Northern Ireland Assembly, 28 May 2012

288 contributions from 69 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I wish to advise the House that I have been given notice by members of the Business Committee of a motion to extend today’s sitting beyond 7.00 pm. Under Standing Order 10(3A) the Question on the motion will be put without debate.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I beg to move

That in accordance with Standing Order 10(3A) the sitting on Monday 28 May 2012 be extended to no later than 7.30 pm.

Ministerial Statements

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

You would think that, on a day like this, we could move proceedings outside, like we used to do in school on a nice day. We could sit out and enjoy the sun, as well as get the business done.

The North/South Ministerial Council met in special EU programmes sectoral format in Armagh on 4 May 2012. Council last met in SEUPB sectoral format in November 2011. I represented the Northern Ireland Executive, accompanied by Junior Minister Martina Anderson. The Government of the Republic of Ireland was represented by Brendan Howlin TD, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, who chaired the meeting.

The meeting began with a presentation from the rural enabler programme, a £2·7 million initiative aimed at the Rural Community Network and funded under the Peace III programme. The programme aims to build positive relationships between all communities in rural areas of Northern Ireland and in the border counties of the Republic. The presentation was a welcome opportunity for the Council to learn directly of the benefits of EU Peace funding and its delivery.

I commend the project leaders for their achievements to date and for the very interesting and engaging presentation they gave to the Council.

Mr Pat Colgan, the chief executive of the Special EU Programmes Body, updated the Council on progress since the November 2011 meeting. The Council noted and welcomed the ongoing work being undertaken to close the Peace II and INTERREG IIIa programmes. It is anticipated that the closure process for the two programmes will be complete before the end of the year.

The Council also noted SEUPB’s progress in implementing the current Peace III programme. As at the end of March 2012, Peace III had approved 158 projects worth £284 million; that is, 98% of the available budget. To date, the programme has spent £108 million and that exceeds its EU spending target for 2011. It will need to spend £11 million in 2012 in order to achieve this year’s EU target, and SEUPB is confident that that can be achieved.

With regard to the INTERREG IVa cross-border co-operation programme, the Council noted that, at the end of March 2012, 71 projects worth £170 million had been approved. As a result, just over three quarters of the programme’s budget has been allocated to projects. The programme has to date spent £60 million, enough to surpass its EU spending target for 2011. However, it will need to spend £32 million in 2012 if it is to meet this year’s target. Again, SEUPB is confident that that can be achieved.

The Council had been previously advised by SEUPB that INTERREG faced a potential risk in achieving one or more future EU spending targets, possibly in 2013 or 2014. The risk was due primarily to the fact that the programme budget was not yet fully allocated to projects. SEUPB advised that, if the programme budget was not fully allocated to appropriate projects by the start of 2013, EU spending targets could be missed, either in 2013 or 2014, or in both. When a programme misses its EU spending target, any shortfall between the actual and the target expenditure is deducted from the programme budget. SEUPB had advised the Council that up to £35 million might be at risk on account of missed spending targets, if the risk were not addressed.

I am pleased to report that, since then, there have been some positive and welcome developments with the INTERREG programme. In January this year, the SEUPB held a call for projects. That attracted 91 applications, seeking nearly £190 million, which is around five times the remaining INTERREG budget. The top-scoring applications have been shortlisted and are currently being assessed in detail. SEUPB aims to have all the top-scoring projects fully assessed and the funding issued by the end of the year. There are also a number of applications from previous calls that are still under assessment. Again, SEUPB aims to have those assessed in full before the end of the year. If all of those assessments are completed on schedule and the funding allocated, the programme should be back on track. It will have allocated its full budget and any potential risk will have been greatly reduced. My officials are, therefore, working closely with SEUPB to ensure that that end-of-year target can be achieved.

The Council was also updated on the progress that has been made by the five local authority-based groups under the INTERREG IVa programme. The groups now have 34 projects approved, worth £37 million. In addition, they have a further £25 million worth of projects under assessment, including the North West Regional Science Park. Based on projects approved and projects under assessment, it appears likely they will secure at least £55 million. That is their notional share of the programme funding. It is good to see that the programme’s local dimension has made a strong showing, because there were concerns that that would not happen. The INTERREG programme was developed to have both a regional and a local focus and it is vital that there are good local projects to balance the more regionally focused initiatives that have been funded.

Where future funding is concerned, the Council noted that we are still at an early stage in that process. The EU budget will not be agreed until the end of this year or perhaps early 2013. Until that happens, there will be no decision on how much individual member states and regions will receive. However, the Council was satisfied that there is likely to be a further INTERREG cross-border programme, and the prospects for a fourth round of Peace funding remain good. In view of that, the Council noted that, in line with its statutory responsibilities, the SEUPB will shortly initiate work on the development of future Peace IV and INTERREG V programmes.

The Council noted that the work will be consultative and evidence based. It will take account of the performance of previous programmes and will be led by a steering group, chaired by the SEUPB. The group will be made up of programme stakeholders from across the eligible regions. The Council noted the key priorities for the SEUPB, as set out in its business plan and budget, and noted that the SEUPB’s annual report and accounts had been prepared in draft for certification.

Finally, the Council noted the November 2011 plenary meeting’s recommendation concerning the establishment of a board for the SEUPB. The Council agreed that the cost of a board would be difficult to justify. Given the existence of the current EU programme monitoring arrangements, a board would, effectively, deal with only the SEUPB’s administrative budget, which is just 3% of the total SEUPB budget. However, it was agreed that the two sponsor Departments would examine the governance arrangements that are in place for the SEUPB and report back to the Council at the next meeting in sectoral format, which is scheduled for October 2012. The decision will be referred for endorsement at the next NSMC plenary meeting, which will be held in June 2012.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Before I call the Chair of the Finance Committee, Conor Murphy, I will take you back to the business motion and get the agreement of the House, because that must be done by cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That, in accordance with Standing Order 10(3A), the sitting on Monday 28 May 2012 be extended to no later than 7.30 pm.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire fosta. I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the more positive indication that was given on INTERREG spend. I know that he shares the concerns of many representatives in this House about the level of spend and some of the issues with getting INTERREG money spent.

It has been suggested to the Finance Committee that implementing more simplified decision-making arrangements for the next INTERREG programme that are similar to those in the other European jurisdictions could avoid the bottleneck and delays that have occurred in the current programme. What is the Minister’s view on that? How confident is he that all the necessary arrangements will be completed on time to ensure that the existing programme gets back on track and avoids any budget deductions?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Chairperson for the question. He is quite right: we cannot continue with the current assessment method for programmes. I would like to think that the changes will occur not for the next set of programmes, but that we will actually see material changes. In fact, we have to see material changes in the assessment method. I cannot understand why programmes and projects can be assessed and letters of offer can be out within 26 to 28 weeks in other jurisdictions, while assessment takes 56 to 58 weeks in our system.

To meet the targets for the current programme, the SEUPB has said that it will cut that assessment down to 40 weeks for the current applications that have gone in through INTERREG. That has been done in a number of ways. First, there has been an early assessment of projects, so we are now down to a shortlist of 13. Secondly, a more detailed economic assessment will then be carried out. At the same time, there should also be work with Departments and a parallel arrangement to ensure that there is input from economists in the accountable Departments.

Since, at the end of the day, the accountable Departments carry the can on this, there must be input from them. Can we marry some of the views in there, so that we get questions at an earlier stage? If it can be done in other jurisdictions for the same kind of programmes, there is no reason why it cannot be done with SEUPB. The other thing is that, perhaps in the longer run, we will need to go back and look at devolving this down again to local partnerships rather than it being centralised to SEUPB level. I hope that that will come through in the consultation when looking at further programmes.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Unlike other Members, I am somewhat apprehensive about the way in which SEUPB delivers some of the funding. I am pleased to see, between INTERREG IVa and the cross-border project, that there are a number of applications, amounting to £190 million. What measures are being taken to ensure that that funding is being dispensed on an equality basis? I ask because we understand that certain Members make a big issue about that. I want to be sure that the community that I represent is getting a fair crack of the whip. I do not believe that —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I ask the Member —

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

That is the question.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

First of all, programme money is not allocated on a community basis. The individual projects that come forward are assessed based on how they meet the objectives of the particular themes and programmes. I am pleased to say that there appears to be a wider range of projects coming in. There is a very strong one for the north-west science park, which I know that you will be interested in, Mr Speaker, and which should benefit the whole community. Certainly, if it has the same impact that the Science Park in Belfast is having, it will be valuable to the north-west. In my own area, I am pleased that one tourist project, the Gobbins path, has already received money, and the refurbishment of Magheramorne quarry, which is not too far away, will have massive tourist potential in east Antrim. It really is up to areas and people in those areas, whether that is local authorities or businesses, to bring forward quality projects so that they can be assessed.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Like other Members, I have a concern about the operation of SEUPB. We were told by SEUPB some time ago that it was having difficulty meeting targets. Suddenly, it takes the step, which is to my mind a normal governance issue, of issuing a new call, and it has now got a lot more. I notice that the Minister put a note of caution in his statement: “If all of those assessments are completed on schedule and the funding allocated”.

Is he happy that that will actually happen, or is it going to be another tactic of SEUPB — stop, go, stop, go, panic, save it, panic, save it?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

First of all, I do not think that I have ever been anything other than honest with the House about the difficulties that SEUPB has experienced and will always experience. I have made it quite clear that I will not defend the indefensible. Where I believe that there is something to be highlighted, I will highlight it so that Members have full transparency. Even if that leads to uneasy questions for me, I am quite happy about that.

All I can say is that, first of all, there was a call for projects, and that call has brought in some very good projects. Indeed, the worrying thing is that, had some of those projects been submitted at earlier stages, they would probably have got through the scoring process because they are very good projects. It is not that we are simply throwing money out and saying, “It does not matter what the project looks like, let us just get the money spent”. The 13 that are shortlisted are all good, high-quality projects. I mentioned the Magheramorne quarry regeneration project in my own area and the north-west science park, both of which are good economic drivers, and will be important.

In all the discussions with SEUPB, we have looked at what was wrong in the past, why it was taking so long and what we can do to advance the assessment. I have been given an assurance by SEUPB, as has the Minister in the Republic, that those will be assessed within the 40-week period.

Consultation groups have already been set up to assess the projects, and they are starting their work now. I think that there should be a report from the consultants by September, and then allocations can be made. Letters of offer must go out by the end of this year — I am putting that on the record in the House so that Members can make their own judgement. If that leads to questions coming back at the end of this year, I am quite happy for that to happen. Of course, it is then up to the groups to spend the money; that is the next stage. Sometimes that is slow, with spending starting around 18 months after letters of offer have been issued. So, again, that is the next big challenge: to make sure that the money is spent once it has been allocated.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. I thank the Minister for his statement. What progress has been made on recouping moneys from groups that were found to be in breach of the terms of their letter of offer?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

First, there is a requirement that where moneys have been allocated and the terms of letters of offer have not been met, the money should be recouped. A number of things have to be taken into consideration, the first of which is the circumstances that led to the breach of the letter of offer. In some cases where genuine mistakes have been made and where the fault does not lie totally with the group concerned, the funding body has to accept some culpability.

Secondly, there has to be a proper investigation. Given that individual groups are seriously affected when money is recouped, I think that it is only fair that they should have the opportunity for comeback. Thirdly, of course, a judgement then has to be made on what percentage of funding needs to be recouped. In the past, the levels have varied from very small percentages to — I think that there are examples of this — up to 100%. All those things have to be borne in mind.

Let us just remember that many of the groups that undertake work in their community have a grave responsibility, and some of them need their hand held more than others. I do not think that we want to run in willy-nilly and penalise people who, despite acting in the best interests of their community, very often find themselves in a situation where they have run foul of the very bureaucratic system of European funding and find that their personal assets have been put in jeopardy. I think that we have to bring a bit of humanity to this as well.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I am grateful to the Minister for reporting back to the Assembly this afternoon and, particularly, for his last comments. I pay tribute to all those people on the ground who work hard to bring a lot of benefits to all our communities. I have sat through many laborious and lengthy meetings with partnerships, which you mentioned. My question has already been asked, so I will ask one about the board. The last paragraph mentions the recommendation that a board be set up. That has been set aside, I think wisely, because of costs. What was the board going to do?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The board’s role was to oversee the expenditure of SEUPB. As I pointed out in the statement, only about 3% of its expenditure is for administrative purposes. The board’s only role would be to look after that expenditure, which is such a small amount. I do not support building more quangos on a cross-border basis or on a Northern Ireland-only basis. The Minister from the Irish Republic took the same view; he and I are like-minded on this. We are not quango builders. We want to knock down as many quangos as possible. It was, therefore, decided that the board probably was not necessary. However, a process has to be gone through, and we will go through it. I have the same view as the Member: why set up another unnecessary body?

