Member and ask him to go.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

The question comes back to education. I am keen to debate education. I am keen to work out why we were able to spend £250 million on capital projects last year and why we will spend nothing in this incoming year. Decisions have to be made. I also want to know why we do not have £100 million for revenue budgets. I want to discuss those issues.

The Committee for Education receives presentations from departmental officials giving it those facts. However, the facts are then apparently countermanded by the Minister, meaning that all we get is confusion. It is not possible to talk about these matters sensibly if we do not have the proper information.

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

Will the Member give way?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I have only five minutes in which to speak.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Mr O’Dowd’s logic says that we should help to identify problems. His own Minister sent the Committee for Education a letter asking it to help the Department to identify problems. It is, therefore, obvious that even the Minister does not know what she wants to do about the education cuts that have to be made.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Mr Bradley will make the winding-up speech, so I am sorry that I cannot take his intervention.

I agree with Mr Storey. This is what the people of Northern Ireland are talking about. They want to know what is happening to our schools. Many of the schools in which our children are taught are substandard. We have to make some arrangement whereby we continue to replace schools that are below the necessary standard, and, if we have to, we must make the appropriate hard decisions. That means some form of closure of schools that are, perhaps, not in the right place. Certainly, we have to recognise that we want to ensure that everyone has equality of opportunity. If we are to make those hard decisions, we have to get together. It is not possible for one of us to come forward, whether that is the Minister or someone else, and say that they will deal with the matter in their way and that no one else is to be involved.

I am struck by Mr O’Dowd’s admonishment that we will have to look for a way to find the money. The next motion on the Order Paper, which is about a health issue and which Mr O’Dowd’s party tabled, calls for precisely what he is telling us not to do. He is telling us not to come forward with proper plans. That is exactly the point. Perhaps the Member should reflect on that.

The issue comes down to how we deal with the finance. We need to take a long, hard look at where waste and inefficiencies exist in the system. We understand that the money is not there. I was not sure whether I could support the motion, given that it calls for money that we know is not there. However, we must find a way forward and do something for the sake of our children and investment in the future.

To that end, can we not, please, remove all the confusion, unacceptable delay, prevarication and inquiries? Nobody really knows whether certain schools will be built. A long list was issued years ago, and we do not know whether those schools will be built. That is unacceptable, it is cruel, and it is not fair. Those are all the things that politicians should not be doing. We must bring some form of clarity. I make this pledge: the Ulster Unionist Party will respond sensitively and appropriately in trying to work out a solution for all people in Northern Ireland.

I am sure that the Minister will speak about ESA, but my party supports it, provided that its purpose is to streamline and improve efficiencies. We had a problem with ESA when it became a super-quango that was going to tell everyone what to do. If those issues are addressed, we will support it. Finally, when we consider cross-party working groups, such as those dealing with the transfer issue, why will Sinn Féin not join us? We have had working groups left, right and centre on the efficiency of the Executive, on trying to —

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

Bring your remarks to a close, please.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Why not have a working party on education?

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

Your time is up.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Why will Sinn Féin not work with the rest of us for the benefit of all the people of Northern Ireland?

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

A quieter contribution is coming up. I support the motion. Even John O’Dowd agrees that we should support it. The need for newbuilds and ongoing maintenance of schools is self-evident. If one were to ask the head teacher of Lagan College if she needs a newbuild, she would say that the school would probably have to fall down before it is rebuilt. If one were to ask in Magherafelt, one would be told that a new school has been promised and will not go ahead. If one is looking for a maintenance example, one could talk to a head teacher on the Springfield Road who regards himself now as more a plumber and electrician than a head teacher.

I notice that the motion refers to a procurement mechanism to expedite the provision of capital projects. That is fair enough: we should have a good, efficient procurement mechanism. However, if it were speeded up at the moment, it would probably make things worse, because it would mean that more projects were coming forward with even less money to provide for them. If the strategic review turns a “maybe” into a possibility of one newbuild, that will probably be the height of it. The backlog of maintenance work required is critical and is getting worse. It is bound to get worse.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

An example was highlighted to me the other day in which a school needs repairs done to windows, but, in order to spend the money before 31 March, they are tarmacking the yard at the back to provide additional car parking spaces. That shows that the Minister is not even in control of the processes that she governs.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

The maintenance budget deficit of £240 million can only get worse. If I remember correctly, the £30 million expenditure figure this year has been reduced from £90 million, which might have made a dent in the problem. Trying to pay off £240 million at £30 million a year will not get easier. That figure of £240 million will probably rise. However, it is not a new problem. At the risk of appearing to defend the current Minister, I will say that this has been going on under direct rule and under the previous Minister. It is a cumulative situation, which has now come to a head.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

No, I have already given way once. All right; I will. Go ahead.

Dolores Kelly (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member very much. The whole point of devolved administration was that we would have control of our own affairs and make a difference to people on the ground. It is a failure of devolved administration if we cannot get that right.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Getting a handle on our own affairs would be all very well if we also had control of our own money. However, the money coming through is being reduced, not increased.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Wait until the Tories get their hands on it.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

You would put up our own taxes, Kieran.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Every Department wants to get something out of the money that is coming through, and every Department has to take a cut this year. It is not a new problem, and it is hardly a surprise that we are faced with this situation. The only way to solve it, and I find myself agreeing with Basil McCrea occasionally —

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Steady now.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I know.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

Resign. [Laughter.]

