Northern Ireland Assembly, 15 October 2012

338 contributions from 63 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

As with similar motions, this will be treated as a business motion. Therefore, there will be no debate.

Resolved:

That Mr Roy Beggs replace Mr John McCallister as a member of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety; that Mr John McCallister replace Mr Roy Beggs as a member of the Committee for Finance and Personnel; and that Mr John McCallister replace Mr Danny Kinahan as a member of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. — [Mr Swann.]

Ministerial Statement

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement on my new housing strategy for Northern Ireland, entitled Facing the Future, which I am launching for public consultation today. The strategy is intended to cover a five-year period, from 2012 to 2017. It links closely to the key priorities in the Programme for Government of supporting economic recovery and tackling disadvantage.

This is the first housing strategy ever produced for Northern Ireland. In it, I have taken a tenure-neutral approach, recognising that we need a broad mix of good quality housing at a reasonable cost in the owner-occupied, private rented and social rented sectors. I have also outlined the significant role that housing could play in helping to support and sustain economic recovery, creating employment and helping to regenerate some of our most deprived and neglected communities.

The strategy articulates for the first time what we see as government’s three main roles in relation to housing. These are, first, to help create the right conditions for a stable and sustainable housing market that supports economic growth and prosperity; secondly, to provide support for individuals and families to access housing, particularly the most vulnerable in society; and, thirdly, to set minimum standards for the quality of new and existing homes and for how rented housing is managed. I also envisage housing playing a key role in supporting my Department’s regeneration responsibilities. In the strategy, I have outlined my broad intentions for significant structural change within the housing system in Northern Ireland.

The strategy sets out how I plan to fulfil those roles under five key themes. Those are, first, ensuring access to decent, affordable, sustainable homes across all tenures; secondly, meeting housing needs and supporting the most vulnerable; thirdly, housing and welfare reform; fourthly, driving regeneration and sustaining communities through housing; and, fifthly, getting the structures right.

The economic context in which I am launching the strategy is clearly challenging. The Northern Ireland housing market is slowly emerging from a turbulent period. There are hopeful signs that the market is beginning to stabilise, with prices now at more sustainable levels. I am keen to do more to help create the right conditions for longer-term market stability. Such stability is an important component of future prosperity.

For those reasons, my strategy rightly places a clear focus on the role housing can play in supporting sustainable economic recovery. In that regard, the strategy focuses, in particular, on four areas. Those are, first, working in partnership with others to increase the supply of new housing; secondly, providing support for prospective first-time buyers to access the housing market; thirdly, funding the provision of advice to those experiencing difficulties in sustaining home ownership; and, finally, using public spending on housing to create jobs and training places that will help address long-term skills gaps and provide opportunities for our young people.

The figures on new housing supply present a stark message. Whereas social house building has continued at significant levels throughout the recession, there has been a large drop-off in building in the private sector. The 'Regional Development Strategy 2035' indicates a need for around 11,000 new homes every year. In recent years, the supply of new homes has been closer to 7,000. Simple economics mean that, if that situation continues in the longer term, house prices may rise again unsustainably and many households will be unable to find a home to call their own. Increasing housing supply also presents a huge opportunity to create a substantial number of jobs and support economic recovery.

Addressing the supply issue will not be easy, but I am keen to work with the private sector and others to identify and develop viable solutions, and, today, I announce my intention to establish a housing supply forum for that purpose. I am also keen to maximise the number of new social homes we can bring forward within the budgets that are available. Building new social homes will help us meet housing need and have a significant positive impact on the construction industry, as well as a multiplier effect on the economy in general.

The current climate also challenges us to use our other budgets and assets to greater effect to ensure that we meet the housing needs of the most vulnerable. My strategy contains proposals to make more effective use of existing social housing stock, undertake a fundamental review of how we allocate social housing, improve the way we support people to live independently and do more to prevent homelessness.

Much has been said in recent days about how welfare reform will affect the lives of many people here. Dealing with the impacts of housing benefit reform requires proper consideration of the types of actions that will make a difference to people’s lives. I am already taking forward a number of actions to ensure that appropriate housing services and support are in place to assist those impacted upon by welfare reform changes. Some of these are outlined in the strategy. I will also be listening carefully to what people are saying and seeking to put in place other practical measures to support those impacted upon by the changes.

Many communities in Northern Ireland are stigmatised by blight, deprivation and a dwindling population. Housing can and should play a greater role in helping to regenerate those communities. We will develop new ways of helping communities to reshape such areas and make them places where people want to live again. This will include bringing more empty homes back into use. I am also challenging social housing landlords to play a greater role in supporting their tenants of working age who are unemployed or economically inactive to take up work or training.

The standard of housing in Northern Ireland has improved dramatically over the past 30 years. This has made a major contribution to improving health and well-being and reducing carbon emissions. The strategy aims to build on this by ensuring that standards are maintained, energy efficiency is further improved and remaining poor housing is tackled. In the social housing sector, this will mean improving further the regulation of social housing landlords to ensure that tenants continue to receive good service and finding new ways of financing essential maintenance of Housing Executive stock on a sustainable basis. In the private rented sector, this will mean focusing on making the sector a more attractive housing option for a broader range of households by improving standards and regulation.

When developing the strategy being published today, my officials met a number of key stakeholders, including representatives from the construction sector, housing professionals and organisations representing the interests of tenants and the homeless. Their views have played an important role in shaping the strategy, and my officials will continue to engage with these stakeholders and others during the eight weeks of public consultation. During that period, my Department will be organising events in Belfast and Londonderry, and we will be casting the net wide to hear a broad range of views. Following the consultation period, I will carefully assess all the ideas expressed in order to finalise the strategy and develop an action plan to deliver on its intentions and commitments.

The strategy is an important document and contains a number of proposals and themes that I have outlined to the House and on which I am seeking comments. However, at its heart is a very simple vision that I know will have support across this House; that is to ensure that everyone in Northern Ireland has the opportunity to access good quality housing at a reasonable cost.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement this morning. I welcome the fact that, perhaps incredibly, we are now beginning to look at an overarching housing strategy here for the first time. It is remarkable that we have not had that to date. Clearly, the Social Development Committee has spent a lot of time, as have most Members, dealing with housing matters; those are very important.

The Committee looks forward to giving its full consideration to the Minister's proposals in the time ahead. I spoke with the Minister earlier this morning, and he clearly acknowledged that, in developing this strategy, there will be further opportunities for people to have discussions around this matter about primary legislation that may be required, which will of course go through the usual full scrutiny process, and the other elements of this strategy that will require further public consultation. We all look forward to that process.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member is right in recognising the importance of housing in providing a good future for people in Northern Ireland. It is true that this is the first time we have had a housing strategy for the Province. It is a commitment that we made and have delivered on, and there is a great opportunity to build on this. It is only the start of the process. There is other work to be done because other things will flow from this in due course.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

In the early part of his statement, the Minister talked about the establishment of a housing supply forum. Will he indicate what he realistically expects that to achieve?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The level of new house building in the private sector has fallen dramatically over the past few years, yet the long-term need for additional housing is still there. The regional development strategy for 2035 indicates the need for around 11,000 new housing units per year; currently, only about 7,000 are being built. That problem clearly needs to be addressed, and there is no one organisation or sector that has all the answers. We need financial institutions to find creative ways to make appropriate mortgage finance available. We need the construction industry to have the confidence to start building again. We need to have the right policies in place, right across government, to support an increase in private sector activity.