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

I also thank the Minister for his statement. Has there been any work done on the future Peace IV and INTERREG V programmes?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The work on future programmes will be undertaken and chaired by SEUPB. There is probably about an 18-month lead-in period for that. The work will mostly be consultation and written submissions. We will be looking at and evaluating past programmes to see the good things and the bad things, the things you want to repeat and the things you do not want to repeat. We will be looking at what kind of themes those people who have an interest in the issue would like to see taken forward for the future, and then a report will go to the Executive as to what we see as our priorities for Northern Ireland. There will be extensive consultation, and I expect that any report on that will go to the Executive, probably towards the end of 2013.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answers. Will he give some clarification on the overall cost of consultants engaged in the economic appraisal of funding applications? My concern is that a lot of the basic structure of applications is similar, and it is being paid for over and over again. It could cut down both the cost and the time to complete those applications, so perhaps the Minister can comment.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I do not have the figure off the top of my head, but I think, in answer to questions on another occasion in the House, I indicated that I was concerned about the level of consultancy spend that there was through many of the European programmes. Of course, some of it is imposed on us because of the EU rules. There is a requirement that projects are properly assessed and that there is an economic case for them. That is a necessary step. If that step was not undertaken, it could be declared that the project itself is not valid.

I will come back to the Member, but the consultancy spend has come down. I have raised this with SEUPB on a number of occasions. On one occasion, when I raised the question of consultation and the cost of consultees and refused to approve it, it came back to me within a week at a 40% reduction. I sometimes think that maybe we do need to push some of the consultants, to indicate to them that this is not some easy ride where they just put their hand out and grab a lot of public money.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Minister, what is your opinion of the recent INTERREG IVa call?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The Member, since he represents East Antrim, will be pleased, as I am, that, in the recent INTERREG IVa programme, a major project in his own constituency — probably worth about £6 million or £7 million — has been shortlisted. That project at Magheramorne quarry will be of immense benefit to East Antrim, so, from that point of view, I am very pleased with the recent call and the outcome of the shortlisting. I would like to claim credit for it, but this is a totally objective assessment of the projects. At some later date, after it has gone through, I may have something more to say about it.

The recent call has attracted £191 million of applications, which is about five times more than the money that is available, so many are going to be disappointed. Yet, had some of those come forward at an earlier stage, when money was more readily available, they would have easily got the score to have got them through to a final selection. That shows that there are a number of very good projects out there and that, although some cynics might say that we are panicking now, that we just want to spend the money and will throw it at anything, that has not been the case. It has been a very competitive process, and I believe that the projects that have been selected will be very worthwhile and great economic drivers in the area when they finally get on the ground.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Does he agree with me that, when SEUPB has indicated that there are future risks for INTERREG funding, primarily coming from the lateness of the Budget, that is not a good way to spend public money?

Lessons should be learned from our Budget; it is much better to have more forward planning so that money can be better spent.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

There are a number of reasons for that. I have given reasons; I have not tried to hide what the problems have been. At an early stage, some of the projects coming through were not well thought out and required a considerable degree of sifting. Secondly, SEUPB has not covered itself in glory when it has come to the assessment of projects. It takes twice as long for projects to be assessed by SEUPB than it takes in other countries. That needs to be improved.

However, I would be more worried had some of the shortlisted projects looked fairly iffy; then, I think the Member’s criticism might have been more justified. Perhaps it is because of the current economic situation, but projects that would normally never have come near INTERREG are now coming. I am fairly sure that we are not throwing good money after bad with the projects that are being shortlisted. We have good, quality projects; however, I suppose it would have been better had those projects come through at an earlier stage so that work could have progressed on them much quicker.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. One issue that has cropped up, particularly with some of the rural development projects, has been the problem that some groups are having in acquiring matching funding, especially from finance organisations. Will the Minister advise whether that has been an issue, and whether any representations have been made through his Department to financial or lending institutions to try to ease the situation and help projects develop?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

There have been a couple of issues around matching funding. In some cases, letters of offer or projects have been held up because matching funding, especially from Departments in the Republic, has not been forthcoming. I discussed that issue with the Minister in Armagh. I have been given an assurance that, although the money has been held up because of budgetary considerations, it will be made available and letters of offer will go out.

I have not been made aware of the problem that the Member raised about financial institutions not being prepared to make matching funding available for projects. I would have thought that any group going to the bank with a guarantee that they were getting EU money for the project and knowing that the amount of money coming from the bank would probably be a fairly small proportion of the total funding package would have been offering the bank good collateral. However, I meet banks on a regular basis, and if the Member is aware that this is a widespread problem, I would love him to give me the details and I will take it up.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Since the Minister has made it clear that all politics is local, I commend the SEUPB for its funding for the Shankill Women’s Centre in north Belfast recently. Credit must also be given to our Ministers and MEPs who have been lobbying for a Peace IV; I hope that happens in the near future.

Evidence was given by the chief executive of the SEUPB to the Committee, and members raised a number of concerns in relation to funding, applications being made and the length of time it took for the letters of offer to be sent. In administration, financial governance and management, as well as practice and structure —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member should come to his question.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

The Minister should be aware that lots of groups have struggled to get letters of offer. That affects their output, outcomes and delivery to the community and impedes them in their work. That means that, when they come to review, the work has not been maximised because of that system. Will the Minister give an assurance that the process will be shortened?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I want to look at all of the issues, and I have asked the SEUPB to look at all of the issues that lead to the delay. If one reason is the stringency of the governance arrangements that are required to be put in place, that needs to be addressed. However, I point out to the Member that, since we are dealing with public money and since there very often will be matched funding from other public bodies in Northern Ireland, we cannot simply hand money out willy-nilly to groups whose credentials have not been established.

There has to be a balance; there has to be proper governance and accountability to make sure that money does not go astray because, as sure as you relax the rules, things go wrong, and, as sure as things go wrong, there will, quite rightly, be a barrage of questions around this room about what was being done with public money.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Is the Minister satisfied with how SEUPB conducts itself in regard to its investigation of funding spend by groups? I refer in particular to how it has treated the victims’ group Families Acting for Innocent Relatives (FAIR). The investigation denied FAIR the basic rules of natural justice by denying it the opportunity to comment on the report before it was concluded and as issues emerged. Does that Minister think that that indicates that SEUPB handles matters in a fair and even-handed manner?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I made it quite clear in an earlier answer to another Member that, since the outcomes of many of the investigations can be fairly draconian for the people who are involved in the groups, it is absolutely right that every opportunity is given to groups to explain why they breached the rules if they did so. There should also be a proper investigation into the severity and the intention because if something has been done unintentionally, the penalty should be much less than where somebody simply says, “Those are the rules, but we don’t think that the rules are very good”, and throws them over their shoulder and decides to go their own way.

I have met the Member privately about FAIR. I have made my views known to SEUPB, and I am quite happy to state publicly that, a report having been done and it being clear that the police did not believe that there was anything worthy of prosecution, the group should at least have had an opportunity to bring forward some points and state how it saw the investigation as being inadequate, because that may well have changed the view of what sanctions should be imposed. I expect SEUPB to give the group that opportunity.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the detail. Although I appreciate the answer that he gave to Mr Humphrey about being certain of certain projects, is there any possibility of a speedier resolution from SEUPB on some of the economic projects that come through the cross-border bodies like the Irish Central Border Area Network (ICBAN)? There are serious delays, which jeopardise the investment of private investors.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

It seems to have been the theme of this statement that people are unhappy about the speed. Of course, as the Member has quite rightly pointed out, that can have severe economic consequences for an area in which there is perhaps a good project. Sometimes, the timing of the projects is quite important because you are aiming for certain events or times or whatever. All that I can do is to continue to emphasise to and plague SEUPB to make sure that the shorter time commitment that it has now given is met. It should not be complacent about that, and it has to look at ways of bringing that down since it is quite clear in other jurisdictions that 40 weeks or 58 weeks is not the norm; half of that is the norm. That is what we should aim for.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I have a number of statements here, Mr Speaker, so I want to make sure that I have the right one. I would hate to start off on the wrong foot and for you to call me to order.

I wish to make a statement to the House on the implementation of the Rates (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2012. There has, quite rightly, been quite a lot of discussion recently in the newspapers about the economic problems that are being experienced by town centres and small businesses in those town centres. I felt that it was worthwhile to put on record what the Assembly has done to date and also to explain some of the limitations on what can be done by the Assembly.

My statement today will update Members about the initial success of the implementation of the Rates (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2012, which we passed in February, and respond to calls for positive action to be taken to alleviate the impact on the local business community during these difficult and changing times.

Every week — I am sure that Members will have experienced it in their constituencies — we hear of shop closures and the impact that the downturn is having on local traders in our towns and cities. I see it for myself in my constituency and as I visit other towns and cities in my capacity as Finance Minister, and I hear about it in the media and, of course, in the House from Members during Question Time and so on. Only last week, research by one retail organisation revealed that one in five shops in Northern Ireland is empty. That is the highest vacancy rate in the United Kingdom.

It is not simply the economic downturn that is causing the problem. Online shopping and bigger stores are taking an increasing share of consumer spending, and the recession is leading to, at least for this period, consumers having less money to spend. The retail industry has been undergoing a revolution, and that is having a sudden impact on local traders because, overall, retail spending is down. Times are changing for local retailers, and it is clear that there are simply too many shops in some areas, and no amount of public money will be enough to sustain them all. However, I want to give those with a future an opportunity or a fighting chance to help maintain the commercial and social core of our towns and cities.

Furthermore, we must recognise the wider context. Other sectors of business need help, as consumer spending comes from those in employment. It is not simply a matter of helping the retail sector alone. Allow me, therefore, an opportunity to outline the measures that I, as Finance Minister, have taken to create the right conditions for businesses to survive and flourish.

It is well known that people in Northern Ireland enjoy the lowest household taxes in the United Kingdom. We ought to remember that. Every day on the radio, we hear people talking about the level of rates in Northern Ireland. We have the lowest household taxes of anywhere in the United Kingdom, and that is a result of policies that have been actively pursued by the Executive in deciding, in the previous Budget period, to freeze rates in real terms and to do the same in this Budget period up to 2015 to enable people to keep as much of their money as possible in their own pockets. That is better than us simply taking the easy way out and looking for the kind of increases that occurred under direct rule or, indeed, that are being undertaken, even in these recessionary times, in other parts of the United Kingdom.

It is not always fully appreciated how competitive our business rates are compared to those in England, Scotland and Wales. For a start, as I have said, the regional rate is being held constant in real terms. That is part of the four-year Budget that the Executive have agreed, and businesses can bank on that. It will not change; it is set in stone until 2014-15. That gives certainty and stability. That means an increase of 2·2% in the regional rate for business ratepayers over the 2012-13 rating year. That builds on the regional rate freeze over the past four years, keeping rate increases as low as possible and meaning that, unlike anywhere else in the United Kingdom, business rates will have been frozen in real terms in Northern Ireland for seven straight years.

We have also adopted the lowest inflationary index, the GDP deflator. Business rates in other parts of the UK are geared to the retail price index and, this year, went up by 5·6%, which is more than double what was experienced locally. In addition, the Executive have agreed to hold manufacturing rates at 30%.

That helps 4,300 manufacturing businesses with £60 million in rates relief alone. That is an economic support that is unique to Northern Ireland. We have also retained the empty property relief at 50%. It has been removed in England and Wales and is being removed in Scotland. This is the right policy, given the growing number of empty shops.

In addition, of course, freezing domestic rates and deferring water charges have bolstered spending power. Do not forget the 19% increase in the domestic regional rate in the year before devolution, the absence of a cap on domestic rate bills and the water bills that were ready for posting before the Assembly was set up. We saved most households hundreds, if not thousands of pounds in the process, at a cost to public expenditure. There is an opportunity that will be foregone here if we do not collect this money, because it will not be available for other public services. It has been of real benefit to the retail sector by reducing its costs but also by giving people more disposable income to spend in the shops.

Together, all these actions complement the commercial rating measures that this Assembly approved through the Rates (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2009. We passed that legislation, despite significant pressure from some quarters not to, precisely because we understood that small businesses needed help now.

I will briefly address some of the criticisms of the large retail levy and what has happened in reality. Some said that the 15% increase in rates for large stores would see the attractiveness of Northern Ireland as a place for large retailers to invest diminished, yet the Environment Minister’s desk is strewn with planning applications for large retail premises in virtually every part of the Province.

I will turn now to the measures enacted in the Rates (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2009. The expanded small business rate relief scheme provided around 8,200 extra business ratepayers with a 20% discount for the next three years, bringing the total number of business ratepayers who benefit from that relief up to 23,000 businesses. The percentage of Northern Ireland properties now covered by the small business rate relief scheme is 33%; a third of all businesses and commercial properties, representing a total rate relief of £12million.

The extension to the scheme was achieved by charging the very largest retailers a levy rather than imposing an additional burden on local business ratepayers, which is the way in which similar schemes are paid for in other parts of the UK. I will consider extending the scope of the scheme next year, again at no cost to other ratepayers. What I am able to do will depend on the outcome of my Department’s evaluation of the scheme, which will be carried out later this year. That evaluation will include consideration of how best to recycle the savings that have been achieved through the exclusion of ratepayers with multiple premises.

However, it is already apparent that the extended small business rate relief scheme is making a significant difference. It was dismissed by some as being too small to be of any benefit, but I have been approached by retailers who are keen to thank me, this Executive and this Assembly for the reduction in their rate bills in these challenging times. This reduction sits, on average, at around £1,500 over a three-year period. For those who availed themselves of the enhancements introduced in April, the average amount awarded over the three-year period will be around £2,000.