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

It needs to be —

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

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

I hope that it is a point of order.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I hope it is too. A conversation seems to be taking place involving several Members in sedentary positions.

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

It is not a point of order. However, I am pleased that the Member made that point, because I have been trying to do so. Some Members are overcome by their own verbosity.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am heartily glad that Mr McElduff made that point. If you stood here and tried to speak on a regular basis, you would realise just how difficult it can be.

Anyway, I will try to return to the issue. We need to tackle the problem at its source. We need to have a proper go at dealing with the entire issue of area-based planning rather than just tinkering with it. We need to look at the issue of sustainable schools: there are too many sectors, too many empty desks and too many systems. I am pointing towards the ESA. I hope that the outbreak of goodwill which seemed to occur on Friday like some sort of miracle will be extended.

I hope that the working group that will look at the business that has been stuck in the Executive logjam will speedily clear the way for a proper discussion about the ESA, because that is the vehicle that could produce efficiency. In addition to the £20 million saving through its own operation, it could help to bring about a root-and-branch review of the entire system to try to make some sense of the situation. I am also glad to hear that the Ulster Unionists appear to support the ESA again. Their support has been on and off, but I am glad that it is on again, even if it is subject to caveats and restrictions.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member take an intervention?

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I am finished, Basil, so you will not be able to make an intervention.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I support the motion. It asks us to recognise the additional economic benefit of construction industry job creation. The economic downturn has had a devastating impact on jobs, particularly in the construction industry. The construction industry accounts for 44% — [Interruption.]

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

Order. A complaint was made recently about conversations. [Interruption.] I am sure that the Member will bear that in mind. I apologise, Miss McIlveen. Continue.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

The construction industry accounted for 44% of the rise in unemployment in December 2009. According to DETI claimant count figures, 13,245 claimants came from the construction sector. As a response to that problem, I understand that the Executive’s gross capital investment during 2009-2010 will be in excess of £1·7 billion, which is an unprecedented level of government investment. I am referring to the parts of the motion that have not yet been addressed.

I understand that the Minister of Finance and Personnel and his predecessor have been working alongside construction industry stakeholders to address concerns relating to improving opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises to access public procurement and information regarding future government construction works and services. Such measures would go some way to addressing the concerns expressed in the motion about a procurement mechanism and the expedition of capital projects from the point of view of DFP. However, the relevant Departments must provide information regarding capital projects and the timing of those works.

I am slightly disappointed in the motion. There is no doubt that the Assembly will pass the motion, and, indeed, it will no doubt receive unanimous support. From listening to the contributions to the debate, it is obvious that Members recognise the need for newbuild schools and ongoing maintenance at schools. I am sure that we are all united in our wish not only to protect but to create jobs in our construction industry and that we all wish that adequate funds were available for a host of things. In coming weeks, we will no doubt see recurrent motions calling for various Departments to be given adequate funds for a host of projects.

What disappoints me about the motion is that it does not address the fundamental issue: the Minister’s handling of her Budget. As we have heard, schools around Northern Ireland have been earmarked for newbuilds and extensions. Those are all at different stages and, previously, would have been given an indication of when work would commence. However, given the current financial situation, Members, the schools and the construction industry do not know whether finance is available or when it might be made so. All those groups need certainty about what is happening.

As has been mentioned, we have known for some time that financial cuts are coming, and, since December, we have been made aware of how severe they would be. In that same month, the Committee was told that there would be a review of the capital programme, and we expected its results early in the new year. We have yet to receive them.

The Minister has now decided that she will come to the Committee and ask us where we think the axe should fall. Without doubt, she has treated the Committee with contempt over the last two and a half years, and now she asks us to provide cover for her. Perhaps we should not be so cynical; perhaps we should see it as a new start for the Minister. She may be embarking on a new path on which, in the future, she will be much more co-operative with the Committee.

In a spirit of co-operation, I ask that the Minister provide the clarity required by the Assembly, the schools and the builders. Will she advise the Assembly of the criteria for her review of the capital programme and of the results of that review? Will she tell the Assembly at which of the schools earmarked for maintenance, newbuilds and extensions work will proceed and at which work is placed on hold? Can she tell us how long the projects put on hold will remain that way? Can she confirm that no new projects will be commenced in 2010-11? Can she confirm that those projects already on site will proceed? Can she reassure us that full equality impact assessments have been or will be carried out in respect of decisions on whether projects should proceed or be placed on hold?

I look forward to the Minister’s response to those questions.

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

As Question Time commences at 2.30 pm, I suggest that the House takes its ease until that time. The debate will continue after Question Time, when Mr Mitchel McLaughlin will be the next Member to speak.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

1. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to outline their 2010-11 budget. (AQO 663/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In the 2008-2011 Budget, the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) was allocated £86·4 million of current expenditure and £17·3 million of capital for the 2010-2011 financial year. On 12 January 2010 in the Assembly, the Finance Minister announced the outcome of the Executive’s review of their 2010-2011 spending plans. The Executive’s proposals, which were issued for consultation by the Finance Minister, proposed a £4·1 million reduction in OFMDFM’s resource allocation and a £5·2 million reduction in its capital allocation for 2010-2011.