The housing supply forum is intended to bring together key stakeholders from the private and public sectors to identify the barriers to increasing housing supply and to find practical solutions that can work and make a real difference. I recognise that it will not be easy, but the effort will be well worth it if we can unlock new opportunities, build more housing to meet projected needs and, at the same time, create lasting and sustainable jobs in the construction industry and beyond. That will help to get our economy moving again.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

On this occasion, I, too, thank the Minister for his statement and for giving us in the Social Development Committee, at some stage in the future, a chance to give our input into the strategy. The truth is that housing affects every single facet of all of the people that we represent. The secret to a stable society is the citizen in his or her home —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I encourage the Member to come to the question.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

The biggest thing, Minister, is: do you agree with me that the provision of a house is merely the beginning of the story and we must work towards the situation where those who get houses are equipped to turn them into homes?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his welcome for the strategy. I also thank him for his brevity, on this occasion.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Enforced.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Enforced or otherwise, it is, nevertheless, welcome. Yes; the broader issue here is that it is not simply a matter of providing a home. Other issues arise because there are vulnerable people in our society who do not have certain life skills that they need to acquire, not only to benefit from having a home but also to avail themselves of all the other opportunities that flow from those life skills. So, a valid point was certainly made there.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the publication of this long-awaited strategy. Housing, or lack of it, is a major issue in my constituency, as it is, I am sure, in many others. Does the Minister have any intention of seeking additional funding from the Executive in the future to enable the construction of more much-needed social homes than are currently planned and budgeted for?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

My priority at the moment is to make sure that the money that has already been allocated to the Housing Executive is used and that we do not end up in the situation where there is an underspend. We are putting that responsibility very clearly to the Housing Executive and housing associations. There is money in the budget. I want to be sure that all of it is spent.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I, too, thank the Minister for bringing this strategy forward, and I look forward to the outcome of the consultation greatly emphasising sharing. I am interested in what he said about:

"challenging social housing landlords to play a greater role in supporting their tenants ... who are unemployed".

What specific actions does the Minister think a social housing landlord could take to encourage a tenant to take up work or training?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

First, I will pick up on the Member's reference to shared housing. Certainly, over the past number of years, my Department has worked to meet the aspirations of many communities to make the transition to a more shared ethos, including more shared housing. We will continue to work with communities, social housing landlords and public agencies to remove further barriers to developing more shared communities.

The other issue was about the role of housing associations. The role and the work of housing associations in Great Britain are, in some ways, much more imaginative and innovative than what we often see with housing associations in Northern Ireland. The area that the Member has identified is simply one of a number of areas where we need to work with the housing associations to help them to develop the scale of the work, the scope of the work and the vision and aspiration that we see with some of the GB housing associations. That is one area that is mentioned in the strategy, but it is only one.

Housing associations in Northern Ireland need to become much more visionary about what they do. There has perhaps been a lack of ambition in the past, and more work needs to be done. We are regulating them much more than was the case in the past, but there is another side to it, and that is helping them to step up to the mark and do more. Even with welfare reform, there is work ongoing between the Government at Westminster and housing associations. There is a need for a sea change in terms of housing associations in Northern Ireland. We are keen to work with the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations and the individual associations in trying to do that.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, in the event of an increase in the supply of housing, what economic benefits would be expected to flow from that?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

One of the main benefits is the building work that is done. There is a tremendous benefit spin-off from house building, in that, of all the forms of construction work, you get the biggest return from construction of houses. It is a labour-intensive activity. Increasing the number of homes that we build will certainly create jobs for people. A 2009 study by Mike Smith and Dr Mark Bailey from the University of Ulster showed a housing multiplier effect in Northern Ireland of 1·7. That means that, for every 10 jobs created in the construction industry, a further seven jobs will be created.

I remember speaking to some folk in the construction industry some time ago, and they pointed out that you create more additional jobs through house building because there is more need for architects and so on, which you would not get if the money was just put into road construction or whatever. Last year I funded the delivery of over 2,000 social and affordable homes, but that helped us to sustain close to 3,000 jobs in Northern Ireland. I believe that unlocking the potential of the private sector to build the almost 9,000 new homes we need each year would certainly be an even greater benefit to our economy and job creation, as well as helping to create long-term stability in the housing market.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I, too, welcome the Minister's statement. As the Minister is aware, the private rented sector provides a lot of social housing at the moment. If more use is to be made of the private rented sector, can the Minister ensure that the properties provided are fit for purpose and will meet decent homes standards?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I have said on a number of occasions that, if we are to meet the housing need in Northern Ireland, it needs to be across all three sectors — private ownership, private rental and social rental. We have now started down the road of registration of landlords. We have started down the road of dealing with a number of other issues, such as tenancy deposits, and that type of issue that comes up. There are issues that have been raised with me directly by some Members about problems regarding antisocial behaviour. In some ways it is easier to deal with in the social rented sector than in the private rented sector. There is also a danger of shifting it from the social rented sector into the private rented sector — simply displacing it.

I am keen to ensure that, in all of this, we get to the point at which the private rented sector is seen as every bit as attractive an option as any other and is not seen as second rate or as a last resort. People in that sector should get the same standards, protections and benefits as people in other sectors. We have to have equality right across the private and social rented sectors.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the note of some of the themes developed by the Minister in the strategy, including ensuring access to decent affordable housing, meeting housing need and supporting the most vulnerable. However, then I look at welfare reform. Will the Minister elaborate on what his Department has done to look at key issues, especially those affecting the most isolated and most vulnerable, such as under-35s, who may find themselves penalised, and particularly people with mental health problems, who will find themselves increasingly isolated and vulnerable as a consequence of the changes to housing benefit?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

We had a fairly extensive debate on welfare reform last week. I am committed to continuing the work that we are doing of engaging with the Government at Westminster, including the Department for Work and Pensions, to secure whatever flexibilities we can for Northern Ireland and to try to tailor the welfare reform package to the particular needs of the Province. That work continues. We are due to meet David Freud. I am going over this afternoon ahead of meeting him tomorrow morning.

As regards the pressing situation with housing benefit, we have increased the amount of money for discretionary housing payments. There are arguments regarding the amount of money that is needed for discretionary housing payments. We have doubled the support available from £1·713 million in 2011-12 to £3·426 million in 2012-13. It will be £6·944 million in 2013-14 and £5·939 million in 2014-15 before falling back to £4·431 million for 2015-16 and 2016-17.