Other measures have been introduced this year to help regenerate town centres, including a concession that allows new occupiers of long-term empty retail premises to receive a 50% rebate on their rates for 12 months. The rates holiday has already received a positive response from businesses; close to 50 enquiries are currently being dealt with by Land and Property Services. Although this might not seem a lot, when it is multiplied up over the remainder of this year it will mean lots more shops being occupied in our towns and city centres and a lot more people being employed. I encourage all MLAs to actively promote this innovative scheme in their own areas in whatever way they can. Unlike the small business rate relief, which goes to businesses automatically, businesses have to apply for this, because it is not an automatic scheme.

In addition, the use of any empty shop window displays for non-commercial purposes will now be disregarded for rating purposes, allowing unoccupied properties to be given some life and stop them from bringing down the appearance of other premises around them.

I have got to say that, as I have walked around town centres, I have seen some marvellous examples of that. Shop displays have made it look as though there is activity going on in shops, rather than the shutters being pulled down, which, of course, creates an air of dereliction on the street.

The measures are unique to Northern Ireland and, along with the large stores levy and the recent announcement of a business rates revaluation, they deliver the majority of the recommendations of the ‘Fair Rates for Small Traders’ campaign document. That was produced by a coalition of more than 31 business organisations and trader groups, which published a five-point plan last autumn.

The Northern Ireland Executive have offered the retail and small business sector a suite of measures that are, in my view, unprecedented in the United Kingdom. Understandably, and especially in the midst of a recession, we have been lobbied for even more interventions. I am sympathetic to the plight of our business community and, instinctively, I want to see them hold on to more of their profits and invest further in their firms. I hear the calls for more targeting of rate relief, in particular for certain town centres or enterprise zones within them. However, such measures present major difficulties in choosing exactly where to designate and the likely impact that they will have, such as the unfair competitive disadvantage they may create for those outside the chosen areas and the likelihood of causing displacement. Furthermore, even if I wanted to intervene in that way, the risk of someone successfully challenging such a policy is unacceptably high. I would rather direct scarce resources to the business community than waste them on defending well-meaning schemes that are vulnerable to challenge in the courts. I would rather give money to the businesses that I want to help than to barristers and solicitors. For those reasons, I prefer the broader approach I have outlined.

The Executive have also agreed to LPS starting work immediately on a general revaluation of 72,000 non-domestic properties in Northern Ireland. That will redistribute the rating burden from April 2015, based on more up-to-date assessments. Unfortunately, that cannot be rushed through or brought forward, nor should it be regarded as a panacea for all businesses. It will mean that sectors and trading locations that have not fared as well since the last revaluation in 2003 will pay less and those that have fared better will pay more, even if rental values overall have gone down. Just because a property has halved in value over recent years, it does not mean that rates bills will halve. When rental prices doubled in some instances, it did not result in a doubling of rates and nor does it work in the reverse. Although it is far too early to judge, many of our smaller local businesses may not benefit much or at all. I have heard some individuals call for the revaluation to be brought forward by two years. Not only is such a suggestion impractical but it could result in some businesses paying more in their rates two years early. In the meantime, the rebalancing measures that we have agreed — the extension to small business rate relief and the large shops levy — will help many local businesses without adversely affecting our public expenditure position.

I also need to recognise that there are limits to the concessions we can make and still raise enough money to help pay for essential services. I say that because every month someone with a worthy cause comes along and asks for more rates relief or further exemptions. This month it is the equine industry, last month it was town centres, the month before it was sports clubs; and so it goes on. I would perhaps be more sympathetic to using the rating system as a means of relief if the politicians who are often responsible for calling for those benefits were not the same ones who call for more money to be spent on this or that. I am looking in a particular direction, but I could probably look around the whole place and apply that statement. It is a local taxation system, not a benefits system. If sectors need to be supported we should look to other ways of doing that, rather than immediately jumping to the conclusions that the rating system is the best vehicle for delivering help and that it is somehow not real money.

Any revenue forgone is less money for public expenditure, and we still have to raise similar amounts of money. Every pound raised in business rates is a pound that supplements our Barnett share. It goes to hospitals, schools, roads and council services; it does not disappear into a black hole somewhere. We need to strike the right balance. Rebalancing the economy during the continuing downturn and through to recovery means keeping as much money in the control of local businesses as possible.

I have made the promise before and I make it again that we will not dip into those pockets any more than is necessary, until we have made all of the savings that are to be made in delivering efficient and effective regional government services. If there is a better way, I am keen to hear what it is, but it is not viable to re-engineer the rating system and change the way that rates are measured to somehow distribute the rating burden based on individual business performance. There are other taxes that do that, and, even if we were to find a simple way — no regional or local government in the world has managed that — it would takes years to implement.

Let us take a collective or cross-departmental approach to tackling the underlying issues and not simply look at rate bills. My colleague the Minister for Social Development, Nelson McCausland, is due to bring forward legislation on business improvement districts, and that is a good example of this. The rating system has a role to play in developing a policy that suits businesses, suits government and suits Northern Ireland. Let us not forget the direct investment that DSD is making in our towns and cities. We have already spent over £20 million in a three-year period on town centre public realm schemes, and another £40 million of planned spend is in the pipeline. Then there are the restore-and-revitalisation projects, funded since last year with £1·5 million plus another £1·5 million on town master plans. Towns in my constituency have benefited from that.

If anyone doubts that this is a worthwhile investment, they should look at the Newcastle experience, where footfall is up threefold. That is something that can make a real and lasting difference to the fortunes of our business community. For my part, and with your support, I will be focusing on getting the right balance back into the business rates system to help pay for investment and to fund efficient public services, recognising that it must act for business, not against it. I hope that Members will appreciate that we have taken the right approach, which is one of adopting Northern Ireland policies that are tailored and responsive to Northern Ireland needs. Devolution has allowed us to do that and to do things differently in Northern Ireland in a way that has benefited local businesses.

Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I thank the Minister for his statement, and I share his view in his closing remarks that we should be looking to have the economic levers available to us to adopt our own solutions that are tailored and targeted to our economic situation. The Committee for Finance and Personnel is keenly interested in the process of non-domestic revaluation, which is due to take effect from April 2015. What methodology will be used to ensure that robustness and objectivity are achieved in assessments? Can the Minister outline what the appeals procedure might be for non-domestic properties? He has been keen to allay any sense that this is likely to lead to a windfall or a substantial reduction in rates bills for properties. Can he suggest what he considers the overall impact of re-evaluation of non-domestic properties will be?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The Chairman is quite right to say that that must be done on an objective basis. One of the reasons why it cannot be rushed is that we have to be able to stand up and justify each individual rate bill, because there will be an appeals mechanism, which will be as it is at present. Where business owners do not believe that their properties have been properly assessed, they will be able to challenge that right up to court level. The first thing that we have to do is an analysis of the market, and we are starting that now. That information will come from a number of sources. Forms will be sent out to businesses this year, and they will be sending us back information about rental values and other information on that. We will use all the information that comes back, including from professional bodies and chartered surveyors who are carrying out work for us. We will then design valuation models for different sectors and for different trading locations and start applying that to individual properties. That requires considerable work on the ground because, of course, you can sometimes get things wrong when using a computer model. There will be quite a lot of footwork as we go around looking at how the results of the model tally with what we find on the ground.

So, there will be that to consider.

In 2013-14 we will probably apply that model to the entire stock and look through the figures to see whether we have got our estimations right, etc. By 2014, we will have to have established a rate for each of the properties. We need that to be done by at least September 2014, because councils will need to know what is happening to their rate base so that they can make judgements about the rates for the following year.

That is the kind of deadline and process that are involved. So, we have to go through quite an extensive process to have a model that we believe we can stand over.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

: I thank the Minister for his statement, which contains a number of very good elements.

We know that we have a certain amount of money to raise from rates, but it depends how we break that up. There is a misconception out there. We are asked why the revaluation was cancelled for the non-domestic rate in the first place, but a lot of people are ignorant of the amount of money that we have to raise. So, why was the revaluation cancelled in the first place?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: In answer to the Committee Chairperson, I probably said why it was not possible to carry through such an analysis in 2010. We cannot simply say, “I think that it is a bit less. Fewer people are using those kinds of areas. Rental values may have gone done there and are maybe a bit higher here. Let’s do an estimation and get a rates bill.” As the Chairperson pointed out in his questions, those things will be rigorously tested, because the rates bill that someone gets is an overhead for their business. Therefore, if it is wrong, if they think that it is wrong, or if they think that it has been created in a shoddy way or that data were not sufficient, they will make sure that they challenge it.

Do not forgot that we have to collect a huge amount of data on what is happening with businesses and rental value and on what is happening to the various sectors and locations and the rental values in them. If you go back to 2010, you will see that the market was all over the place. Property values were up and down — down rather than up — and people were panicking, and traders or people who held property were trying to do anything to hold on to it.

Sometimes very low valuations or low rents were given just to get concessions into a new shopping centre. Long term, that shopping centre might have had huge potential, but, given that it was built in 2010, it had no potential. What do you do? Do you fill it up with short-term leases and give them way practically for nothing? How robust would those data have been? They would not have been robust. Therefore, any valuation that was done around that time would have been, at best, fairly shaky and, at worst, useless. For that reason, we made a conscious decision to delay the revaluation. It was in the interests of everyone to delay it, because there was no point in us putting huge resources into it and finding that we were getting all kinds of legal challenges.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

: I also thank the Minister for his statement. He will remember that, when we were discussing the Rates (Amendment) Bill, many businesses pointed towards business improvement districts as the way to go. Has the Department undertaken any work on that since that date?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: The business improvement districts fall under the responsibility of Department for Social Development, and work will be ongoing there. Indeed, I think that the Minister for Social Development intends to bring forward legislation on that fairly soon.

However, business improvement districts are not an alternative to the rating system. They allow for local businesses to come together to pay a supplementary rate of some sort that is to be spent on things in their area that they want it to be, whether that is improved security, improved environmental measures or marketing or whatever. The only question for DFP in that is whether the current rating system can be used to collect the money or whether the database that we have can be used to enable the source of the money from different businesses to be identified.

There will be small amounts of money locally. It is really to allow local businesses to do their bit in saying, “Here are choices that we want to make. Central government might not make these. We believe they are priorities and will have such an impact on our area that we will put some additional money in to make them happen.”

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

: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle, Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. I thank the Minister for his statement.

On Friday last, a young businessman called to my office. He opened a coffee kiosk in one of our shopping centres. He is being faced with a bill of £27,000 in rates. He employs six people. The burden of rates could lead to the closure of his fledgling business. Can the Minister take any further measures that will help smaller businesses, especially new businesses, regardless of their location?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: I do not know whether the £27,000 was a yearly rate bill or an accumulative rate bill with arrears, so I do not know the individual circumstances. Any business has, of course, the option of appealing the level of a rates bill, and I advise him to do that. Appeals are being dealt with much more quickly now.

As I already said to the Assembly, I will be looking at an evaluation of the small business rate relief scheme this year. If we can find ways to improve or extend it next year, we will do that. I cannot give definite details on that because I do not know what extra money may be available. However, it will be at no cost to existing ratepayers, because there is no point taking money off one group of ratepayers to give to another. We did that with the large business levy because we believed that there was an inequality, which has been sorted out.

As I said in the statement, only so much can be done through the rating system. The rating system cannot solve all the ills that are experienced through increased competition between businesses, changing shopping habits or because people have decided to shop in different ways, such as on-line. Those are things that the rates system will never sort out. We are sympathetic to the sort of issue the Member raised, and we will do what we can within the limits of the financial constraints that are imposed on us.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

: I thank the Minister for his statement. Has there been much uptake of the opportunity around the shop window displays to improve the appearance of areas, and how is that being controlled to ensure that the displays are in line with the scheme’s intention?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: If they are not in line with the scheme — if, for example, a business simply decides to extend its own activities into the shop window — it will not get the rates relief. Those sorts of things will be checked out.

I do not have figures for the number of businesses that have taken up the scheme. We are now two months into the financial year, and we have had enquiries. I have seen some schemes in town centres. I saw one in the centre of Belfast the other day, so I know that it is beginning to happen. I hope that chambers of trade will work with local art colleges, charity groups, etc, to look at innovative ways to use shop windows so they can have attractive displays and at least give the appearance of activity. That was the whole purpose of the scheme. Since it was heavily supported by chambers of commerce in all the towns that I visited, and I may have been with nine or 10 chambers of commerce, hopefully they will encourage estate agents and shop owners to do that.

Adrian McQuillan (DUP, East Londonderry)

: I thank the Minister once again for his latest statement. Is location taken into account when valuing a property, whether town centre, out-of-town or rural?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: Location will be taken into consideration in so far as the rental value of a location will be reflective of its footfall and popularity. That, of course, is what the rates will be based on. You would expect that rental values of very popular locations, which lots of retailers want into, would go up, and the rates would reflect that. The rental values of places that have fallen in popularity will go down as landlords try to attract people into those properties. That will also be reflected in the rates. Location will be taken into consideration, but only through the mechanism of what the market says about the rental levels in those areas.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his comprehensive statement today. I very much welcome the restatement of the various initiatives that the Executive and the Assembly have approved, on the basis that eaten bread is soon forgotten. I very much hope that the local media will reflect that, because we have been talking about very significant statistics with regard to the families that are being driven into poverty and the businesses that are being driven out of business.