Subject to the outcome of the consultation exercise, OFMDFM’s revised budget allocations for 2010-11 will be £82·3 million of current expenditure and £12·1 million of capital. We are considering a number of options for delivering the budget reductions proposed in the Executive’s review of their 2010-2011 spending plans. The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister will be briefed on our proposals for the delivery of the 2010-2011 budget reductions as soon as our considerations are complete.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister indicate the implications for the number of staff in the Department?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It has implications, undoubtedly, but we are considering options for delivering the additional savings agreed by the Executive for OFMDFM in the review of their 2010-2011 spending plans. Following a bilateral meeting with the Minister of Finance and Personnel on 19 November 2009 to discuss OFMDFM’s 2010-2011 administration cost pressures, the First Minister and I agreed to develop a robust plan to address those pressures through a reduction in the Department’s headcount.

The departmental restructuring plan will deliver efficiencies of 51 OFMDFM full-time employees (FTEs), which will bring OFMDFM’s staffing level at 1 April 2010, or as soon as possible thereafter, to 314 FTEs. The proposals will deliver estimated annual administration cost savings of £2·3 million. All OFMDFM staff have been advised of the staffing reductions in a minute from the head of the Civil Service.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful for the opportunity to question the deputy First Minister. Will he explain the absence of his Department’s revised expenditure plans to the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister in advance of tomorrow’s plenary meeting?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said earlier, we are considering a number of options for delivering the budget reductions proposed in the Executive’s review of their 2010-2011 spending plans. It includes an assessment of any impacts on our obligations to promote equality, good relations and social inclusion. Obviously, that takes time. I do not want to speculate on the potential impact of the plans on any part of the Department until we have completed our consideration of the issues and have briefed the OFMDFM Committee.

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

Given that it appears that we are now moving with more certainty towards the devolution of justice and policing, will the Minister confirm the budget line for the proposed office of attorney general in the 2010-2011 budget plan? Will he share with the Assembly and Executive Review Committee and the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister the report that he and Peter Robinson received last September, nearly five months ago, about the future shape and role of the attorney general’s office —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member should come to his question.

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

— so that all of us may be in a place to better understand what the devolution of justice will look like when it comes?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very pleased that the Member has adopted such a progressive and constructive approach to the transfer of policing and justice powers. I do not have the figures for the cost implications for the office of the attorney general off the top of my head, but I will write to the Member with them.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Last month, the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) confirmed to me that it has received almost £1 million from the UK migration impacts fund for this year, and I understand that the fund will run for a second year in 2010-11. Will the Minister state whether any of that money was given to OFMDFM to help those migrant workers who have no recourse to public funds? Will OFMDFM receive any more money for next year?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That will be part of an ongoing discussion between OFMDFM and DFP. When we know the outcome of that discussion, we will write to the Member.

Dawn Purvis (PUP, Belfast East)

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how much was spent by the central advertising unit on newspaper advertising in the last three years; and whether competitive tendering practices are always followed to ensure that the best possible price is obtained for such advertising. (AQO 664/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The central advertising unit holds figures for the amounts spent on newspaper advertising by Departments, their agencies and non-departmental public bodies. The total amounts for the past three years are £8·7 million for 2006-07, £9·6 million for 2007-08 and £8·4 million for 2008-09. That amounts to more than £26 million over the past three years on classified advertising — public notices and recruitment — and campaign advertising.

The differing natures of the two types of advertising mean that different approaches are required. A competitive tendering process that was applied to classified advertising in 2006 resulted in a lengthy court challenge by some newspapers. Given the level of expenditure and the ongoing pressures on departmental budgets, we recently agreed to carry out an interim review of the policy on classified advertising. That review, to be undertaken by OFMDFM officials, will include some of the highest spending Departments, with support from the Central Procurement Directorate.

The approach to campaign advertising is different. Competitive rates for government have been negotiated with each of the main media organisations. That approach now delivers improved value for money, with incremental savings last year estimated at more than £660,000.

All aspects of the tendering process must comply with procurement guidelines.

Dawn Purvis (PUP, Belfast East)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his answer. When will that interim review on classified advertising be completed and published? Is a value-for-money review of all government advertising planned?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The review is ongoing. I do not have a date for its completion, but we wish to expedite it. We are all conscious of the need to ensure that public money is used properly. A tendering process was run for classified advertising in daily newspapers. After the results became known, three local newspapers combined in a legal challenge to stop its implementation.

The case never came to judgement. As the length of time that subsequently passed rendered rates and other marketplace data out of date, the newspapers agreed to drop the case on the basis that the approach would be re-examined. That re-examination is now under way.