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

The funding is not allocated to specific areas of change, such as the increase in the age threshold for the shared accommodation rate, but it is intended to provide the Housing Executive with enough flexibility to sustain tenancies where additional support is needed in vulnerable cases. I have asked for a change to be made to the legislation that will give Housing Executive tenants access to discretionary housing payments. That is just an example of what we are doing.

I am sure that the Member will agree that, in dealing with all this, the important thing is not to alarm people unnecessarily but to focus on practical measures such as this, which will make a difference and help us to go through this process in a way that minimises difficulty for anyone in the Province.

David McClarty (Independent, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his statement, the aims of which I fully support. What plans does he have to proactively target tenants who, through antisocial behaviour, make once very attractive social housing areas much less so?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member identifies what is a very real problem in many parts of the Province, and that is antisocial behaviour. The strategy focuses on two areas as regards antisocial behaviour. The first is working with social housing landlords to build their capacity to deal with antisocial behaviour more effectively using the statutory powers that are available to them. There is work to be done on that with the Housing Executive and particularly with the housing associations.

The second area is to introduce a form of short, secure tenancy along the lines of the approach used successfully in Scotland. It is important that we learn from good practice elsewhere. If things are working elsewhere in the United Kingdom, or indeed anywhere else, let us learn from them. The idea of the short, secure tenancy is one that has been used successfully in Scotland. It is tested and proven.

The yellow card system, as it is called, will provide a strong message to tenants who act in an antisocial way that their tenancy is at risk unless their behaviour improves, while offering them support to make the improvements required. We intend to move forward on that.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh míle maith agat, LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for making his statement to the House; its outworkings will set in place structures to deal with housing over the next 40 years. We need to get it right. Will the Minister assure us that dealing with objective need will be at the heart of any new housing strategy?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I assure the Member that that will be the case. Meeting objective need will be right at the heart of the strategy. There is no question about that.

Executive Committee Business

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That Standing Orders 10(2) to 10(4) be suspended for 15 October 2012.

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

Before I put the Question, I remind Members that this motion requires cross-community support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved (with cross-community support):

That Standing Orders 10(2) to 10(4) be suspended for 15 October 2012.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I beg to move

That the draft Welfare of Animals (Docking of Working Dogs' Tails and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012 be approved.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The aforementioned statutory rule will, subject to the Assembly's approval, set out the procedure to be followed for the breeder of a future working dog to apply for an exemption from the tail docking ban. Before I go into the detail, I will explain briefly to Members the background to the regulations.

The new Welfare of Animals Act 2011, which the Assembly passed last year, contains powers in section 6 making it an offence to dock a dog's tail unless it is removed by a veterinary surgeon for the purpose of medical treatment or to save the dog's life. The Act makes it an offence to take a dog outside the North of Ireland to have its tail docked, unless it is for medical treatment by a veterinary surgeon. The Act also provides the power to exempt certified working dogs that are not more than five days old from the tail docking ban.

The Act specifies that a dog is a certified working dog if a veterinary surgeon has certified it in accordance with the regulations made by the Department. The veterinary surgeon must also have seen evidence that the dog is likely to be used, as specified in the Act, for work in connection with law enforcement, lawful pest control or the lawful shooting of animals and is of one of the following breeds: a spaniel of any breed or combination of breeds; a terrier of any breed or combination of breeds; any breed commonly used for hunting or any combination of such breed; any breed commonly used for pointing or any combination of such breeds; and any breed commonly used for retrieving or any combination of such breeds. The Act also makes it an offence to fail to identify the dog in line with the regulations before it is eight weeks old.

Tail docking was one of the most contentious issues when the Assembly debated the Welfare of Animals Bill, as it went through the legislative process. However, it is important to remember that we are not here today to reopen the debate on the pros and cons of tail docking. That was decided by the Assembly last year. Today's debate is purely about the procedure to be followed and the evidence that must be produced to a veterinary surgeon to allow a pup of a breed specified in the Act to be certified as a working dog and thus exempted from the tail docking ban. The draft regulations specify the evidence that must be produced by the breeder to a veterinary surgeon and set out the certification and identification process that the veterinary surgeon must follow to certify the pup as a future working dog.

A 12-week public consultation was undertaken with stakeholders last year. Over 690 stakeholders and interested parties were consulted, and the Department received 30 responses. The consultation sought feedback on specific questions on the certification and identification process to determine whether any amendments should be made to the draft regulations. Overall, the draft regulations were welcomed by stakeholders, and there was significant support for the majority of the proposals in them. In the consultation responses, a number of stakeholders, including the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, expressed their disappointment that an exemption for working dogs had been included in the Act. One stakeholder proposed that a non-veterinarian should be able to dock a pup's tail and questioned the need for the certification process for working dogs. These issues were outside the remit of the consultation, as they were already specified in the parent Act that had been approved by the Assembly. Hence, these views and suggestions have not been reflected in the draft regulations before the House.

A small number of stakeholders, in response to the consultation, questioned the need to present the dam of the pups to the veterinary surgeon at the time of docking the pup's tail. However, the veterinary profession sees this requirement as crucial to allow it to comply with the Act when deciding whether the pup is of a breed specified in the Act. In addition, a small number of stakeholders questioned the need for the pup to be microchipped by the veterinary surgeon and asked why it had to be microchipped at the same veterinary practice at which its tail had been docked. In including these requirements in the regulations, I have tried to close loopholes identified in similar exemption schemes already in place for working dogs in England and Wales. The RSPCA, which has enforced the legislation in England and Wales since 2007, has advised that, in its experience, the pup presented for microchipping is not always the pup that has had its tail docked. It is critical that, in putting in place an exemption for genuine working dogs, we do not open the door to unscrupulous breeders who want to continue the cosmetic docking of their pups. I believe that the certification scheme for working dogs detailed in the regulations will allow the breeders of working dogs of the breeds specified in the Act to continue to have their pups' tails docked while ensuring that cosmetic docking is not legitimised by the back door.

I am pleased to say that the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee, as part of its scrutiny role, thoroughly examined the certification process in May and June of this year. Initially, the Committee was concerned not about the certification process but that there might not be a sufficient number of veterinary surgeons in the North of Ireland prepared to dock pups under the exemption for working dogs, given that there is no legal obligation on any veterinary surgeon to dock a pup's tail under the exemption. However, that was not the understanding that my officials had obtained from working with the veterinary profession here to put this robust scheme in place. My officials and the Committee liaised with the veterinary associations in the North of Ireland to clarify the issue. On the basis of information from the two veterinary associations, I am happy to say that the Committee and I are assured that an adequate number of vets will be prepared to dock future working dogs' tails under this exemption. At the Committee meeting on 26 June this year, the Committee indicated that it was content for the regulations to be brought before the Assembly.