I have been glad that I have been able to endorse and support what the Minister has done. However, there is the issue of the enterprise zones. I take some encouragement from the fact that, in his statement, the Minister has considered that issue and considered the problems. Perhaps there is a case to be made for localised initiatives on a pilot basis in the form of four to six enterprise zones with a defined lifetime. I think that the affordability issue and any possible legal challenges could be addressed that way. We should try to indicate that —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

: Time.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

: — we are prepared to think outside the box, if necessary.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: We have had a discussion on a number of occasions, in Question Time and whatnot, about enterprise zones in Northern Ireland, be they the enterprise zones that the Secretary of State believes we should be setting up and which have been set up elsewhere, or enterprise zones in town centres, as suggested by some retail organisations. I know that the Member has said that he believes that the difficulties could be overcome, but they will not be easily overcome. Can you imagine an enterprise zone stopping at the end of one street and the next bit of the street or the next street not having the same advantages, especially if the advantages are to be significant enough to help the area? You would get all forms of displacement, distortion of trade, etc. I have absolutely no doubt that there would be immense legal challenges to that.

Even if there were not legal challenges, there would be economic distortion. That is why, if we are going to look at local initiatives, it would be more beneficial in the longer term for local people to have the ability to decide to put in additional money through the bids process, define where they want the improvement district to be, give the money locally, have a say over it and make the judgement on it. That is more likely to be robust. I would prefer it if we were to look at more general applications of changes to the rates system, and I think that that is the route that we will have to continue going down.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

: I thank the Minister and welcome the statement and the measures contained therein. Minister, will you provide additional help for more than three years?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

: That is an excellent example of a very focused question; it was straight to the point.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

: Let us hear the focused answer.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: That is even more demanding, of course. I will give a focused answer. The current small business rates relief will stop. The legislation for it stops in 2015. However, we said that, beyond the revaluation, we would be looking for ways to help small businesses. In the consultation, we asked for suggestions on that. Not very many came through at that stage, other than the business improvement districts. As we approach 2015, businesses and business organisations will, hopefully, start to look at ways in which we can replace the small business rates relief. However, do not forget that the idea of the revaluation was to try to create the even playing field that did not exist because of the huge change that happened between 2001 and today.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

: The current business rates for town centres reflect the 2005 rates evaluation. Does the Minister accept that the 20% discount that has been given may not be sufficient and that, if we really want to value our town centres and town centre retailers in the future, a much greater reassessment may be required? Why was England and Wales able to proceed with the 2010 revaluation, which might have had an even bigger impact than the 20%, when we could not?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: First, we are going to have a much greater reassessment. I do not know whether the Member has been listening. We are going to have a full rates assessment for 2015. It will be a rigorous examination of what has happened in the market. I outlined all the steps, from data collection to modelling to investigation of individual areas and premises to levying individual bills. This is a major, internationally recognised assessment that will take two-and-a-half years, which is the same length of time that it would take in any other part of the United Kingdom.

Secondly, he asked why they could have it in England but not here. All the indications and measures show that the turbulence in the property market in Northern Ireland, although not as great as that in the Irish Republic, was far more extensive than that in any other part of the United Kingdom. I explained why that turbulence in the property market would not have enabled us to revaluate the rates in a way that was robust, fair and that we could have stood over and that would not have made us subject to widespread appeal. That is the reason.

We are where we are. We are undertaking the revaluation, and it will be a full evaluation. In the meantime, I believe that the small business rates relief has compensated for whatever differences may have resulted from the necessary delay in the revaluation in 2010.

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

: I also welcome the Minister’s statement. I note that he told us that the Environment Minister’s desk is strewn with planning applications from large retailers. Does the Minister agree that that is not good news for small shops? What can the Executive do collectively to ensure that we do not get into the situation that exists in Britain, where 60% of even modest-sized villages and towns have no shops at all?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: I was simply making the point that, when this was introduced, the Assembly and I were lambasted by some people for putting up a sign outside Northern Ireland that read, “Business is not welcome.” Apparently, large businesses would take their cue and not invest in Northern Ireland. At the time, I said that that was nonsense, and I rubbished it. I rubbished it to their faces when they came to see me, and some of them left with fairly red faces. They now look even more foolish than they did at that stage, because applications have, of course, continued to come in.

I did not say whether it was welcome or not welcome. There are some places where those planning applications will be of benefit to the location, and there are some where they will not. Of course, that is a job not for the Finance Minister but the Environment Minister. If the Member is not happy with some of the decisions that are made, he should direct his fire at Mr Attwood, not at me.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

: I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the initiatives that the Minister has introduced: the 50% empty premises relief scheme; the rebate scheme; the regional rate freeze; and, of course, the small business rate relief scheme, which averages £1,500. All that is very welcome for local businesses. I know that the Minister has met the Belfast Chamber of Trade and Commerce and Belfast City Centre Management to discuss the dire situation that exists in Belfast City Council. Can the Minster assure the House that he will continue to engage with chambers of commerce and businesses across Northern Ireland, as he has done in the past year?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: I can. Let me say something about the engagement with the Belfast Chamber of Trade and Commerce. It brought forward the idea of dressing empty windows, and we responded to that. It brought forward the idea of a 50% discount on empty shops, and we responded to that. Some of the big city centre stores were being affected by the large retail levy, so the Belfast Chamber of Trade and Commerce asked us to ensure that it is limited to a three-year period. We responded to that. Given the impact that it might have had on some of the large stores in Belfast city centre, it indicated that 20% was probably too high, and we responded to that.

I listened to chambers of trade and chambers of commerce during the consultation, and changes were made to the initial proposals to reflect all the aforementioned concerns. There were some things to which we could not respond, however. In addition, through the Department for Social Development, extensive work on street furniture and refurbishment has been carried out in Belfast city centre. Members have probably found that, when work is being done in their town, traders complain that it has the effect of cutting down on footfall, and so on, and although the work in Belfast was disruptive, the extensive investment has helped to brighten the city and make it a very attractive location.

Therefore, lots of work is being done across Departments, and we are listening. Despite what some people may say, we do not sit here with cloth ears. We put forward ideas. If those ideas can be improved on, I am not so proud that I will not say that somebody has a better idea than me. If somebody does, I will steal it and use it.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

: I thank the Minister for his statement. I congratulate him on his work as Finance Minister to try to help lessen the burden on our local businesses, especially independent retailers across our town centres. I also congratulate him for the benefit that the rate relief scheme has brought to over 1,300 properties in my constituency —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

: Do I detect a question?

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

: — to the value of around £1·2 million.

That having been said, the Minister referred to extending the programme. May I encourage him to give serious consideration to doing that?

Mr Wilson: Yes. [Laughter.]

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

: I thank the Minister for his statement and for outlining the generous nature of some of the changes that he has introduced. I am sure that he is aware of some of the surveys that have shown some parts of Northern Ireland to have higher rates of empty businesses than other parts of the UK, so heaven alone knows what the situation would be like if our rates had been roughly the average of those in the rest of the UK.

Has the Minister been able to get examples of best practice from other parts — for example, from England and Scotland — of programmes and proposals that could be implemented here to assist those empty businesses?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: I expect that England, Scotland and Wales could learn from us. We have a wider range of measures than that in other jurisdictions. However, as I said in answer to an earlier question, I am always open to any suggestions that come along. They will be given serious consideration. If they are affordable and workable, of course we will look at them.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

: I, too, welcome the Minister’s statement. It was fairly comprehensive. If the Act is to be an even greater success, however, does he not accept that the banks must come on board and be more constructive? I read continually about the 0·5% lending rate. I would like to know who qualifies for that rate, because it is certainly not those with a mortgage, an overdraft or a personal loan. Does he agree that we need the banks on board to make this a total success?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: The Member raises an issue, but it is probably the wrong morning to ask me about it, because before I came to the Chamber, I was with someone in my constituency and then someone in the office upstairs who, if their side of the story is correct or even half correct, told me the most horrific stories about the way in which banks seem to be determined to put businesses under. This week, I will speak with the banks concerned and, at some stage, I think that I will be at the point at which I will name some of them, because I am increasingly worried that some banks, or some bank managers, seem to be totally cut off from reality and do not recognise that, although they have a commercial responsibility to their organisation, they have a civic responsibility to ensure that they do not stand in the way of economic progress in Northern Ireland.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

: I do not pretend that there are easy answers, but I suspect that a lot of businesses feeling crippled by rates will be disappointed by the statement, because, although it is very strong on reviewing what has been done, there is really nothing new in it that will bring immediate relief.

There have been many recent warnings of what is in store. The Minister’s colleague the Member of Parliament for North Antrim said recently that if something is not done urgently, we are going to hear more of the sound of shutters coming down and not going up again. The Minister’s statement says that he is:

“focusing on getting the right balance back into the business rates system.”

However, that may be too late for many. Can no current further relief be given to those who are in dire straits?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

: These are new measures that came into operation in April this year, and I spoke today about their review. It is not a historical review about something that we did three years ago and our saying how wonderful we are. Problems were drawn to our attention, and we responded quickly by introducing a relief scheme in this financial year. Let us look at the situation. This year, the manufacturing industry will save £90 million as a result of the relief that it receives. Small businesses will save £12 million in overheads as a result of the relief received. I cannot quantify what has been done for an average business by freezing rates for the past four years, or what will be done by freezing rates for the next three years. All I can say is that no other part of the United Kingdom has responded to businesses in this way. I explained to the House that revaluation cannot be done. If I could wave a magic wand and have premises revalued more quickly in a way that I could stand over, I would do it. However, for all the reasons that I outlined and despite all the work that has been done, revaluation cannot be done more quickly.

I bet the Member is sitting there thinking that I have not mentioned the last bit of his question. However, I am not going to dodge that. When constituents bombard their public representatives, and the news media also bombard us with a diet of how something has to be done and nothing is being done, it is easy for that to drip-feed into everybody’s psyche, even those who are politically involved. Within resources and constraints, we have done what we could, and we have done our best. If people think that there is some value in me, as Finance Minister, holding back on anything that could be reasonably done and watching businesses close down, I do not know what kind of world they live in. People can say that shutters are going to come down, but we have not, and will not, hold back. Let me be clear: shutters may come down but that will not be as a result of our being cloth-eared and not listening, or being indolent and not working. We will do what we can because we realise that people’s livelihoods are at stake.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the Executive’s recent European successes, including a major engagement event in Brussels undertaken by the Barroso task force working group, and to explain how those efforts have shaped the Executive’s European priorities for 2012-13, which are published today.

I am pleased to report that the past year has seen a substantial step-up in our collective engagement in European Union policies, funding programmes and networks. All Departments have been involved in the work, which has seen us raise our positive profile, commit additional dedicated resources to support our efforts and has helped us to achieve increased financial successes.

I turn to the European successes of 2011 and 2012. While the euro zone’s financial problems have been making all the headlines, this has been a hugely important year for us in Northern Ireland to be very actively engaged with Brussels as the first firm proposals and draft regulations for the next European funding period, which is 2014 to 2020, have emerged. Departments have been following the policy debates closely and working to ensure that the proposals, and the new funding programmes that will eventually emerge, accommodate our regional needs as fully as possible.

The Executive have strengthened their European support infrastructure to assist Departments in their efforts, funding nine additional European secondments that include four desk officers operating from the Executive’s Brussels office. Those desk officers are dedicated to supporting the Barroso task force working group and its four thematic subgroups. Since the desk officers took up their posts in early March, they have made a significant impact. They have opened new doors and helped Departments to engage more, maximising the benefits for our businesses and citizens over the coming year.

A significant and tangible outcome from our collective efforts can be seen in the increased drawdown of competitive EU moneys over the last year. The Executive set themselves a target in the Programme for Government of a 20% increase in EU competitive funding by March 2015. Over the past year — year 1 of the target period — Departments drew down £15·8 million of competitive EU funds, and that is an increase of £4·9 million over the 2010-11 baseline. That is an excellent start and provides a strong springboard for delivering even greater success across the remaining three years of the target period.

I turn to the Barroso task force and the context for the event. All those efforts culminated in a highly successful Brussels engagement programme by the Barroso task force working group between 27 and 29 March, under the chairmanship of junior Minister Anderson and me. We led a delegation of officials from all Departments to Brussels to engage in an extensive and comprehensive programme of meetings and discussions with the European Commission’s members of the Barroso task force. The purpose of the programme was to take stock of progress made to date against the Executive’s agreed priorities, to pursue current issues and to share our future strategic priorities with the European Commission.

It is an important time to make our voice heard in Brussels. For example, negotiations are currently under way on the size of the EU budget for 2014-2020. That will determine the amount of funding available for the next generation of EU policies and programmes, such as the common agriculture policy, the structural funds and the new research and development framework — Horizon 2020 — all of which will be highly significant for us. We must, therefore, continue to exploit the unique opportunities that are presented to us by the Barroso task force and opportunities such as our Brussels programme to identify fresh funding opportunities, to influence policy and, more generally, to further our interests in Europe to help strengthen and support our economy.