Paul Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Will the Minister outline the role of the central advertising unit?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The unit applies specialist expertise to improve the value for money and effectiveness of advertising for all Departments. In 2008-09, the unit cost £398,000 to run and delivered savings of more than £1 million. The unit has 12 posts: nine in Belfast and three in Derry. Last year, the Derry team handled almost 7,500 classified ads worth £2·6 million. It recently achieved a 100% customer satisfaction rating across seven performance areas. The Belfast team delivered 18 advertising campaigns, each of which had clear objectives and measures of effectiveness.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Will the deputy First Minister outline how much was spent on the development of the Executive’s website? In light of its being virtually a replica of the Directgov website in the United Kingdom, was there a tendering process?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not have that information to hand, but we will write to the Member with it.

Paul Butler (Sinn Féin, Lagan Valley)

3. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister whether they plan to use the Financial Assistance Act 2009 or to set up an Executive programme fund to ensure that the Executive meet their targets in relation to child poverty. (AQO 665/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, junior Minister Kelly will answer that question.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The tackling of poverty and disadvantage is a priority in the Programme for Government, and it is a theme that cuts across departmental boundaries. Child poverty is an integral part of the overall work to tackle poverty and disadvantage, and specific child poverty targets have been set in the Programme for Government. To ensure that resources and efforts are directed to those in greatest need when allocating resources to programmes, Departments are required, in line with normal public expenditure guidelines, to consider available data and research on poverty, including child poverty.

It is the responsibility of the Executive subcommittee on poverty and social inclusion to agree the priorities and the key Executive actions that are necessary to meet child poverty targets. To that end, Ministers have asked officials to work with colleagues from other Departments to identify the priority actions that are required to benefit those groups, including children who are in greatest objective need. The Executive subcommittee on poverty and social inclusion is due to meet shortly to consider the outcomes of those cross-departmental discussions and associated proposals for priority action.

Once priorities are agreed by the Executive subcommittee, it will be for the Executive to consider and decide how those priorities should be implemented and resourced. In the Executive’s considerations, they will consider non-legislative options before legislative methods, such as the Financial Assistance Act 2009.

Paul Butler (Sinn Féin, Lagan Valley)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an fhreagra sin.

Will the junior Minister consider, through his good offices on the subcommittee on children and young people and the subcommittee on poverty and social inclusion, whether money in dormant bank accounts could be used to create a dedicated fund to address child poverty?

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We recognise that legislative proposals for dormant bank accounts represent an opportunity for the Executive to target additional resources at tackling social need through the Big Lottery Fund. We look forward to the outcome of the Department of Finance and Personnel’s consultation process, which ended in October 2009.

Naomi Long (Alliance, Belfast East)

Has there been any progress in resolving the dispute between the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety about school-age childcare, which the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister identified as one of the main barriers to people’s being economically active and, therefore, to their being able to lift their families out of poverty?

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We were due to meet the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister last week, and we will meet it next week. I do not have precise information now, but we will have it when we meet the Committee.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

To ensure that any distribution of financial assistance funds is seen to be fair and equitable, what steps and protocols has the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister put in place to determine the relative priority of each government programme that has suffered from cutbacks that inhibit the achievement of preset targets?

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

To date, the Executive subcommittee has met on two occasions, during which it reached conclusions about the agreed terms of reference. In addition, it has been informed about the extent of poverty here, and it has agreed the work that should be undertaken to identify the key co-ordinated priority actions that are needed to benefit areas, groups and individuals, particularly families and children in greatest objective need. We considered and agreed initial proposals for a monitoring and reporting framework for the Lifetime Opportunities strategy, which we adopted more than two years ago as the overall architecture of our approach to poverty and social inclusion. Furthermore, we agreed to the early re-establishment of the Minister-led poverty and social inclusion stakeholder forum, which would be another accountability mechanism.

The third meeting of the Executive’s subcommittee is due to be held shortly. The meeting that was scheduled for 17 December 2009 was cancelled due to an extended Executive meeting. A new date is to be agreed. At that meeting, Ministers will consider further proposals on priority action areas, as well as the monitoring and reporting of a framework for lifetime opportunities.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how the report of the promoting social inclusion working group on disability will be taken forward. (AQO 666/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

On 3 December 2009, the promoting social inclusion working group on disability presented a report to the First Minister and me at an event in Belfast City Hall. When we accepted that working group’s report, we committed to taking it to Executive colleagues to seek their response. The report has already been agreed by Departments at official level. The next step will be to discuss and agree a formal Executive response to the report’s recommendations. Following that, we will carry out a consultation exercise on the response. The response to the report will form an important part of the Government’s implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and it will promote equality of opportunity for people with disabilities in line with our statutory and equality duties.

We have already provided a copy of the report to the OFMDFM Committee and have agreed that the Committee should be provided the opportunity to comment on the Executive’s response in due course.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I welcome the deputy First Minister’s response. Can he assure the House that every effort is being made to end discrimination and the abuse that people with disabilities sometimes face in day-to-day society? Departments have been almost silent on disability discrimination compared with other forms of discrimination on, for example, grounds of race or religion.

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The report’s key vision is of a future in which people with disabilities contribute to and benefit from cultural, social, political and economic life on an equal basis with others. We in OFMDFM absolutely agree with that. It is essential that any government, particularly any that we are part of, recognise the need to ensure that everybody in society has the ability to achieve their full potential. We are absolutely committed to taking that work forward through to the Executive and on to consultation in the total belief that, on the other side of the process, we will have devised an approach and a strategy that recognise that people with disabilities must be treated with respect and have the unequivocal support of all Departments under our tutelage.