My officials have also assured the Committee that there will be a campaign to educate dog breeders and the public on the change in the law on tail docking. I fully support this, and I think that educating the public is critical so that cosmetic docking becomes socially unacceptable and people will not want to buy docked pups. To allow time for this campaign, I intend to delay the commencement of the new regulations until 1 January 2013. In addition, my officials will work with the veterinary profession to help it to understand the certification process and both its and breeders' responsibilities under the exemption for working dogs.

Investigations of any breaches of the new regulations will be undertaken by councils' animal welfare officers as part of their enforcement responsibilities for non-farmed animals under the Welfare of Animals Act. My officials have been in regular contact with the five lead councils for animal welfare and will continue to work with them in the run-up to the commencement of the regulations so that they will be ready to enforce any breaches of the ban on tail docking. I am grateful to the Chair and members of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee for their support for the regulations, and I commend the motion to the House.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. The motion seeks to affirm the Welfare of Animals (Docking of Working Dogs' Tails and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012. The statutory rule will commence the final provision of the Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. When the Act was commenced on 11 July 2011, the majority of its provisions were also commenced, and further parts were brought into law on 2 April 2012. That left one important provision from section 6 on the docking of working dogs' tails. When commenced, it will ban the tail docking of dogs unless the whole or part of a dog's tail is removed by a veterinary surgeon for the purpose of medical treatment or to save the dog's life when it is not practical to have the whole or part of the tail removed by a vet. The rule, however, provides for an exemption for certified working dogs that permits tail docking for working dogs such as spaniel, terrier or hunt, point and retrieve breeds involved in law enforcement, lawful pest control or the lawful shooting of animals.

As part of the Committee's scrutiny process of the legislation, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development first presented the pre-consultation to the Committee at its meeting on 28 June 2011. The regulation returned to Committee at SL1 stage on 8 May 2012, at which stage the Committee had no issues with the merits of the policy. It was considered again on three further occasions at SR stage, when issues with the certification of a working dog by a vet caused some concern and prompted the Committee to seek clarification from the Department.

Several vets contacted Committee members advising that they had concerns with the docking of tails for certified working dogs. The parent Act sets out specific elements that a vet must certify a dog as a working dog before it is five days old. The responsibility to provide evidence that the dog meets the requirements of the regulations is on the owner. However, vets raised concerns about the next step in the process, which involves microchipping. The pup must be presented to the same vet before it is eight weeks old to confirm that it is the same pup that had its tail docked seven weeks earlier. Once this is confirmed, the pup will be microchipped. The role of the vet at that stage is to certify that they are microchipping a dog that the owner claims is the same dog that was docked previously. The owner, not the vet, does the certification.

The exemption was subject to a 12-week consultation period. The Department advised that, whilst the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons is opposed to the docking of dogs' tails, it acknowledges that some of its members may choose to dock tails within the proposed legal framework. Under both the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 and the proposed regulations, there will be no legal obligation on any vet to dock a dog's tail. Therefore, it will be an ethical decision for the individual vet to make.

Departmental officials met representatives of VetNI and the Committee in an attempt to resolve the issues with the regulations. The Department advised that it has been working closely with councils and enforcement officers to educate them about the forthcoming regulations. That has given some assurance to vets that there will be enough education for dog owners about the requirements of the new legislation. Committee members were content with the explanation provided by departmental officials and commend them for their active intervention with the vets to resolve the issue.

The final issue of concern to the Committee was about some form of public information. The Committee felt that it was vital that the general public were made aware of the new law. We are glad to note that the Department agreed with this position and initially agreed to delay commencement to allow it to inform the public and veterinary professionals. The Minister confirmed that today. For the record, the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee agreed at its meeting on 26 June 2012 that the statutory rule should be affirmed by the Assembly.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

As Ulster Unionist Party agriculture spokesperson, I welcome the fact that the regulations have reached the Floor of the House. The issue has been the subject of lively debate since 2009, and concerted pressure from Committee members in the previous and current mandate, alongside consultation responses, has resulted in the exemption in the Bill for working dogs. Some in the agriculture community may well ask why so much time has been devoted to one issue. However, I acknowledge the excellent debate in the House last week on the farming crisis and that we are focusing on matters of greater importance to farmers, the wider agriculture industry and rural communities.

The exemption for working dogs will avoid unnecessary suffering and improve their welfare throughout their working life. If an adult working dog sustains an injury to its tail, amputation is a major act of veterinary surgery. It requires anaesthetic and an extended period of recovery, all of which could simply be prevented shortly after birth by a small procedure. However, it was no small procedure to bring the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to the position that it is in today. It has been forced into an about-turn on its initial position of a complete ban on tail docking.

During the previous mandate, in February 2011, Members debated the Consideration Stage of the Bill. The Minister's predecessor spoke of the unnecessary suffering and acute pain that is caused by tail docking and said that she wanted to impose a complete ban. In response, the Committee highlighted the total reluctance of the Department to listen to alternative views, its dismissal of the evidence and its refusal to listen to the voice of the rural community. The result is evident in the final regulations that are before us, proposals in which the voice of the rural community of Northern Ireland is acknowledged.

Committee members have been told that, following five years of a similar tail docking exemption in England and Wales, the legislation there is operating relatively well. Perhaps in her response, the Minister will tell the House whether the number of illegal tail docking incidents has reduced in those jurisdictions as a result. We would all welcome that occurring in Northern Ireland.

Now that the proposals have reached their final form, the Department, from today, has a duty to educate the public. It is vital that everyone knows their roles and responsibilities. Dog owners and breeders will need to know exactly how the new regulations will affect them. It is therefore vital that the Department increases awareness of the documentation required to avoid confusion or delays when people arrive at the vet.

I welcome the agreement between DARD officials and the Dogs Trust to work together to start the process of informing vets and the public of the changes to the legislation. The Dogs Trust does fantastic work increasing public awareness of changes in regulations, and I commend it for its involvement in helping people to understand the changes that were brought in last year on the microchipping of dogs.

I also welcome the assurances that have been given by the Department to the Committee that it will work directly with vets. It must give vets the right level of advice and guidance to make sure that they are fully aware of their role under the new legislation. It is critical that vets do not find the new regulations overly complicated or bureaucratic. We certainly do not want to make a decision that could, in any way, lead to an increase in illegal tail docking. The legislation leaves it as an ethical decision for a vet whether or not to dock a working dog's tail. I hope the Department recognises that, if a significant number of vets decide not to make such decisions, it could trigger an increase in illegal tail docking, which presents a greater risk to the welfare of pups. The Department must work alongside vets to ensure that that does not happen.

I also urge the Department not to instigate a witch-hunt against the owners of dogs that have had their tail docked. We must recognise that, for the next 10 to 15 years, there will be owners of dogs whose tails have been docked, quite legitimately and legally, under the present provisions. I would welcome the Minister's assurances that the Department will not stigmatise those owners.

We welcome the proposals before the House, and I would further welcome the Minister's assurances on the points that I have raised.