President Barroso has invested personally and politically in this process. In 2007, he was the first European leader to visit us following the agreement on the restoration of devolved government. He underlined the support of the European Commission for the peace process at an important time in our political and economic development, and he established a task force to enhance our engagement in Europe, reinforcing our newly-established political institutions. In December 2010, President Barroso again restated his personal commitment to us when he joined the First Minister and deputy First Minister in opening new premises for our Executive’s office in Brussels, and he reinforced and renewed the work of the task force.

In response, through the Barroso task force working group, we have built up a strong infrastructure, allowing us to work with the Commission task force to engage effectively in Europe and, through mechanisms such as the Programme for Government, mainstream Europe within the Executive and Departments.

The Barroso task force working group aims to promote participation in EU policy development that will benefit the region; engagement in European networks, allowing us to benchmark our performance and learn from best practice across Europe in the delivery of services to citizens and businesses; and drawdown of resources from competitive EU funding programmes, strengthening our economy and delivering competitive advantage for our businesses. Through the group and its various subgroups, we aim to harness European programmes and policies to help us make progress across a number of areas, including competitiveness and employment; innovation and technology; climate change and energy; and social cohesion.

Recognising the time-limited advantage that the Barroso task force offers us, we have — even in the current difficult financial environment — provided additional resources to boost the number of our Brussels-based officials and ensure that every opportunity for greater European success is being maximised.

In respect of our engagement and the outcomes from the Brussels programme, we have strengthened significantly our engagement with the European Commission, following and building on the previous visit to Belfast by the Commission task force in March 2011. While there, we were able to outline to the Commission areas where we have made significant progress against our targets during 2011 and 2012.

Our most recent visit to Brussels gave us once more an opportunity to express our appreciation for the work of the Commission task force, including the work of Walter Deffaa, who is the recently appointed director general of DG Regio. In addition, it gave us unprecedented access to Commission officials. Over three days, 54 meetings took place, involving 35 Civil Service officials from all our Departments. In addition, our Executive office in Brussels hosted a plenary session attended by over 50 officials from the European Commission and our own Departments. That focused on the current world and European economic context and the strategic thrust that will be necessary in 2012-13 to stimulate growth and help regions such as ours recover from recession. The session was chaired jointly by the lead Commission official on the Barroso task force and the head of the Executive office in Brussels and was addressed by the director general of DG Regio and the permanent secretary of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, David Sterling. The Brussels programme also provided junior Minister Anderson and I with the opportunity to raise specific issues of importance.

During the first six months of 2013, Ireland will take on the presidency of the European Council. As such, it is expected to preside over a number of key EU decisions, such as, possibly, the agreement of the EU budget, the future of the common agricultural policy and the cohesion policy. We used the opportunity of the visit to explore with the Irish Permanent Representation to the EU areas where we could contribute to, and benefit from, this important Irish presidency. For example, the possibility of secondments of our civil servants to Irish Departments was raised, following agreement in principle at a previous North/South Ministerial Council. One civil servant has already been seconded to the Irish Permanent Representation in Brussels to assist in the presidency. This is a rare and important opportunity for our officials to gain first-hand experience at a time when decisions will be made that will impact on us all for many years to come.

We met our MEPs Jim Nicholson and Diane Dodds, as well as staff from Bairbre De Brún’s office, and we briefed them on the recent work of the task force. Since the Lisbon Treaty came into force, the European Parliament has become a co-legislator in important policy areas such as agriculture and fisheries and our cohesion policy. That reinforces the need for us to work proactively with our MEPs in promoting our regional agenda.

As Ministers, we are keen to further our contribution to the EU’s efforts to increase its role in peace-building and conflict resolution throughout the world. The European Commission, in the Barroso task force report, committed to working with us to examine how that might be done. The European External Action Service, as the European Union’s foreign policy arm, is currently considering how the European Union can develop its role in that area. It is, therefore, an opportune time for us to join these discussions. This is particularly so in light of the EU’s recent decision to award £12 million towards the construction of a peace-building and reconciliation centre at Maze/Long Kesh This was of particular interest to members of the cabinet of Vice President Catherine Ashton, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and to officials in the European External Action Service, with whom we had very positive meetings.

We also discussed these developments with Jane Morrice, one of our members on the Economic and Social Committee. Jane was rapporteur for her Committee’s formal opinion on the role of the EU in helping to resolve international conflicts. Her report lays particular emphasis on the relevance of our peace process to conflict resolution in other parts of the world. It was adopted by the Committee on 19 January this year and further underlines the potential for the centre at Maze/Long Kesh to play a major role in international conflict prevention and resolution.

We took the opportunity of our meeting with the Director General of DG Regio, Walter Deffaa, to discuss the future direction of European cohesion policy, including the possibility of a further Peace programme. In his role, Mr Deffaa will have an important influence in the current structural funds negotiations. We also discussed Commissioner Hahn’s proposal to host an event in Brussels to showcase projects funded by the Peace programme to a wider international audience, which is scheduled for early 2013.

With regard to departmental engagement in Brussels, just as structural funds are important to our future economic growth, so, too, are the many competitive EU programmes that are available to us now and in the future. Those opportunities were explored in some depth through a series of meetings with the Commission and our officials in each of the Executive’s policy priority groups. Those in the innovation and technology group covered topics such as the future funding programmes for 2014-2020, with a particular emphasis on supporting and growing our small to medium enterprises. They explored the COSME programme, the competitiveness programme for small to medium enterprises, which aims to provide support for entrepreneurship through better access to financial and enhanced support services, the regional smart specialisation strategies and Horizon 2020, which is the European Union’s future framework programme for research and innovation. Possible funding applications under the European innovation partnership were also explored, with a focus on agricultural productivity and sustainability.

Officials in the competitiveness and employment policy group discussed opportunities to address the EU-wide issue — an issue close to many Members’ hearts, including mine — of youth unemployment. They discussed also the current proposals to use uncommitted funding from existing programmes to address that problem. Their discussions also covered Erasmus for All, the new future programme for education, training, youth and sport.

That will replace the existing Lifelong Learning Programme. Other issues covered included the European social fund and vocational excellence.

Problems posed by an ageing population — we should celebrate having an ageing population — provided a particular focus for the social cohesion group’s policy discussions. Specifically, officials were interested in exploring funding for innovative approaches to the problem. They also looked for opportunities to share examples of local best practice in that area, such as the success with the creation of a Commissioner for Older People and our combined health and social care system. Other members of the social cohesion theme focused on funding opportunities relating to young people who are disenfranchised; justice; culture; and community-led regeneration. The meetings explored existing and future funding opportunities.

During meetings with the Commission, the climate and energy group members impressed with examples of how our experience could provide insight into a regional approach for the EU adaptation strategy and of how our approach to low-carbon technology and renewables could drive ambitious targets. Officials highlighted the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute’s successful research into agricultural carbon sequestration and held constructive meetings on transport policy, including electric vehicles and the transnational funding of projects under the Trans-European Transport Network programme. For Members interested in finding out more, we will provide a more detailed report on the Brussels engagement programme, which will be laid in the Assembly Library shortly.

I now turn to our European priorities for 2012-13 and our next steps. As we move forward, it is important that we maintain the significant momentum that has been built up as a result of the Brussels engagement programme. Follow-up actions are being pursued, and bilateral contacts between Departments and the Commission services have been strengthened. Early reciprocal programmes by Commission officials are expected, and one has already taken place, dealing with health and the digital agenda.

Today, we published our ‘European Priorities 2011-12 Implementation Report’ and our ‘European Priorities 2012-13’. Both those documents can be found in the Assembly Library. Hard copies are available from the Business Office, and Members will be able to download them from the OFMDFM website following this debate. Their publication represents another tangible step forward and a restatement of the Executive’s commitment to that work.

Given our success to date, we will continue to focus on the four broad themes of competiveness and employment; innovation and technology; climate change and energy; and social cohesion that we adopted last year. Our aims and objectives have, however, been updated and aligned with European Union objectives for the current year, with the details we currently have on the 2014-2020 EU funding period and with our Programme for Government. As was the case last year, an implementation plan, setting targets for each of the objectives identified under each theme, is being developed. The Barroso task force working group will monitor progress quarterly and provide the Executive with a formal six-month progress report in the autumn.

Now that we have a reinforced infrastructure in place to support the drawdown of EU moneys, our intention is to build on last year’s success by broadening the range of competitive EU funding streams that Departments target and by working to influence the ongoing negotiations on key funding sources, such as the Connecting Europe Facility and Horizon 2020, which will be worth around €50 billion and €80 billion respectively.

During this year, we expect to consolidate our preparations for the new EU funding period so that, by the end of 2013, each Department will have a well-developed project pipeline in place, allowing them to tap in to the new EU funding programmes as soon as they are launched.

We also believe that our performance needs to be seen in context if our success is to be honestly and fairly measured. Our performance in year 1 has been good, but, on a relative basis, compared with other regions, the picture is still unclear, and so for the year ahead – year 2 – we will be placing greater emphasis on comparing our relative drawdown with the best performing regions in Europe. Engaging positively by extending partnerships and collaboration across all key policies and programmes will do much to make that possible and to advance our own learning and knowledge. We will also work closely with our MEPs and other representatives to the EU to exert the maximum possible influence on decisions in Brussels that are important to us.

In conclusion, the Barroso task force represents a significant political and resource investment by the European Commission in the region as part of its contribution to helping us maintain a momentum towards a peaceful and shared society and towards economic recovery. The Executive, in turn, recognise the need to match the Commission’s continued prioritisation of the region with an appropriate level of resource and effort. In so doing, we will realise the greatest benefits from our EU membership for our businesses and our people.

As junior Ministers with responsibility for that work, we will continue to encourage and support Departments in their efforts, helping them to implement their individual priorities and deliver even greater collective success, strengthening our economy, and building a shared and better future for us all.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his update. Members will be aware that the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister was one of a number of Committees to respond to Ministers on the Executive’s draft European priorities. An implementation plan was referenced on a number of occasions during that process and again by the Minister in the House today. Given that it is nearly June, can the Minister tell us when we can expect to see the implementation plan for 2012-13, and will he confirm that it will contain SMART targets?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I cannot give the exact date, because it is currently being developed by our officials. I welcome the constructive contribution that the Committee has made, and I hope that it will continue to help us to influence the budgets and the policy for the 2014-2020 period.

In terms of the SMART targets, I think we are meeting the first one by being strategic, because we are taking what President Barroso has committed and the interest that the EU is giving to assisting Northern Ireland, and we want to respond positively. As I regard it, we can either use the expertise of the European Union that President Barroso has offered us and all of that energy and talent, or, effectively, we can lose it.

In terms of the SMART target being achievable, the Executive have already responded positively. The Committee has seen where we have committed significant extra resources. They are measured against our own European priorities, and they are time framed, in that we are operating in 2011, 2012 and 2013, but we are also proactively looking towards the future, which is the 2014-2020 period. That is the time frame that we will be operating against, and we will build on the good contacts that we have already made. We will follow through on every policy and every programme that we think has even a modicum of success in bringing development and growth back to Northern Ireland from Brussels.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Quite a number of Members want to make a contribution to the statement, so I ask Members to please be brief in coming to their question. I call William Humphrey. That is no reflection on the Member.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I have picked up the hint, Mr Speaker. I thank the junior Minister for his statement. I welcome his comments about tackling youth unemployment in north Belfast. It is a huge issue, and I welcome that being included in the statement. What is the junior Minister’s view on the outcome of European engagement?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The outcome is going to be, in a number of ways, what we have managed to draw down in additional funding, how that has stimulated growth and how that has affected areas with youth unemployment. I know that is of particular interest to him in north Belfast as he has invited me to visit projects aimed at tackling it. I welcome the energy that there is in north Belfast for tackling that critical issue.

When we look down at our programme of engagement, we are looking, as an Executive, at lifting and improving our European engagement. As I outlined, the success will be in the priorities that we lay down for 2012-13. In addition to the plenary session at the Brussels office, each of our four thematic groups — I will not go over them — had its own programme of meetings. There were 54 meetings across three days with Commission officials and 14 directorates general. I think that that will draw down success in and of itself.

The reason junior Minister Anderson and I were in Brussels was to support all Departments’ efforts in European engagement. The responsibility of the four thematic groups and the associated individual Departments is to ensure that the objectives identified during the programme of engagement are met. We will follow each of those programmes closely. We must not lose the momentum of the programme of engagement, and we are confident that all of our Departments will work to meet their objectives that were set out in the Executive’s priorities of 2012-13. As I said, a report of the entire programme is being prepared by officials, and we will place a copy in the Library as soon as possible for you to peruse.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat. I congratulate the junior Ministers on the drive they have put in to the Barroso task force. Will the junior Minister tell us what the position is on Peace IV? Last term, I was at a meeting of OFMDFM with Lord Trimble, who was saying at that time that he would not support the future programme. We all know how important Peace funding has been to this programme and this Assembly; has that had any influence on unionism and the Conservative Government in their representation to Europe? What future do we have for Peace IV?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We are pressing very hard at every opportunity and in every meeting for Peace IV. I do not think anyone could point to one opportunity that we have missed to put that forward. Thank you for the warm remarks on the engagement in Europe. I know that the Member works hard, as will a future colleague of mine, Trevor Cummings, in the Committee of the Regions, and we look forward to that constant engagement of regional support for the work that we are doing.