Conall McDevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Does the deputy First Minister agree that the best protection that this region could offer people with disabilities would be a strong and inclusive bill of rights? Do he and his Office agree with the SDLP that the British Government’s proposal for a bill of rights, which is currently out to consultation, is defective and falls far short of the ambitions of this region and of the Good Friday Agreement?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will speak now on my own behalf and as a member of Sinn Féin, rather than on behalf of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. My party has registered its strong opposition to the approach that the British Government have taken. I would be surprised if many other Assembly parties did not share some of the concerns of Sinn Féin and the SDLP, and, indeed, those of many other people who are involved in community and voluntary work.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I welcome the deputy First Minister’s answers. If he wants to take those efforts a step further, there is nowhere better to promote inclusion of people with disabilities than the Building itself. Last week, I attended a conference to which people with disabilities were denied entrance through the front door of the Building. Why should people with disabilities not be permitted to enter through the front door of Northern Ireland’s Parliament Buildings? They were sidelined to a side door. I ask the Minister to take that on board.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. I must point out to the Member that his question is for the Assembly Commission, not for the deputy First Minister. We shall move on to Question 5.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mr McCarthy, it is clear that your supplementary question related to the Assembly Commission’s responsibilities in and around the Building.

We will move on. Question 5 has been withdrawn.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

6. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, following the publication of the latest fair employment monitoring report by the Equality Commission, if they intend to hold discussions with the Equality Commission regarding the under-representation of Protestants in organisations which come under their remit, including the Equality Commission itself. (AQO 668/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

All specified public bodies, including the Department and its agencies, are legally required by the Fair Employment and Treatment Order 1998 to monitor the community background of their workforces. The Order also places a duty on them to conduct a review, at least once every three years, of their employment composition and employment practices. The purpose of the review is to determine whether both communities enjoy fair participation in employment. Where that does not appear to be the case, employers may take affirmative action measures to attract members of the under-represented community into their employment.

The Equality Commission has in place an affirmative action programme designed to redress the imbalance of representation in its staff. That includes the use of a statement in all job advertisements welcoming members of the Protestant community; contacts with schools and third-level educational establishments; contact with, and forwarding job vacancy information to, community organisations servicing the Protestant community; and engagement with representatives and people with influence in the Protestant community. Officials maintain regular contact with the commission to keep the situation under review.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I note that there was an admission that some work goes on in bodies in which there is an under-representation of one community or another, but there was no admission that the Equality Commission is one of those bodies. Yet, the facts are there; they are undeniable. The figures involved are quite small, but other figures regarding recruitment of Protestants to many major public sector bodies are equally undeniable; many thousands of them are denied equality of opportunity. When is the deputy First Minister going to waken up to that reality and address his mind to trying to resolve it?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I remind the Member that when he asks a question of me, he is asking a question of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. I also remind him that, in my earlier answer, I said that the Equality Commission has in place an affirmative action programme that is designed to redress the imbalance of representation in its staff. I must point out that when I was 15 years of age, I was a victim of religious discrimination, so I know all about it, and under no circumstances would I tolerate any section of our community being discriminated against because of religion.

Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat. Does the Minister accept that it is important that the employ­ment profile in the North reflects equality of opportunity, and that equality means equality for everyone in this society, not for one community over another?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely agree that it is vital for the employment profile in the North to fully reflect equality of opportunity, particularly in the public sector. Some good progress has been made to ensure a more fully representative employment profile across the public and private sectors. That has been due not least to the pressure for more effective fair employment legislation and implementation. However, there is still some way to go, and there remain worrying levels of structural inequality across wider society.

Ken Robinson (UUP, East Antrim)

I listened very carefully to what the deputy First Minister was saying about recruitment. Does he believe that the time has now come to take indicative action, along the lines of the 50:50 recruitment policy for the PSNI, to redress some of the long-standing under-representations of the Protestant community in sections of the public sector?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The difficulty is that, if we went right across the North, we would be able to pick out all sorts of examples of people being under-represented, whether in the Protestant community in regard to some situations, or in the Catholic community in regard to others. I want to get away from talking about the issue in the context of Protestant or Catholic. We must recognise that all citizens have rights, and we have to ensure that, as we move forward, there is equality of opportunity for everybody.

We are dealing with a one-off situation in respect of the PSNI. Throughout the decades, since the partition of Ireland, there has been under-representation in the police for many reasons. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will not turn this into a political debate, because I could stand and talk about the subject for the next two hours without any difficulty.

Tommy Gallagher (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

7. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for their assessment of the proposed creation of a North/South parliamentary forum to advance political understanding and wider opportunities on the island of Ireland. (AQO 669/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Agreement to establish a North/South parliamentary forum is a matter for the Assembly and the Oireachtas. The issue has been discussed at North/South Ministerial Council plenary meetings. It was most recently discussed at the meeting held in Limavady on 14 December 2009. At that meeting, the Council noted that the establishment of a forum is a matter for the Oireachtas and the Assembly under paragraph 21 of annex A to the St Andrews Agreement. It also noted the Speaker of the Assembly’s proposal to hold a North/South parliamentary conference.