Joe Byrne (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

As Deputy Chairperson of the Committee and spokesperson for my party, I support and welcome the motion on the docking of working dogs' tails. The consultation between the Committee and stakeholders has meant that we have better legislation before us, and that will be more beneficial in the long term.

I ask the Minister to make sure that the Department issues clear guidelines to dog owners, the dog wardens of district councils and animal welfare officers to make sure that there is no ambiguity. Vets were very concerned that they were almost being expected to dock tails at the request of owners. However, the onus is on the owner to ensure, certify and guarantee that the animal will be used as a working dog if the exemption is to be obtained. I support the motion, and I hope that the Minister can give those guidelines to the necessary stakeholders.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I agree with the Chairman and other members of the Committee on this very important issue. I express my appreciation to the officers and staff who serviced the Committee and continue to work with us. I also thank the people and organisations and the staff from the Department who came to the Committee to make representation and give us advice.

The issue has provoked many worries and concerns, and, as a Committee, we were sympathetic. However, decisions have to be made, and I hope that the compromise that is arrived at will serve the community as we move forward. Let us remind ourselves that a dog is supposed to be and always has been a man's and a woman's best friend. The least that we, as humans, can do is ensure that those animals are well treated at all times.

I welcome the Minister's statement and our intention to do what is necessary to inform and educate everyone involved in this important topic. I recall representations from the dog-showing fraternity. Its concerns were genuine, and it suggested to the Committee that revenue could be lost to our economy if restrictions were imposed. Only time will tell whether that has been the case.

The exemption for working dogs is welcome. I sincerely hope that no attempt will be made by anyone to undermine the regulations. I support the motion.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank all the Members who spoke, particularly the Committee Chair, for their comments. I will pick up briefly on a few of the points that were raised. I think that everybody recognises that we need a campaign of information and education for everybody, and that is why we have delayed the implementation until January so that we can have the time that we need to do that.

Jo-Anne Dobson talked about figures in other areas, particularly Britain, where legislation has been in place before now. No figures are available, so I cannot give her any details from Britain. She talked about a witch-hunt of people who had their pup's tail docked previously. Obviously, that will not be the case. Any dog that was docked before 1 January 2013 will have been done by a vet under the current situation. So, I hope that that assures Members.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Welfare of Animals (Docking of Working Dogs' Tails and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012 be approved.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Education Bill [NIA 14/11-15] be agreed.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle, agus go raibh maith agaibh, a Chomhaltaí. Ba mhaith liom an rún seo a mholadh.

I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on the Education Bill. It is surely one of the most important Bills to come before the Assembly, not just in this session but in this mandate. This day has been a long time coming. The need for reform was recognised as far back as 2002. In my view, education is too important to wait any longer, and the Bill sets out the overall aim of education, which is:

"to contribute towards the spiritual, moral, cultural, social, intellectual and physical development of children and young persons ... and ... of the community at large".

To put it more simply, education determines the future for individuals and society. It can shape and guide our young people's development and life chances, build strong, cohesive communities and drive and fuel the economy. That means having a clear vision of a modern, fit-for-purpose education system that delivers educational attainment and the fulfilment of potential. Good schools are the key to delivering that vision, and we already know what good schools look like. They have strong, effective leadership from their board of governors and senior management team; they have a strong sense of belonging to the communities that they serve; they each have an ethos that pupils, parents, staff and governors support; and they have the autonomy and the support that they need to manage their day-to-day affairs. I wish every school to be like that. To achieve that, we need better planning of the education estate and delivery of the curriculum, better support services for schools and freedom for school leaders to manage and innovate, with clear accountability for outcomes.

If we are serious about reform, we need to compare our system against the best and constantly challenge it to do better. That means taking as broad a view as possible beyond these islands. For example, we know that good teaching is the key to raising standards. We also know that the success of STEM subjects — science, technology, engineering and maths — is the key to rebuilding the economy. If we want to benchmark against the best, we must look at China, which leads the world in the teaching of science. That is the scale of our challenge.

A 40-year-old model of education simply cannot deliver a new vision, but let me make it clear that it is the system that is wrong, not the people within it. I pay tribute to the thousands of people who have served with dedication and distinction as officers and employees of the various organisations, often in very difficult circumstances. They deserve our recognition and thanks for all that they have striven to achieve over the past 40 years. Now, however, we are asking them to do the job with the wrong tools, and they deserve better than that.

The board system is ageing. The direct rule model is no longer fit for purpose. We, as elected representatives in the House, have an opportunity to replace it with our own model — a model to meet the needs of our communities, our children and young people and our economy. We must seize that opportunity.

The Bill reflects the heads of agreement published by the First Minister and deputy First Minister last November. At the centre of the Bill is the creation of ESA, a new and different type of organisation with a new and different role. Its purpose will be to improve education outcomes, not to run schools. ESA will have four main functions. First, it will plan the education estate. It will consult and involve stakeholders, but it will be the only body with a statutory education planning function. Secondly, ESA will be the employing authority. Its role will focus on system-wide workforce planning and development. Boards of governors will take all employment decisions in their school. Thirdly, ESA will promote the raising of standards as a supporting and critical friend. Fourthly, ESA will support professional development. It will provide or procure support and development services for schools and support schools to provide services themselves. ESA will take on the functions of the bodies it will replace, such as school maintenance, school library and meal services, transport and youth services.

The Bill draws heavily on the two Bills brought before and during the previous Assembly mandate. However, importantly, it also sets out fresh thinking, particularly in the matters that were of greatest concern to stakeholders. Those include the membership of ESA and the autonomy of schools. Members will be glad to know that ESA will not be run by bureaucrats. The membership provisions are based on local democratic accountability. They also preserve the established rights of the churches to take part in the governance of education. That will ensure that we have responsible and accountable service delivery.

In relation to employment provisions, my aim is to deliver two key benefits: a single employing authority to provide better workforce and planning; and guaranteed autonomy for all boards to take employment decisions in their school. The Bill delivers that. Members will know that many of the concerns of stakeholders related to employment. I have taken those concerns on board, and the provisions before you are very different to those in the previous Bill. In particular, there is a range of safeguards in the Bill, including an independent tribunal to rule on disputes between schools and ESA. That will provide the necessary confidence for schools that ESA will concentrate on its proper role and leave schools to get on with their role.

The Bill also seeks to strengthen and underpin child protection arrangements in education and will ensure consistency and clarity of roles and responsibilities across the entire education sector. It will also provide for strong powers to intervene, where necessary, to protect children.

Further provisions will place the funding of early years services on a formal statutory footing for the first time.

Before concluding, let me acknowledge that some stakeholders remain wary of or opposed to the Bill. No doubt, we will hear some of their concerns voiced by Members today, rightly so. Let me say this to those stakeholders and Members: the Bill threatens no one. It offers accountable autonomy to all schools, not just a few. It does not change or detract from the ethos, identity or values of any school. It does, however, challenge schools to improve, to put the needs of learners before the needs of the institution and to share and work in partnership for the greater good of all our young people.