We would welcome a further round of EU Peace funding very much. The work of peace-building is not complete. The recession has created future and further challenges, particularly among young people who we heard from earlier, for whom unemployment is increasing and there may be fewer opportunities for education and training. I fear that some evil groups within our society will seek to prey on those vulnerable young people. The particular content of any future Peace programme will be established through research and public consultation, and a further round of Peace funding could potentially focus on the needs of marginalised and disaffected youth.

Junior Minister Anderson and I recently had the privilege of handing out awards to a group from the Craigavon/Lurgan area, where a specific two-year programme was put in through Co-operation Ireland to help young people who were at risk and to give them a two-year development plan. Those young people were entrusted with something like half a million pounds of communications equipment. Not only did they complete their programmes; some of them have gone on to achieve full-time jobs.

We need to potentially focus on the needs of our marginalised and disaffected young people. Through the task force and direct engagement with the Commissioner for Regional Policy, Johannes Hahn, and in our dealings with Westminster and Dublin, we have pressed at every stage for a Peace IV programme. We are encouraged by the provision to fund peace-building actions in the draft territorial co-operation regulations that are published by the European Commission, and by the United Kingdom and Irish Governments’ declared support for Peace IV.

In pursuing that, we will seek to ensure that Peace IV provides additional funding to the region and does not merely displace other European Union funding sources. Junior Minister Anderson and I will continue to closely monitor the negotiations and will always lobby the United Kingdom Government through the Joint Ministerial Committee in Europe.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the junior Minister for his statement. I welcome the fact that he stated that he intends to learn from the good example of the Irish Government in drawing down funding from the EU. How many officials do we have based in Brussels compared with the Irish Government?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I have a responsibility in Northern Ireland, but I do not have responsibility for the number of officials the Irish Government have. I thank Mr Eastwood for his positive comments about the engagement in Europe. I have shown conclusively where the Executive have put in additional resources. Even against the backdrop of a recession, we have put in four desk officers to cover the key areas. We will ensure, and have been ensuring, that those desk officers are fully and adequately resourced for the task that they are doing. We have already seen in year 1 that we are well on our way to not only meeting an ambitious target but, potentially, exceeding it. I will get you information on the precise number of officials that we have; I presume that you would have to ask the Irish Government to get the precise number of officials that they have. President Barroso has given us energy; we will match that with energy and commitment. We will leave no stone unturned in bringing back to Northern Ireland from Brussels the maximum amount that we can. I have put out the figures honestly and squarely; we are already exceeding the targets that we have set ourselves.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome his positive endorsement of the potential benefit to our citizens and businesses as a result of engagement with Europe. I agree with the Chair of the OFMDFM Committee, however: in the absence of an action plan and targets, it is difficult to assess the full ambition of the plan. What existing and future European funding opportunities are available to assist our small and medium-sized businesses?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Sometimes, strategies and action plans are important — I will get that to you as soon as I possibly can — but the reality is also important; that was the “R” in the SMART targets that were set. The reality is that, under the first year of our watch, we have drawn down more than we wanted to. We will always take more than we want at every stage, and, in a situation that is very difficult — you see the situation in Greece and everything else — and constantly changing, we will seek to maximise and go beyond the 20% that we have set ourselves. We have done it in year 1, and we look to do it in future.

Mr Lyttle raised a vital question about the important issue of other European funding opportunities and securing greater EU financial support for Northern Ireland. The House will be aware that EU structural funds are allocated at national level and that we receive a fixed percentage of that amount. Scope to increase that funding is very limited, which is why we, as the Northern Ireland Executive, set a target for increasing our drawdown from competitive EU funding steams. The success in competitive European funding programmes takes time and sustained effort and requires us to network with other European Union regions to demonstrate our regional strengths and expertise and build on our experience as junior partners before we can seek credibly to lead in larger projects.

As far as small and medium-sized enterprises are concerned, we are developing our future research and development strategy. You have seen the Horizon 2020 proposals. Under those, we will allocate around 17% to small and medium-sized enterprises.

Moving on to the work that is being undertaken, DEL has looked at matching labour market supply with demands in Estonia. That has allowed it to explore potential project ideas and possible future partnerships. Where SMEs are concerned, in February 2012 DETI appointed a smart specialisation co-ordinator to lead the smart specialisation strategy for the region. DEL has established an EU framework support fund of £80,000 per annum to encourage our universities to apply for funding from framework programme 7 for research and innovation. In the area of SMEs, each Department has been actively targeting the current programmes in framework programme 7, including the trans-European Transport Network, known as TEN-T, the Progress programme and the European Union culture fund, and we are also preparing for the arrival of the next funding programmes. It is vital that the Northern Ireland Executive are proactive and seek, in the next round of funding programmes, including through Horizon 2020, to look at how we can maximise our drawdown from 2014.

I should also say in conclusion, Mr Lyttle, that junior Minister Anderson and I have been active in meeting European Commission officials in Brussels to discuss how we can contribute to and benefit from the 2012 European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations. That is vital. For example, I was with the chief executive of the South Eastern Trust recently to discuss my constituency of Strangford, and I thought that we should celebrate and thank God for the fact that our elderly people are getting older. They have contributed a lot to society, and, as we have been seeing in the Pensioners Parliament, they have a huge amount more to contribute. However, because of the people who are living longer, we in Strangford have to prepare for a town that is equivalent to the size of a new Ballynahinch. We want to be proactive, and we have discussed with the European External Action Service how we might contribute and share our experience in Northern Ireland through supporting an enhanced European Union role in peace building.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I remind Members that Question Time starts at 2.30 pm. I want to try to get through all the questions and answers before then.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the junior Minister enlarge on what impact he believes our European priorities have had in 2011-12? What potential is there for Northern Ireland to benefit from developments in health, technology and innovation?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I am happy to do that, and, as I am conscious of the time frame, I will briefly report. There has been considerable success over the past year in engaging policy development, strengthening networks, and increasing the number of officials on secondment in Europe, as well as in a range of EU funding streams. We also hope that we have laid the groundwork for what we hope will be future success. We have nine more staff in Brussels than we did a year ago, and, as I said to Mr Eastwood, the four desk officers who took up post in March are providing dedicated support to deliver on the European priorities of 2012-13. A finance subgroup was established to deliver progress against the Executive’s Programme for Government target of a 20% increase in drawdown from EU competitive funding sources. It is important to note that, in comparison with the previous year, we have drawn down an additional £4·9 million in 2011-12. That is a fact. Northern Ireland applicants secured a total of €36·4 million from the seventh framework programme for research and development between the start of the programme in 2007 and the end of October 2011. We will be active in shaping and preparing for its successor programme, Horizon 2020, so that we can take it forward from 2014. I will pull back there, because I know that there are a number of questions.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement and for some of the very positive things that he said in response to other people’s questions, particularly on small and medium-sized businesses. Now that we have a better support mechanism over there, he will be aware that the Irish Government have taken 100 SMEs over to Europe to encourage them to build the capacity to draw down moneys.

Would the Minister be of a mind to do something similar with small and medium-sized businesses from the North?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

It is a very well-made point. That is obviously a priority for DETI, but we have been keen, whether from a culture, arts or business perspective, to bring our businesses to the Northern Ireland Executive office and allow them to use the facilities to showcase their products. DETI has led a programme to maximise framework programme drawdown and has produced 18 recommendations designed to increase Northern Ireland’s success.

Part of that success has been in bringing over some of those local businesses as part of DETI’s international trade missions, and I welcome that. I know, particularly from the work of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates and India, that the feedback from Northern Ireland’s businesses is that they got unprecedented access because of the opportunities that were afforded to them by the OFMDFM visits to the United Arab Emirates and India. Among its recommendations, DETI has included the appointment of a Horizon 2020 manager, hopefully in place by September 2012, and thematic leads based in our two universities.

The Member may also want to know that Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn will visit Belfast on 7 June to speak at the Collaborate to Innovate conference on FP7, the focus of which will be on encouraging greater small-to-medium-enterprise involvement in FP7 and Horizon 2020. Commissioner Geoghegan-Quinn will also meet the Executive subcommittee on the economy and separately with the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. In addition, she will visit the Agri-food and Biosciences Institute and the Northern Ireland advanced composites and engineering centre at Bombardier.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the junior Minister for his statement. Will Northern Ireland seek to secure funding through the European innovation partnership on active and healthy ageing?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We will seek to secure not only that funding, but funding through every opportunity that we have. We have built up some expertise in Northern Ireland, which is regarded at a European level as a success. I do not say that lightly; I say because I sit in Brussels and I listen to what the commissioners are telling me. The First Minister and the deputy First Minister put in place a comprehensive role for the Commissioner for Older People. In many places across Europe, that legislation has been regarded as a success.

The relevant commissioners are looking to where we in Northern Ireland have already been successful in our work on active ageing and solidarity between the generations. We hope to have a number of events and have Northern Ireland’s good progress profiled. Take it from here that no stone will be left unturned in any of the funding streams. We have proven that already by the significant success that we have had in year 1.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the junior Minister for his statement. I am very impressed by the number of meetings and discussions and the amount of research, but, until we get actions and timelines, we have really just got seven pages of waffle here. I want to focus on ERASMUS and the 50 officials who met to discuss the economic context and strategy. When are we going to hear, either in actions or summaries, what sort of skills and training we need to put in place in Northern Ireland so that there are jobs for our young people, whether in Northern Ireland, Europe or even globally?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for his positive remarks at the start, which I understand. He talked about waffle, but we have increased the amount of funding for young people in our area and increased the amount of growth opportunities for economic development in our area.

I used to sing a hymn during free school meals at primary school, Mr Kinahan. [Interruption.] I promise that I will not sing it now, but it spoke of the rich man in his castle and the poor man at his gate. Until I met you, Mr Kinahan, I did not realise that people in Northern Ireland still lived in castles.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I remind all Members to make their remarks through the Chair.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We have drawn down more money from Europe and increased the amount of opportunities for our young people in Europe. Both of our universities, which are collaborating on the programmes that I have already outlined, are stepping up to the plate and will be disappointed with the Member’s description of their work as waffle.

Look at the Department for Employment and Learning and its work in the trans-European consortium, under the PROGRESS programme and in the New Skills for New Jobs project in July 2011. That project aims to contribute to the European Union’s effort to meet its ambitious employment rate target of 75% for women and men in the 20 to 64 years age group by 2020. I have already outlined the success in terms of additional drawdown.

In the area of youth unemployment, European funding has provided significant support for our Executive’s efforts to tackle directly youth unemployment and the issues of young people who are not in education, employment or training. That is addressed under the thematic group’s key aim, which is basically equipping our young people with the skills and the ambition that they need to contribute to the economy. European social fund assistance has been given to 82 voluntary and community sector organisations — there is an action — to support the employability of individuals who face barriers to participation in the workforce. Mr Kinahan, if you think for one second that supporting 82 voluntary and community sector organisations to help young people get employment and face and overcome the barriers to employment is waffle, you are very much mistaken. There are also a number of projects with a value of £10 million that are aimed specifically at re-engaging young people who are NEET. Priority one of the programme is to support 4,500 of our young people who are not in education, employment or training between 2007 and 2013. If you think that a target of supporting 4,500 of our young people is waffle, you are very much out of date in your castle.

The European social fund programme is supporting the Apprenticeships Northern Ireland programme, which offers the opportunity — [Interruption.]

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Order.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

It offers individuals the opportunity to train in their chosen occupation. For an Ulster Unionist to say that 82 voluntary and community sector groups and £10 million is waffle, you are so much out of date in your castle.

Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phriomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you said that: “The Executive have strengthened their European support infrastructure”

and that:

“It is an important time to make our voice heard in Brussels.”

Is it the intention of the Executive to further strengthen our infrastructure in Europe, particularly in relation to accessing the Connecting Europe facility and Horizon 2020 funding sources?

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I remind Members that Question Time is coming up and that we will have to come back to this after Question Time if we do not get through it all. Can we have precise answers?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

Yes. We will do all that we can. DRD received £2·9 million —

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

No more waffle.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Order.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I appreciate that the Ulster Unionists want to shout down £2·9 million, but that amount was delivered during 2011-12 for the TEN-T programme. The new draft TEN-T regulations are currently going through the ordinary legislative procedure in Europe, and DRD is doing all that it can to influence the negotiations in Europe to ensure the best possible outcome for Northern Ireland. For example — the Ulster Unionists should listen to this instead of trying to shout down their own Minister — DRD has been instrumental in securing amendments —

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

[Interruption.]

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

They are shouting down their own Minister.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

No, you are —

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Order. If the Minister is to reply and we are to hear that reply we have to give him the space to do so. The Minister has the Floor.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

DRD has been instrumental in securing amendments in the Danish presidency’s general approach to the regulations, including an exemption from certain rail standards for isolated rail networks such as our own. If those amendments are adopted in the final regulations, they could save the Executive — I will finish with this — up to £1·5 billion in unnecessary expenditure. That is not to be shouted down.