Two working groups, one in the Oireachtas and one in the Assembly, have been established to develop proposals for a North/South parliamentary forum. The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission and the Assembly Commission held a joint meeting on 18 November to discuss issues of mutual interest. During discussions, our Speaker, Mr William Hay, proposed that a North/South parliamentary conference be arranged. That proposal was welcomed by the Ceann Comhairle, and it was agreed to progress the matter through two working groups established by both institutions. I understand that a meeting to discuss arrangements for a North/South parliamentary conference, involving officials from the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Assembly, was scheduled for last week.

Tommy Gallagher (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Minister provide more precise information on when the North/South parliamentary forum will be established? I welcome the progress that he has outlined. However, since the inter-parliamentary forum will be such an important body for building trust among our politicians across Ireland and improving understanding on the island, will OFMDFM soon be able to tell us that it is going ahead with it?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I outlined in my answer, whether it goes ahead is a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission and the Assembly Commission. As many people know, we went through arduous negotiations in the Hillsborough discussions, which lasted variously from 10 days to two weeks. The matter was discussed, and the outcome is apparent in the document that was issued. It is clear that the working group that we have established will have a responsibility to take forward matters in the St Andrews Agreement that have yet to be implemented. The responsibility rests with that group, and I hope that its work will be expedited in the interests of ensuring that we see the full implementation of what was agreed at St Andrews some three years ago.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Chean Comhairle. Tá ceist agam don Aire. Will the deputy First Minister confirm that the parliamentary forum and all other outstanding aspects of the St Andrews Agreement, including a strategy to promote and enhance the Irish language, will be addressed and implemented through the structures that were agreed at Hillsborough last Friday?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As was made clear in the agreement that was published on Friday, the First Minister and I will oversee an exercise that examines the St Andrews Agreement and identifies all matters contained in it that have not been faithfully implemented or actioned. We will provide a report to the Executive by the end of February in which we will detail the level of progress that has been made on each outstanding matter. We will seek approval from the Executive to set up a working group to make recommendations on how progress can be made on matters that have not been actioned. Junior Ministers will be asked to chair that working group and to make an initial report by the end of March. Within four weeks of the working group’s initial report, we will agree a programme to effect completion of the working group’s agreed conclusions.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

8. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister to detail their Department’s legislative programme for the current session of the Assembly. (AQO 670/10)

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member will be aware that, in this session of the Assembly, we introduced a Department of Justice Bill, which passed its Final Stage on 1 December last year. We are developing proposals for a commissioner for older people and a victims and survivors’ service, and consultation exercises on the respective proposals took place recently. Legislation will be required to establish both of those, and once we have considered the consultation responses and consulted with the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, we intend to seek the agreement of the Executive to finalise policy proposals ahead of introducing the relevant Bills in the Assembly later this year. Furthermore, the Member will be aware from the agreement that was published last Friday that we intend to introduce a Bill on parades later this year. Other legislative requirements may arise in the future, and the Executive’s agreement to the policy and to the legislation will be sought in accordance with the established procedures.

Health, Social Services and Public Safety

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

1. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety what action he is taking to reduce the level of heart disease. (AQO 711/10)

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

In June 2009, I launched a service framework for cardiovascular health and well-being that set standards for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation and palliative care of individuals in communities at a greater risk of developing cardiovascular disease. In that context, action is being taken across a wide range of areas to reduce heart disease, including initiatives to promote healthier lifestyles and to reduce smoking, obesity and alcohol consumption.

In recognition of the pivotal role of GP practices, substantial funding is provided to practices for the provision of lifestyle advice on smoking cessation, safe alcohol consumption, healthy diet and physical activity. In addition, GP practices maintain registers of at-risk patients and carry out annual blood pressure assessments and medication reviews for that group. My Department is also developing plans to make Northern Ireland self-sufficient in cardiac surgery and is investing in cardiac rehabilitation.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his answer.

The Minister may be aware that Cookstown in my constituency has the highest rate of heart disease in Northern Ireland for people under 65 years of age and the third highest for those under 75 years of age. Does the Minister agree that those figures are startling and that the fact that it is a rural constituency is cause for concern? Will he give details of what steps can be taken in rural areas, especially areas that no longer have acute hospital provision?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

The first step taken is that I established the Public Health Agency, and its key role is to take forward those vital messages to the general public. The reality is that our hospitals are filled with large numbers of people who, had they made different lifestyle choices in years gone by, would not now be in hospital. Those lifestyle choices relate to smoking, obesity, alcohol, and healthier lifestyles. Secondly, we are dealing with the current situation. For example, we have a requirement for 1,000 cardiac procedures per annum, which is the capacity in the Royal Victoria Hospital. However, demand is higher than that, and we want to satisfy that demand and ensure that patients do not come to harm by waiting overlong for their treatment.

I am not aware of the specific numbers as regards Cookstown. People in Cookstown are the same as everyone else in Northern Ireland: they are entitled to the support of the Health Service for cardiac and any other procedures, which are provided on the basis of equality and fair treatment for all patients.