Our education system needs this Bill. It needs clear leadership and direction from the Assembly. It needs modern, fit-for-purpose arrangements that aim to make every school a good school and support every learner to achieve his or her full potential. It needs arrangements where schools have autonomy and responsibility, where success is celebrated and underperformance is challenged, where the leadership of governors and principals is supported and where high quality teaching is promoted. I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

At the outset, I declare an interest, as a member of the boards of governors of Ballymoney High School and the integrated Ballymoney Model Primary School. I will contribute to the Second Stage debate first as Committee Chair, then as the DUP's spokesperson on education.

There is a sense almost of déjà vu for some of us in the House. That feeling comes as a result of having had an Education Bill in the previous mandate, as you will recall. In fact, we need to be reminded that we almost had two Education Bills. In the previous arrangements, there would have been two Bills. The first Bill had a Second Stage and even a Committee Stage. Although the final outcome was not in any way satisfactory for anyone, I think it is important to remember that a great deal of very good scrutiny work was done by the previous Education Committee. With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Committee staff, the departmental officials and the members of that previous Committee for their work, which is still available for us today.

The legislation before us today is a different Bill. The question is: how different is it? The Committee, in its initial consideration of the relevant clauses and schedules, has considered a number of key differences. At this stage, I again thank the Department for making available to us, on Wednesday past, one of its officials, Mr Chris Stewart. He came with the Committee on its visit to Omagh to spend some time with us on the introduction of the Bill as it progresses through its Second Stage. As part of the exploration of the principles underpinning the Education Bill, I want to take a few minutes to explore those differences. I am sure Members will be glad to know that it will be a few minutes, as opposed to the long time we spent in this House last week. However, one should not rule out being here for a considerable length of time this evening.

Let us begin with the heads of agreement, which are referred to in a number of places in the Bill. The heads of agreement document promises the setting up of the Education and Skills Authority. It needs to be remembered that it took some considerable time to get to the point where there was an agreement that, in this mandate, there would be movement on the establishment of the Education and Skills Authority.

The document spells out the appointment arrangements for the ESA board, ensuring political and community representation. It sets out the sectoral support bodies that will be established. It indicates that there will be no change in school ownership that negatively affects the role of the boards of governors of schools. The heads of agreement document indicates that there will be no change to the way in which boards of governors are appointed. Furthermore, the current arrangements under which boards of governors hire and fire their staff will be unchanged. Additionally, there is to be no transfer, secondment or redeployment of teachers without the consent of schools and boards of governors. It should be remembered that, in the previous Bill, there was a proposal for what were to be called community governors. Everybody had all sorts of ideas, and there were different opinions as to what was going to define "community". Was it going to be the geographical community? Was it going to be the educational community? Was it to be some other definition of community? However, the term "community governor" is no longer there.

The Committee understands that the current drafting of the Bill includes a rather inelegant linkage to the heads of agreement document. The Committee expects, following the passage of Second Stage, that those drafting issues will be addressed by the Department, probably through amendments. I welcome the fact that it was very clear from the presentation that was made to the Committee on Wednesday that that is the case. So, we in the Education Committee will take a very close look and have a very close scrutiny role in regard to how that particular element proceeds. Following the Second Stage, further thought will be given to whether the Bill properly reflects the promises in the heads of agreement and, indeed, to whether further checks and balances are required by ESA. That will also be an integral part of the work that we will carry out.

I also want to draw attention to the issue of the independent tribunal. It is an important additional feature of this legislation. Let me pause there for one moment and pose the following question: why do we feel that it is necessary? The sad reality is that it is felt to be necessary because of the absence of one thing. It reflects its way through legislation in this House in many shapes and forms, and it is particularly relevant in education. It is the word "trust". I have no doubt that the Tories do not trust the Lib Dems, and nobody trusts Labour. You can go through all the political connotations of any Parliament, and you will probably find that the word "trust" and the exercise of trust are in low demand. However, when it comes to education, particularly in a Northern Ireland context, it is bad enough having to trust your political opponents, but it is equally as challenging, if not more challenging — I mean no disrespect to civil servants working in education — to trust the system. The system sometimes does not endear itself to being trusted. That goes right across educational provision and the sectors that are provided for. So, unfortunately, the tribunal is necessary to ensure that the trust can be built upon and that there is some mechanism to ensure that there is neither political interference nor interference from the Department, for whatever reason or for whatever purpose it is intended.

The tribunal will be appointed by the Department of Education, but the relevant regulations will be made by the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM). The tribunal will rule on disputes relating to employment schemes and schemes of management. That is intended as a check on the authority of ESA in respect of its dealings with boards of governors and other submitting authorities. The Committee has noted the inclusion of the relevant clauses and, I think, will spend quite some time reviewing those provisions and those relating to employment schemes in general.

As I said, the heads of agreement and the independent tribunal are intended to provide reassurance and, in the case of the latter, make up part of an amended regulatory framework that will support what is described as a more delegated model for schools in Northern Ireland. Assuming the successful passage of the Bill at Second Stage, the Committee will explore and seek to verify, and, indeed, challenge the assumptions that underpin those checks and balances and the revised regulatory framework.

Let me deal now with some key parts of the Bill. The Education Bill will see ESA replacing a number of organisations, including the five education and library boards and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). It is hoped that that will deliver a significant financial saving and reduce greatly the bureaucracy and inconsistency of approach evident across those organisations.

I will pause at this point and say that it is only right and proper that we place on record our appreciation and thanks to those who, through many difficult and challenging years in our education and library boards, have provided a service to our educational family. It has not been easy. They have gone through a multiplicity of changes. They have had various direct rule Ministers and initiatives. It is fair to say that we need to remember where ESA came from. I am glad that ESA did not have its genesis in Connolly House. I am glad that ESA was not created in the normal political structures but had its genesis in the Department of Education.

We all can recall the damning report from the House of Commons Select Committee on the way in which the Department had squandered or had not spent appropriately £40 million in regard to numeracy and literacy. At that stage, back in the early 1990s, there was a desire to have a more streamlined approach to the delivery of education. So the education and library boards are not averse to change and to doing something differently. It is only right, therefore, that we place on record our appreciation for what they have done. However, it is also right to say that we have not always agreed with the decisions of the education and library boards. I am sure that many Members across the Chamber have, in their constituency role, challenged their relevant education and library board and had exchanges with them about issues on which they clearly disagreed.

I note in clause 2 that ESA has a duty to encourage and facilitate:

"the development of education provided in an Irish speaking school."

The Department appeared to advise the Committee that that provision would bring the Irish-medium sector more into line with the legal status of the integrated sector. I expect that the Committee will wish to explore that matter further, and you will not be surprised to hear that I, as a DUP MLA, want to return to it in a few moments.

I turn now to another key feature of the Bill: the employment schemes. As the House is aware, the Bill will make ESA the employing authority for all teachers in all grant-aided schools in all sectors. As I indicated, we are given to understand that boards of governors will continue to employ and dismiss teachers as they have previously done. It is also understood that ESA as the employing authority will simply look after workforce planning.