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I wonder whether the Minister will deal with my question precisely or whether he will waffle. His statement referred to the world and European economic context and all sorts of financial interests. Did his colleague and he differ in their advice on the EU fiscal treaty? Will he care to tell us what the position was of the two Ministers on that important matter?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I hate to enlighten the Member, but that is not something that we have ministerial responsibility for.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The aspect of the Minister’s Europhile statement that I wish to focus on is its trumpeting of the Provo project at the Maze. That was never troubled to be announced in the House —

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Question.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Of course, it was once eschewed by the Minister’s party when his deputy leader said: “However it is dressed up, whatever spin is deployed, the preservation of a section of the H-Blocks … would become a shrine to the terrorists … That would be obnoxious”.

If wasting EU money —

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I ask the Member for a question.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

If wasting EU money on this Provo project is now a DUP success, was Nigel Dodds wrong?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The only person who is wrong, Mr Allister, is you. There will be no shrine, and there will be no “Provo project”. We need to be very careful. I met a number of victims yesterday when I was with the Royal Ulster Constabulary on its 90th anniversary and its 10-year celebration of the awarding of the George Cross. I know that it is politics, but we need to try to be sensitive and try not to take meaningless advantage when someone of your intelligence knows the difference. To try to play party politics with the needs of victims and survivors is very wrong indeed. There will be no shrine and no “Provo project”.

What Europe is looking towards and what we are looking towards is the success story that is Northern Ireland. It is a success story about how young people are today, Mr Allister, living with the lowest levels of violence in Northern Ireland than has been the case in the lifetime of anyone in this House. Should we not celebrate that success and the fact that our people and young people have the opportunity to live at a time when we have the lowest level of violence ever?

Contrary to what you are telling us, Europe is telling us that Northern Ireland is a real success story and that Northern Ireland can contribute to the building of peace, showing not only what we have done here but what we can do internationally. Our universities are telling us that they have an academic base and an academic infrastructure that can show to the world the success of peace in Northern Ireland. It can show not only what it has achieved but what it is currently achieving.

You said that my statement is “Europhile”. If bringing additional millions of euros to Northern Ireland —

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

You are getting close to the end of your time.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

— qualifies me as Europhile, I stand guilty.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I pay tribute to the two junior Ministers, and I wish my colleague Martina all the best in Europe. I have no doubt that we will all continue to work with our MEPs.

In March, the junior Ministers led a delegation of officials to engage with officials in the Commission in Brussels. Will you outline how the recent focus on this will ensure more funding for us in the North of Ireland?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

There are four key areas, including competitiveness, employment and social cohesion. I will not go through them all in detail, because of what Mr Principal Deputy Speaker said about time. We have ensured that we have nine extra bodies and brains working on the project to ensure that we influence the budget, not only today but for 2014-2020. It is interesting that some of those with critical voices, having made their party political statement, have run from the Chamber. They are not interested in what we will do for 2014-2020, yet President Barroso, probably the most key figure in the European Union, said that he will significantly assist Northern Ireland. He has told us to use the resources and not lose them. We will engage directly with the Commission in Brussels. We will build on every good contact that we have achieved.

We will push every policy and programme area. We are exceeding our 20% targets. That is OK; we are happy to exceed them, but we will leave no stone unturned in maximising to Northern Ireland the benefits that we currently get from Europe.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As Question Time commences at 2.30 pm, I suggest that the House takes its ease until that time. The next item of business will be Question Time. After Question Time, there will be a debate on the legislative consent motion on the Finance Bill.

Assembly Business

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

On a point of order, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Point of order, Mr McCartney.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. In previous mandates, the Speaker made rulings in relation to the heat and the wearing of jackets. I wonder whether the Principal Deputy Speaker will make a ruling on that?

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, if anyone feels that they want to take off their coat because of the heat in the Chamber, we will allow that to happen today under the circumstances.

Oral Answers to Questions

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Questions 2 and 10 have been withdrawn and require written answers.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

1. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure how much funding has been allocated to cricket over the past five years. (AQO 2046/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Sport NI is responsible for the distribution of funding for sport here. In the past five financial years, Sport NI has provided almost £4 million of Exchequer and lottery funding to Cricket Ireland to assist with the development of cricket. As part of that funding, Sport NI is supporting the employment of a club development manager by the governing body of cricket, Cricket Ireland. That manager is based in Belfast and is responsible for providing advice and guidance to cricket at all levels on development and funding opportunities.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

As the Minister is aware, several players from this part of the United Kingdom have played for the Ireland cricket team. Indeed, that team had historic wins over Test-playing nations such as Zimbabwe, England and Pakistan. Cricket is clearly a growing sport, yet would she agree with me that the amount of funding that has been allocated to this international sport is tiny in comparison with that allocated to, for instance, rugby, GAA and soccer?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I share with the Member his concerns about perhaps the feeling that cricket receives smaller amounts of funding compared with other sports. However, it is only in recent times with the success of the cricket team that we are all enjoying and, indeed, supporting that team. I would imagine in future CSR bids that perhaps the amount of money to cricket will increase.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister assure us that the opportunities for funding for all sports, including cricket, will be made known to the grass roots groupings and clubs?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I will. I do share some of the concerns that have been repeated throughout Question Time on this. Cricket, like other sports, is receiving quite a lot of interest, and it is important that people who want to get involved in sport have the opportunity to do so. We will be focusing, particularly with grass roots clubs and within communities, to try to provide support that will result in a bigger uptake in sport. It is important that I keep that under review.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Question 2 has been withdrawn.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

3. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for her assessment of the impact of a 2.00 am closing time on night-time culture and musical art in Northern Ireland. (AQO 2048/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The closing time of pubs and clubs, as I am sure the Member is aware, is not a matter for DCAL. I understand that the 2.00 am closing time was introduced under a voluntary arrangement between Pubs of Ulster, which represents pubs and nightclubs, the PSNI and licensees. The arrangement has resulted in a number of establishments closing at 2.00 am since April even though they hold a 3.00 am entertainments licence. My Department, through the Arts Council, supports a wide range of musical art activities. The vast majority of those activities, if not all, would be finished long before 2.00 am, and, therefore, they have not said to me that they are affected by those new arrangements.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Minister, I appreciate what you said. But if we talk about culture such as night-time music culture and things along those lines and given how we are quite out of step with the rest of Europe, does the Minister not believe that greater liberalisation of our entertainment laws would help our night-time culture and economy?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have spoken, through my constituency office, to licensees who have expressed concern, particularly at the need for better support from the Executive for the night-time economy through pubs and clubs. At the minute, we are looking at the disparity between the entertainments and the licences. But at the end of the day, the sector itself has been very good at lobbying.

It had an opportunity last year, but, unfortunately, it did not get passed through the House. I will receive requests from that sector, if it is appropriate, but it is not within my gift to influence any changes in licensing or entertainment licences.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Has DCAL been involved in any discussions with Pubs of Ulster regarding potential impact on art and culture events?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have not been involved in such discussions as a Minister. As I said to Mr Agnew, I was in discussions with regard to lobbying through my constituency, as, I am sure, were other MLAs, but the voluntary arrangement was then reached. That is the last that I have heard. DCAL has not been approached officially in relation to the matter.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

Given the fact that one prominent nightclub in Belfast has already left the voluntary arrangement to close at 2.00 am, can you detail the degree of engagement, if any, that you have had with the various entertainment sectors to facilitate a future agreement that strikes an appropriate balance and is acceptable to all?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I will repeat what I said to Mickey Brady. It is not within the remit of DCAL to do that. The issues around licences are for DOE and DSD.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

4. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure whether she has any plans to increase the £200,000 provision to the Arts Council for musical instruments grants, given the impact that the marching band sector has in terms of social impact, cultural promotion and tourism. (AQO 2049/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The musical instruments for bands scheme is a highly successful programme, and I am pleased that it has provided over £800,000 to bands across the North over the past five years. Marching bands are an important element of our culture and musical heritage, and I am keen to support the development of organisations that encourage young people to learn to play an instrument. However, due to budgetary constraints, I have no plans to increase the £200,000 that my Department provides annually to the Arts Council for the scheme.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she agree that the current £5,000 limit placed on funding applications is excessively restrictive on pipe bands, accordion bands, brass bands and silver bands, given that the average price of bagpipes and accordions is £1,000 and £600 respectively?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I hear what the Member has to say. I met the Confederation of Bands, which raised the issue as well, and we passed that on to the Arts Council. It is one of the practical arrangements that we need to look at in the future. Given the cost of some of the musical instruments, they need to be factored into the award. You cannot apply for two sets of funding for the same thing, and the money is not available in the communities to make up the difference. It will, therefore, have an impact. We need to work out if we can and how we can make a difference in this. I hear what the Member has to say.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. What funding is available for bands in the North?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As I said to Mrs Hale, over £800,000 has been made available. That was £200,000 a year. The grants equipment is up to £10,000, and the equipment programme for funds for over £10,000 is available. As I said, bands can apply for that funding through the Arts Council.

Karen McKevitt (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

Following the Department’s study into marching bands in the North of Ireland, several opportunities for development were identified. Given the importance of the marching bands in preserving cultural and musical traditions, what has the Minister done to actively build on the areas for development?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

The areas for development of some bands are financially based, and they need additional resources that I do not have, but the areas for development of others are around governance and getting the band constituted. At this stage, that is what is happening through NICVA. There is a toolkit available on the website to help bands reach the criteria they need in order to put them in a better place, if they ever decide to apply for funding in future years.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I understand that the Minister’s predecessor commissioned some research into marching bands? How is the current Minister taking that forward?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am taking the research forward, and I am going back to have a look at it again to make sure that it is still relevant. I am supportive of the initiative. I have met the marching bands, and I intend to meet them again throughout this year. Our officials are working very closely to look at possible recommendations and any review or revision of those recommendations to try to put this on a better footing for the next period. We are looking at this in a very positive way.

Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for her assessment of the potential benefits of an all-Ireland fishing licence. (AQO 2050/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Three bodies across the island of Ireland provide fishing licences for their jurisdictions. Those bodies are DCAL, the Loughs Agency and Inland Fisheries Ireland. The licensing regimes are all different, reflecting the different legislation and priorities in each jurisdiction. However, I can see the merit of rationalising licensing regimes across the island of Ireland. In particular, it would simplify the purchase of licences for tourist anglers.

The current licensing regime recognises that there are distinct types of angling, and it allows anglers to pay only for that which they practise. It will be important that any rationalisation protects that principle. I have therefore asked my officials to contact colleagues in the other licensing bodies and their sponsor Departments to initiate discussions on considering the case of making angling licences available across the island.

Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for her answer. Does she agree that the system for issuing licences is too complex? Will she consider, along with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, the potential for an all-Ireland fishing licence?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As I said, I have asked officials to initiate discussions. I have listened to anglers from different clubs, and they said that the system of licences being issued from different Departments is too complex and cumbersome. Our own anglers said that, so we need to accept that it will be really confusing for tourists who come here to fish and angle. So, I will initiate discussions with DCAL and DARD.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Most tourists who come for fishing breaks come for a short-stay break. Does the Minister agree that it would be a much more sensible arrangement to look at short-stay applications for two, three or four days for tourists from whatever country they come, whether it is the Irish Republic, France, Germany or anywhere else?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

All the conditions of licensing, and even the different types of licences that are purchased, will be examined. There are only two types of licence in the Loughs Agency, from where you can get a junior permit, whereas DCAL issues up to 17 different types. It is about simplifying that system and making it easier for people who want to angle. We are looking at this in a very practical and pragmatic way. I think that all Members would agree that we need to simplify the system rather than further complicate it.

Seán Rogers (Social Democratic and Labour Party, South Down)

Have there been any discussions with DETI about the promotion of angling as a tourist opportunity across Ireland?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have not had any discussions about this with the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, but we will be looking at talking to DETI officials. It makes sense to make sure that all our Departments are involved in this process, that we get agreement and that we get a system and regime that simplifies the process and makes it easier for people, particularly for our towns and villages that rely on angling as part of their tourism product.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

6. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on the development of Windsor Park, Casement Park and Ravenhill. (AQO 2051/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As the Member will know, the stadium programme is complex. As regards rugby, planning permission for Ravenhill was received earlier this year. The design has been developed, and they will go to tender for a contractor in mid-June. The contractor should be on site in September.

The GAA is currently out to tender for a design team, which will be appointed by the end of July. It is working with the planners on Casement Park’s requirements and has commenced various surveys and agreed the overall programme with my Department. In addition, it will shortly commence a consultation process with residents.

The IFA has also agreed its overall programme with my Department. It has appointed a design team and is working on the design of Windsor Park. It is working with the planners and will submit for planning by the end of the year. It will also commence a consultation process shortly.