Sue Ramsey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the Minister’s comprehensive response, and I also welcome the additional investment in cardiac rehabilitation. Does the Minister believe that the service framework dealing with cardiac rehabilitation is working, and will he give the percentage of heart attack patients who are able to access cardiac rehabilitation programmes?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

With regard to whether the programme is working, the Health Service is, in general, clearly working and that is evidenced by the higher life expectancy of the general population. For example, 25 years ago, cardiac open heart surgery was, typically, provided for patients in their fifties. Today, it is much more likely to be provided for patients in their eighties, due to new medical interventions, the skills of our cardiac teams and the work being undertaken by primary care through GP practices. All that has combined to ensure that we are able to defer major cardiac surgery until much later in life, which demonstrates that the system is working.

The service framework for cardiovascular health and well-being are new standards that the Department has put in place, which allow patients to be shown exactly what type of service they should expect to receive. The Department is rolling out similar frameworks across several other areas of healthcare, and it has already done that for cancer and stroke services. Those frameworks are all about improving the service and expanding quality of life.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to the staff who work in cardiology services across Northern Ireland? Does he agree with me that, contrary to what has been proposed by the DUP, health funding should not be reduced? That will ensure that Northern Ireland maintains the highest standards of cardiac care.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

Of course I agree with the Member’s second point about funding. Members have heard me make that point over and over again, and I assure them that I will not get tired of making it. There is substantial underfunding in health and social services in Northern Ireland, as we heard during the previous debate on the McElhill/McGovern tragedy.

We have very highly talented and trained professional cardiac teams in Northern Ireland, which are headed by our cardiac surgeons. Each of those surgeons requires a specialist team, including cardiology anaesthetists and specialist nursing and theatre staff, who must be trained and be able to maintain their skills. It is very much a team game, and it is appropriate that we occasionally pay tribute to them, because they save lives daily.

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

I thank the Minister for his very detailed response to the original question. Will the Minister provide the cost of sending patients to places such as England and the Republic for heart treatment?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

Northern Ireland has the capacity to conduct approximately 1,000 cardiac operations each year, and approximately 1,250 operations are required. Two years ago, I was presented with the choice of allowing patients to remain on waiting lists until those operations became available or sending them elsewhere. Our cardiac surgeons are very successful in determining risk and ensuring that those who are most at risk come first, but some patients were coming to harm while waiting for operations. Therefore, I invested extra money in procedures to ensure that those patients received timely interventions.

As I have said, those interventions are not all available in Northern Ireland. Therefore, the Department offered patients a choice among London, Dublin and Glasgow. The procedure in London is comparable to the cost of a procedure in the Royal, but it is more expensive in Dublin. There are differences in travel and accommodation costs. I am considering that matter, because the cost of travel and accommodation brings the cost of having those interventions carried out in Guy’s Hospital to almost the same total as the Dublin clinics.

However, one must give patients a choice, and patients very often prefer Dublin because it is a land rather than a sea trip. The other reality is that many of those who require open-heart surgery today are much older and perhaps frailer than they would have been 25 years ago. Indeed, many of those patients are very often well into their 70s or 80s. All those factors must be taken into account to ensure that our patients do not come to harm.

David McClarty (UUP, East Londonderry)

2. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety for an update on his Department’s proposed revised budget for 2010-11. (AQO 712/10)

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

5. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if he can provide an assurance that the additional savings to be found, as announced by the Minister of Finance and Personnel, will not impact on front line services. (AQO 715/10)

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer question 2 and 5 together.

The position that I face in the next financial year is dire. Not only am I faced with delivering £700 million of existing efficiencies and a 9% increase in demand, but I am facing a proposed budget reduction.

If implemented, the reduction would take my settlement to a meagre 0·3% above general inflation: in effect, it would be a stand-still budget. My position is even worse than that. Given the increase in GP referrals, the rapid ageing of the population and the increase in the birth rate, I will have to find another £100 million, or perhaps more, in order to simply stand still. The Executive are well aware of those pressures but chose to ignore them when making the proposal for a reduction. I cannot guarantee that the additional cuts will not hit the front line.

David McClarty (UUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for that response. The facts and figures that he has provided are not good news at all. The Minister will be aware that the revised Budget Bill will be introduced to the House next week. Does he agree that any party that votes to further cut the health budget by £133 million will be treated with contempt by the public? Does he also agree that if one does not want cuts to the Health Service, one should not vote DUP? [Laughter.]

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

It is possible that there will be a lot of contempt floating around before all of us are much older. I have outlined the situation in relation to the Health Service, and I make no apology for doing so again. We need to find £700 million to take out of the health budget over three years. That is an enormous task, and it is causing huge pressures in all the trusts. All Members need to bear that in mind when considering the difficulties in the trusts in their areas.

It is also estimated that, by the end of the CSR period, we will be £600 million short of the cost of providing a service comparable to that provided in the UK. As a unionist, I make no apology for saying that I believe that all parts of the UK should get equal treatment. However, that is not possible given the current funding available to the Health Service.