The Department advised that it expected there to be a saving for voluntary and grant-maintained integrated schools under the new employment arrangements. Those schools will, with ESA as their employing authority, no longer have to meet premises insurance costs from their delegated budget. The Committee will explore the extent and importance of those savings during the anticipated Committee Stage. That issue was raised recently, even before the introduction of ESA, around some of the practical problems that some of our voluntary grammars are having as regards workplace issues, especially if they have students in a health setting. I am well aware that my colleague, the Health Minister, has been doing some work in the past number of days to help address that. That is another element of the Bill for which detailed scrutiny will be key over the next number of weeks and months.

I think that we all remember being told that there would be savings in the region of £20 million over the period. However, when we look at the savings delivery plans and at the schemes in place for the education and library boards, we can conclude that in the region of £15 million has already been taken out of the budget. In one way, I am glad, but in another way, I am confused, because last Wednesday, the Committee was told that the estimated savings are now in the region of £40 million. If that is the case, we want to find out where that additional saving will come from and how it will be broken down. So clearly there are challenges when it comes to budgets.

Let me say something about budgets, and I would appreciate it if the Minister would make an intervention on this point. In Northern Ireland, there has always been a debate about what is known as the delegated budget — the amount of money that goes to front line services. I appreciate that we are not comparing like with like in our educational structures as opposed to those of our counterparts in the rest of the United Kingdom, particularly in England, where the local authorities have power and resources. However, depending on whose sets of figures you listen to, the delegated budget — the amount of money that goes directly to front line services in education — is somewhere in excess of 65% to 75%.

I can assure you that the issue is extremely difficult. We have Mr McCrea, a member of the previous Committee, here. He will recall that we had long discussions around the previous Bill of trying to determine the delegated budget for education. Is it 50%? Is it 55%? Again, depending on what figures you look at, it ranges anywhere between 45% and 55%. The question is this: will we be able to guarantee that, as a result of the establishment of ESA, schools will have more financial resource to be able to deliver education in their area?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member answered his own question in many senses: it depends on whose figures you wish to listen to. This somewhat reminds me of a debate in the last mandate when the Libraries Bill was being debated and my colleague Barry McElduff stood up and made available figures from England. The responsibility lay with Mr Poots at the time, as Minister for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) who refuted those figures, and Mr McElduff said he was aware of that but those statistics did not suit his argument.

That is the territory we are in at this time. The budgetary process is currently open and transparent. ESA will not change anything with regard to the budgetary process. The debate about how much money should be delegated to schools will, I fear, continue.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I am not sure whether I am any the wiser after that response. It reminds me of Groucho Marx:

"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them ... well, I have others."

We do need to have —

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

I thank the Chairman very much for giving way. We all share his confusion. In the area of budgets, will he tell the House, as Chairman of the Committee, what he sees is deliverable to protect the future of grammar schools as he and I know them today?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his question. This has been a difficult issue for the Committee, for previous Committees and, certainly, for me personally. We need to ensure that, whatever sector comes to make its point to you, you do it in a way that tries to reflect the overall provision that we have in our educational system.

The Member will be well aware that this party — my party — has done what we did at St Andrews, specifically around the issue of grammar schools. We have listened to the argument around the voluntary principle. I have no doubt that we will revisit that issue. A legal document, in the region of 10 or 11 pages, that was made available to us was as conclusive as the answer from the Education Minister a few moments ago about how to break down the definition between the employing authority and the employer. Not having any legal background, I do not want to tread too far into that territory other than to say that their heads of agreement was an attempt to ensure that the concerns, particularly among voluntary grammars, about the voluntary principle were enshrined in legislation in such a way that it did not take away from them the autonomy, responsibility or place they have had but recognised that we were still moving to a place where there would be the establishment of a single employing authority.

In direct answer to the Member, I believe that there will be no change to that current arrangement and system other than that the employer will be ESA. The Committee needs to take time to be clear in members' minds that that is the case and to have every possible assurance that we are not moving to a situation in which this Bill will be used for some other purpose, reason or means.

I place on record our appreciation to the Member for the contribution that he made while a member of the Education Committee. I have no doubt that his presence here today is an indication that this is an issue that he has a concern about and an interest in. I look forward to working with him in his new role, with his new political hat on, and I assure him that we will endeavour to be of whatever help we can in trying to answer his queries and questions about the Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the —

Basil McCrea (UUP, Lagan Valley)

I am grateful to the Chairman for giving way. He talked very eloquently about the underlying principle of the voluntary grammar school and about the fact that there are worries in that sector that the Bill may be used for other, nefarious purposes. I wonder whether he thinks that it would be helpful if, in some form in the legislation, we had an explicit recognition of the voluntary grammar principle extended to all schools. The trouble with the Bill, I suspect, is that you have to read it very closely and you are not absolutely certain what everything means. It would go a long way to reassuring people if we could find some way for the Bill to be absolutely clear and explicit in order to protect those schools, which are the foundation of our society.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank Mr McCrea for that. That is where we want to get to, and that is why I believe that the issue that I raised at the start about schedule 2 and the linkage between the Bill and the 'Heads of Agreement' needs to be clear. It should have been clearer before we got to this stage. However, having got to this stage, the work that we have ahead of us with your party colleagues on the Education Committee is to ensure that recognition is reflected in a way in which we understand.

That will not be an easy task, because it seems that there will always be a fundamental difference between what people believe they have had and what they believe will be the new structures in place. That is why this Bill is different from the previous Bill. Remember that regulations to deal with the employment structures will now be brought to the House, which was not going to be the case previously. That should give us the assurance that the Bill will not be used for any other purpose. Unfortunately, however, when you are dealing with the party that is responsible for bringing the Bill to the House or with the Department of Education, one can never be sure that that is exactly how it is, but the duty and role that has been vested in the Committees is to ensure that, when it comes to the minutiae and the detail, we are as clear as we possibly can be and that we have as many checks and balances as possible in place to ensure that those who have concerns have them mitigated.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Yes, I will give way.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Has the Member any concern that the Trojan Horse for moving matters towards the destruction of the voluntary grammar schools might well be the area-planning powers now in the Bill? The assessment of the need for the number of schools in any area could well be the vehicle used to do that, as could ESA seeking to interfere with the grades at which grammar schools can accept pupils. Therefore, should the Member not be particularly concerned that one of the greatest threats to grammar schools in the Bill is the introduction of area-planning powers?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his intervention. He is the chair of the board of governors in a school in our constituency, so I am aware of the contribution that he makes to the education debate. I share his concern, and not only on area planning. We need to look at every element of the Bill, and I will come to the inspectorate later on. It will raise more concerns for me, although I share concerns about the area planning process.