That progress means that it is anticipated that rugby will have its stadium by September 2014, soccer will have its by June 2015, and the GAA will have its by September 2015.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her reply. Can she tell the House what work DCAL is doing with the three sporting bodies to ensure that, in the medium to long term, the stadiums will be sustainable?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As I am sure the Member is aware and can appreciate, the whole process is very detailed. However, sustainability is absolutely key for the three sporting bodies. As well as being about the sustainability of the infrastructure of the three stadia, it is about achieving sustainability in the communities. Right from the start of the project, which is the biggest capital programme in this CSR period, we want to ensure that communities are considered. They will certainly be considered right at the end, and by that I mean employment opportunities, training and apprenticeships, as well as the provision of goods and services.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister tell us whether there will be strong social clauses that affect the neighbourhoods around the stadia?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

There absolutely will be strong social clauses. Casement Park is in West Belfast, Windsor Park is in South Belfast, and Ravenhill is beside the Cregagh estate. All three are distinct areas with distinct needs. Those constituencies need opportunities, but so do surrounding areas. Therefore, our social clauses will be as strong as they can possibly be to make sure that everybody, where possible, has some opportunity for training, employment, retraining or an apprenticeship. Indeed, we will have a presence in the three stadia well after they are built and delivered.

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

7. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for an update on her Department’s review of its arm’s-length bodies. (AQO 2052/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

My review of the Department’s arm’s-length bodies started with reviews of Sport NI and Museums NI. The reviews are being taken forward in two stages. The first stage considers the continuing need for the functions of each body. It also examines the governance and accountability arrangements in place, and the effectiveness and value for money of each body in its current form. The second stage will consider future delivery options for the functions of each body.

The stage one review for both bodies is nearing completion and has highlighted some issues. I am considering how those issues will be addressed before the review team finalises stage one and completes stage two.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, agus Tá an-áthas orm go bhfuil an tAire ag caint liom arís.

I am delighted that the Minister is speaking to me again after the last day. Can she confirm that she has withdrawn her edict to arm’s-length bodies to channel all announcements through her?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am not really sure what the Member is referring to. I think that he may be referring to the media communications protocol that we are trying to finalise with some arm’s-length bodies. Rather than withdraw it, we are progressing with it. Most of the bodies have signed up, and we are still completing the protocol with the rest.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Minister confirm whether the movement of responsibility for delivery of stadia development from Sport NI to the Department has anything to do with the findings of the review of Sport NI that is currently being undertaken?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I can confirm that that is not the case. It was quite obvious, and I said this at the time, that the stadia programme was quite big for a body such as Sport NI to take on on its own. There were delays, so I made a decision to make the Department responsible for it to ensure not only that we reached the targets set by the Executive but that the money was spent, that nothing was returned and that the three sporting bodies got what they needed. It has absolutely nothing to do with the review that we are undertaking of Sport NI.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answers. Will she detail her work with her Executive colleague the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment on reviewing the excellent work of Screen NI, given that it funded by both Departments?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Needless to say, the work that we are to do is still not finalised. The Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and I are not only involved in the work and funding of Screen NI but are responsible for creative industries and taking forward a robust music strategy.

So, work in those three areas is under way. I think that the Member is trying to say that, through NI Screen, a lot of Executive resources have been spent, particularly on film and television. We want to continue to make sure that that is still value for money, and we are making those areas competitive so that we can attract other productions, which will help our economy.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

8. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure for her assessment of the role that sport plays in reconciliation in Northern Ireland. (AQO 2053/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I recognise that the development of sport in the North has in the past been affected and hindered by community tensions and has, on occasion, reflected segregation. However, I also believe that well-managed sport has, and can, play an important role in reconciliation here. That is recognised in my Department’s 10-year strategy for sport and physical recreation, Sport Matters. Sport Matters commits the Government to the promotion of sport in the context of a shared and better future, and it encourages sport to embrace and facilitate the process of reconciliation. To achieve that, the strategy contains a number of targets and actions to help to promote community cohesion through sport, including improving participation rates among under-represented groups of people and the provision of shared spaces for sport that promote community integration.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she tell the House how far down the road we are with the 10-year strategy? Are we on target, and what is the level of achievement? In other words, is the strategy working to schedule, behind schedule or ahead of schedule?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I will take the last question first. The strategy is not only working to schedule but is working better than we had anticipated. Can we do more? Absolutely. We can always do more to provide better opportunities for reconciliation, integration and cohesion. I honestly believe that the community and voluntary groups that are involved in participation in sport are the best example for all of us. For many years, they have led by example, and Sport Matters complements that. If the Member, or anyone else, for that matter, has suggestions about anything that we have not thought about or that is not included in the strategy that would promote better reconciliation and inclusion, I would be really happy to hear about it.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I very much agree with the broad thrust of Dr McDonnell’s question. I am proud to be a member of the green-and-white army, and, growing up in north Belfast, my idol was Pat Jennings. Does the Minister agree that any player born in Northern Ireland, or who has represented Northern Ireland at youth level, should play for Northern Ireland and that failure to do so actually damages community relations?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I do not agree with the Member. I think that it is a choice for the players, and it is down to the sporting bodies. It would be irresponsible for someone in my position to try to corral people. I am on the record as saying that I would much prefer an all-Ireland team, as did George Best. I honestly believe that there would be great support for such a team and everything that goes with it. Regardless of what team people prefer to play for, they have my support.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

9. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline any discussions she has had with the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the recently launched intercultural arts strategy. (AQO 2054/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have not had any direct discussions with the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the Arts Council’s recently launched intercultural arts strategy. However, I understand that the Arts Council consulted OFMDFM officials during the development of the strategy and that an OFMDFM official sits on the implementation group.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for her response. Will the Minister join me in congratulating a young swimmer from my constituency who has just received a silver medal and wish her all success for the upcoming Olympic Games? We are very proud of her.

Given the vital role that the ethnic minority development fund will have for all groups availing themselves of the intercultural arts strategy, has the Minister discussed with OFMDFM the inordinate delays in the administration of that fund? If not, will she engage with the office to distribute those funds as soon as possible?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

Taking the last matter first, I have not had discussions with OFMDFM about this fund or about any details surrounding it in terms of delays or anything else. As I said in my answer to a previous question, OFMDFM officials sit on this body and so will be aware of this. I will certainly pass the Member’s comments on. Along with others, I congratulate Sycerika McMahon on her achievement. I think that everyone in this House, and even outside it, is extremely proud of her, her coaches, her family and her community.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phriomh LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her answers to date. Does she agree that, as a medium, the arts have the potential to improve mutual respect and understanding across and within communities?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I absolutely do agree. Even this morning, in the Long Gallery, there was a Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) event, and a group representing north and west Belfast called Artability. Through the promotion and facilitation of the arts, they offer facilities for people with disabilities who come from what has been known as both sides of the community, and have done so for a long time.

I have also seen the work of Draw Down the Walls in my North Belfast constituency, where people have used the arts at interfaces to talk about some of the very challenging issues that adults sometimes cannot bring themselves to discuss. I have also seen the role of the arts, through the media of drama and play at St Mary’s recently around the Ulster covenant, and I have seen the power that that medium has in fostering and developing better relations. I am looking forward to supporting the work that we have done thus far in developing and supporting further work to meet those aims.

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

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she outline what steps she has taken to action the different points raised in relation to the intercultural arts strategy?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I am due to meet my arts branch in three weeks to look at the actions from that strategy and, indeed, other outstanding actions in relation to the arts. I think that that is important. I do not think that anyone is doing this from a mischievous point of view. If there are delays, the rationale for them needs to be explained to me. We also need to look at resolution of delays or perceived delays. I will certainly be doing that. The meeting will be in mid-June, and I am sure that this will come up again in future Question Times. I am happy to write to the Member on the issue he has raised and provide the answer that he needs.

Francie Molloy (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Question 10 has been withdrawn.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

11. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline the work she is undertaking, in conjunction with other relevant Departments, to encourage participation in sport as a contributor to improving health. (AQO 2056/11-15)

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

My Department is, alongside other Departments, supporting Health in developing a new Investing for Health framework. As part of that process, DCAL has submitted a number of proposals to the Health Department, setting out where sport might contribute to the implementation of the framework. In addition, my Department’s sports strategy, Sport Matters, contains targets designed to increase participation in sport across the population. To ensure that these are delivered, DCAL led a Sport Matters monitoring group, chaired by me, and established to oversee the implementation of Sport Matters. The group comprises representatives from a number of key stakeholder Departments including Health, Education, Social Development, Agriculture and Rural Development, and Employment and Learning.

Michael McGimpsey (UUP, Belfast South)

I ask the Minister, particularly in relation to health and the issues that are the responsibility of the Public Health Agency, bearing in mind prevention, promotion and protection, what steps she believes could usefully be taken with that agency to further the aims and objectives of her Department?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I have met the Health Minister on at least two occasions. We are due to have another meeting. I have met the Agriculture Minister, and I am meeting the Education Minister. As regards the Health Minister and the Public Health Agency, we are looking to use sport and physical activity as ways of promoting better health awareness, including mental health awareness. We have also met groups that are working on the prevention of suicide and groups that are trying to reduce obesity and diabetes. I have to say that the relationship with the Health Department and the Health Minister is very proactive. It is very “can do”. We are looking in our own Departments and agencies to look for gaps and make sure that we do everything in a joined up way, which I understand was not done previously.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

For most Members, childhoods resulted in being outside kicking football or playing whatever sport and getting involved in many different sporting activities at school. Can the Minister outline what discussions she has had with the Education Minister to try to encourage more people to take part in sport, not only while they are at school but while they are at home?

Carál Ní Chuilín (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

As I have said, I have had no discussions with the Minister of Education solely on the Sport Matters strategy, but the officials have been meeting and working together. I want to personally meet all the Ministers, where possible, to look at a joined-up way on this.

However, I agree with the Member that it is necessary to ensure that children and young people have every opportunity to participate in sport. Recently, I met women who work in the area of sport who asked me to do the same. We need to make sure, particularly for young women, who do not feel comfortable participating in sport, in schools and outside, perhaps because of changing facilities. We must make it easier for women, and not take our eye off the ball. It is important that, throughout school and afterwards, we provide opportunities and a better way to get children and young people involved in more physical activity.

Regional Development

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what steps are being taken to ensure that residents purchasing homes with the benefit of surety bonds under the Private Streets (NI) Order 1980, the Water and Sewerage Services (NI) Order 2006 and preceding legislation, have those services adopted within a reasonable time. (AQO 2061/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Roads Service and NI Water have advised that they continue to work closely with developers during the construction of roads and sewers within new housing developments. Officials inspect the work at key stages and process requests for bond reductions and preliminary certificates promptly, in order to facilitate progress towards final adoption of a development.

In normal circumstances, the pace of that process is generally driven by the developer’s progress on site. However, in cases where the developer does not complete the street works or sewers as agreed, or if the works are not proceeding at an appropriate pace, officials will initially seek to negotiate with the developer, or other responsible party, to get the necessary work completed. If that is not successful, enforcement action is initiated and, if the developer fails to act, Roads Service and NI Water make arrangements to access the bond moneys and instruct their own contractors to carry out the necessary works. As soon as those works are complete, the road and sewers become adopted and are then maintained as part of the public road and sewerage network.

The Member will also be aware of the inquiry into unadopted roads which is being taken forward by the Committee for Regional Development. My Department has provided written and verbal evidence to the inquiry, awaits receipt of the report with interest and will give careful consideration to its recommendations.

I should say that my Department is broadly content with the current private streets legislation. It provides a good balance, reconciling the responsibilities of the Department with those of developers and house buyers, and those arrangements work well in the majority of cases. For example, in the last five years, some 260 miles of road have been adopted. However, officials also acknowledge that it would be possible to give added protection to homebuyers through other measures, albeit that there would be practical and financial implications for developers and homebuyers that would need to be carefully considered, especially in the current economic circumstances.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the Minister for his response. Given that, in some cases, surety bonds are outstanding for between 10 and 20 years on numerous developments in my constituency, what guarantees can the Minister give that enforcement action will be prioritised in such cases, and that the value of the surety meets the value of the work that remains outstanding?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for her supplementary question. She has taken particular interest in this matter. I recall the Assembly debate that we recently had on it. I am pleased to inform the Member that substantial progress continues to be made, particularly in her own area, Strangford. There are recently adopted developments and those which are to be adopted shortly in the near future. There are always some contentious sites, and my Department and NI Water will continue to work at them. Clearly, those that stretch into a period of years are unacceptable, and we need to see a resolution of those matters as quickly as possible. I assure the Member that I am as keen to see that as any Member of the House.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

The Minister mentioned “an appropriate pace” of activity by developers. Is the Minister content that “appropriate pace” can be easily defined?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. There is an issue there. We hope and expect that the works will be completed within one year of the houses being occupied. However, if there is ongoing work further along a development or street, it may be deemed reasonable for a developer to take more than a year to complete the final surfacing. However, as usual, in all these matters, there is a balance to be found. By working with developers, we are seeking to complete those developments as quickly as possible so that the householders can enjoy proper access and proper water and sewerage facilities.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister increase the number of staff involved in enforcement in the southern division in order to ensure that action is speedy and efficient?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. It is not simply a matter of employing more people. By working more smartly and more closely with developers and all the agencies involved, significant progress is possible without adding significantly to the expense of the service. It is my belief that improvements can and perhaps will be made to the service that we are offering. I am hoping for ideas and am looking forward to the recommendations that the Regional Development Committee will bring forward as part of its inquiry, and I will listen closely to those. However, I also have some ideas of my own.

We also have to bear in mind that simply increasing the costs to developers will likely lead to the costs being put back onto potential home buyers. With the housing market in its current state, I am not sure that that would be logical or very sensible. All in all, there are a number of factors that need to be given careful consideration.