Under the Budget settlement, I got full flexibility over my resource and I was entitled to bid for funding to deal with pandemic flu. However, when I bid for that, I had to accept a very poor settlement indeed, which represents a very serious cut to the Health Service of well over £30 million. As part of the Budget, I also made an agreement to receive the first £20 million of available in-year moneys; I am still waiting for that. All those things add up, but the key thing that people must remember is that demand is up by 9% this year, and was up by 12% last year. Those are huge increases, and they cannot be addressed by a budget increase, in real terms, of less than 1%.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. It is clear that the Minister faces difficult decisions, as do many of his ministerial colleagues. He made an interesting comment when he said that, as a unionist, he expects everybody in the UK to receive the same treatment. Is that not part of the difficulty? The Minister is looking at Health Service planning on the island of Ireland from a unionist perspective, rather than a health perspective. Does he agree that, as long as he is involved in turning his back on the Health Service in the Twenty-six Counties and does not plan island-wide, we will continue to run into the serious financial difficulties that we are currently faced with?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

Over and over again, I have said that where we can derive benefits for patients in Northern Ireland, I am not averse to a co-operative venture with the Irish Republic. Mary Harney takes a similar approach.

I remind Mr O’Dowd that cradle-to-grave healthcare is provided universally and free at the point of delivery in the UK. That is not the case in the Irish Republic, where people have to pay. The UK has the only proper health service that actually delivers and is free at the point of delivery. The UK’s Health Service is also the cheapest. In France and Germany, there is a hybrid of the system in the Republic of Ireland. In America, where there is a big debate on health, there is a purely private health service, and people pay for that at the point of delivery. There, the health service costs 18% of GDP. In France and Germany, the health service costs 10·5% to 12% of GDP, and in the UK, where the service is universally delivered, it is free and is the best health service in the world, costing just over 8% of GDP. Not only is it better and more efficient but it is cheaper.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I understand the Minister’s difficulty, and that of each Minister, in operating under tight financial constraints. Will he join me in commending the many groups that are involved in a voluntary capacity and which do excellent work, particularly those that are involved in the area of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)? Within those tight constraints, will he consider what assistance might be offered to try to help them to alleviate the difficulties that people face?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I subscribe to Mr Campbell’s sentiments, and I will look to support anyone who provides health and care in the Province, particularly those who alleviate and address the pain and distress that so many patients feel. However, activity is directly proportionate to the resources that are available to fund it, and as the funding reduces in real terms, which is happening, activity is bound to reduce. Therefore, tough choices are to be made, but I assure the House that I will not make those choices on my own. I will allow every Member to join me in making those tough choices about what happens in hospitals and with staff. As I have done before, I assure every Member that the order of the reductions is severe.

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

Does the Minister consider that the system of merit payments for consultants and doctors represents an effective use of public funds? Does he intend to return to that issue when he next undertakes pay negotiations?

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I operate the system to the optimum efficiency that I can derive. I take the opportunities to make savings, and I will go forward on that basis. Merit payments, or payments by results, are cost-effective in many areas. I can write to the Member to discuss the basis of BMA contracts, and I remind him that, in Northern Ireland, consultants in hospitals get paid less than they would get paid if they lived in the Irish Republic or on the mainland and they get paid about a quarter of what they would get paid if they lived in the United States.

Our entire Health Service provides value for money. I do not pretend that it is perfect in every way and that there is no waste, but where I see waste, I will seek to drive it out. As I said to Mr O’Dowd, as a general rule, the Health Service is efficient and we should be proud of it, not simply because of the standard of care but because of the way that staff provide that care with the limited budget that is offered to them.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I have sympathy for the position in which the Minister finds himself, but does he regret describing his budget settlement as a “good deal” in February 2008? I identify with the Minister’s desire for common standards across the UK. Does he agree that it is time for his party and his Executive colleagues to bite the bullet over water charges? It is difficult to argue that the Health Service is underfunded while taking a different approach to funding water to the rest of the UK.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I am grateful that Mr Farry’s question went into the realms of water. I remind him that I am the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, not the Minister for water. I never described the health budget as a good deal. I said that it was not enough but was as good as it gets. The key UK standard is democracy, and that standard governs us all. How would the appointment of the Member’s party leader as Minister for policing and justice reinforce that principle in any way?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Questions 3 and 4 have been withdrawn and question 5 was grouped with question 2.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

6. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to provide an update on the provision of hip arthroscopy surgery. (AQO 716/10)

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

The Health and Social Care Board is working with trusts to develop an evidence-based business case for the development of a hip arthroscopy service in Northern Ireland. In the interim, where the procedure is recommended on clinical grounds, the Health and Social Care Board will consider funding the treatment of individual patients through the standard procedures for extra-contractual referral. The alternative treatment is physiotherapy and medical therapy, and that may be offered to patients if it is considered to be clinically appropriate.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I am deeply disappointed at that response, because it is exactly the same as a written response that I got from the Minister almost one year ago. What has the Minister got to say to a 34-year-old constituent of mine and, indeed, others who are desperately seeking that surgery but cannot get it? They cannot even get that service across the water, because they are being denied extra contractual referrals by the trust. Those people’s options are confined to gobbling up medicine and pills.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I advise the Member to come to his question.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

What does the Minister say to those people?