I will try to answer this in another way, through why the Bill was brought into existence. The fundamental issue for some people is that the Department of Education set the policy and paid the money but never had any control. In some regards, that has been a good thing. Some schools, because of the power that they have had, have been able to set out their stall, employ their staff and do things in the way in which they have done without it being detrimental to education. In fact, it clearly indicates that, as a result of that formula, they have benefited and have delivered a very good education. I want to see —

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Chairman of the Education Committee recognised that Mr Allister was the chair of a board of governors in a particular constituency. In this debate, is it not essential that Members who contribute declare their interests in respect of being a chair or otherwise of a board of governors in a particular sector?

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

It is for Members to judge whether they should declare.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

If the Member had been here at the start, he would have known that I declared an interest; but obviously he had more important business and was somewhere else. I take his point, but it was yet another attempt to try to cause a diversion.

Let us get back to the point that I was going to make, which is about trying to ensure that the position that some schools have regarding autonomy is greater exercised by those that wish to have that autonomy. For example, in the controlled sector, we have controlled grammars. I have spent a considerable length of time having discussions with the controlled sector, the voluntary sector and the controlled grammars. I have met the Irish-medium sector and the integrated sector. I doubt that there is any element of the education system that I have not met over the past three years. Some schools think that this will be good for them, but others believe that it would be better to retain the right to exercise that power rather than have some other organisation use it on their behalf.

The Department advised that the new approach to the employment relationship would bring — and I hope that this confirms the point that I was trying to make — other benefits to controlled schools. I will talk about controlled schools in a moment or two. It is understood that the Bill will provide those schools with greater autonomy; it will allow them to appoint their own principals, which they can do currently only with the agreement of the education and library board.

A school in my constituency has tried on three occasions in the past few months to appoint a principal and has not been able to do so. I asked the North Eastern Education and Library Board serious questions about why that is the case. I have a serious issue. I think that other Members will concur that, although there has been merit in the teacher appointments committee and the way in which it has delivered over the years, there are other elements in the process that we need to question seriously. I trust that the way outlined in the Bill will be beneficial to controlled schools. However, we have a challenge to test and scrutinise to ensure that this will be the case. That is why I am looking forward to hearing from the public.

To date, this debate has been carried out virtually — not exclusively — behind closed doors, with one or two salvos being fired occasionally by different interest groups on a number of issues, depending on the latest rumour or issue that they think that may or may not have been raised.

We now have a Bill in front of us on which there will be public scrutiny over the next number of weeks. All those organisations will have the right and opportunity to raise with the Committee issues that are of concern to them. I know that the Deputy Chair and other Committee members share the view that that is necessary.

The Committee noted with great interest the prospect of greater delegation and responsibility for schools. I expect that, in determining their final views, Committee members will spend a long time considering the merits of employment schemes and the sometimes vexed issue of who exactly is the employer or, indeed, the employing authority — a very important issue.

The Bill indicates that ESA will consult, as appropriate, with sectoral bodies that appear to the Department or ESA to represent the schools of that educational sector. The Committee understands that the sectoral bodies will not be established by statute but there will be a statutory requirement for ESA to consult them. It also understands that the sectoral bodies will be funded by the Department and that all sectors will be represented. I will come back to that issue in a moment or two, particularly with regard to the controlled sector. The Committee welcomes fair and equitable representation by sectoral bodies, and it notes with interest the working group that is to be established with regard to the controlled sector. While generally welcoming the relevant clauses, I think Members will want to be assured that representation is not in any way distorted and that the sectoral bodies are free to express the views of the schools they represent.

As mentioned by Mr Allister, the Bill will make ESA the area planning authority for schools in Northern Ireland. The Committee recently spent some time considering the operation of the area planning process. I do not intend to discuss that at length at this time. It is sufficient to say that the majority of Committee members are most unimpressed by the area planning and viability audit process that has been exercised to date. Look at the way in which the viability audits and the area planning were constructed and delivered. I know that this refers to my Deputy Chair's constituency, but I still have not received a satisfactory answer from the Department or the North Eastern Education and Library Board about why, during a consultation process, the status of a particular school — I refer to Parkhall — was changed from a school that caters for 11- to 19-year-olds to one that caters for 11- to 16-year-olds. So the area plans and the consultation process were not set in stone to the degree that some would try to tell us they were. We have issues with the current process, and, if we have issues now, I can assure you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that we will have issues with the area planning that is outlined in the Bill. Clause 27 requires an adequate opportunity for persons to make representations to ESA on revisions to area plans. Given its recent experience, I expect that the Committee will wish to deliberate on exactly what will constitute an adequate opportunity.

The Bill includes what appears to be a much revised inspection regime for schools, including new powers for the Education and Training Inspectorate to remove documents and materials. The Department has advised that that is in line with powers currently available to Ofsted. I expect that I will have a bit more to say about that when I speak as a private Member. I assure the House that the Committee will scrutinize that section of the Bill thoroughly to ensure that it is satisfied that the issues of appropriateness and proportionality are at the centre of the proposals.

The Department characterises the Bill as giving an enhanced level of delegation to schools, while balancing that with a stronger regulatory regime.

I also expect that, in addition to the clause-by-clause analysis, the Committee will wish to give some thought to the Bill's overall balance. Members will come to this welcoming the fact that more delegation will be given to schools, and they will see that as a reward for our hard-working school principals and staff. It is only right that, as a matter of courtesy and fact, we put on record our appreciation to the many people who work in our education system. Despite all that is thrown at them and despite all the issues that they have to deal with, including more legislation coming down the track, their fortitude and resilience mean that they continue to deliver education to our children and young people on a daily basis in a way that, in many respects, is exemplary. They need to be commended for that.

The Committee will want to be sure that the Education and Skills Authority will live up to its billing as an efficient and effective replacement for existing organisations. That is a huge challenge, and all eyes will clearly be on those who will have responsibilities as and when the organisation comes into existence. To make that happen, those people will need to be very focused to ensure that they work in a way that reflects fairness and equity in educational administration and in how resources are allocated.

I also note that the Bill amends the quite large body of existing education orders. The Committee will want to explore exactly what differences the Bill will make to that substantial body of legislation. I understand that there are around 11 subordinate pieces of legislation. At some stage, as was indicated to the Committee on Wednesday, I think, the Department may want to consider a programme or process that brings all that legislation together. I assure Members that that is a piece of work that none of us looks forward to seeing. However, at some stage, it may be necessary to undertake it.

The Education Bill is yet another cause for concern for many in the education sector, including, as I said, our principals, teachers, boards of governors and others. Assuming the Bill's successful passage today, the Committee will gladly take evidence from those groups. Committee members have agreed to clear our forward work programme and to set aside as much time as we need for sober reflection and detailed scrutiny of this important legislation. However, that does not mean that we will take our eyes off the ball on any of the other ongoing issues. There are so many things going on with education that you would need eyes in the back of your head as well as in the front to ensure that you did not miss anything.

The majority of Committee members are just about content to allow the Bill to go to Committee Stage, albeit with some reservations and issues that they believe will have to be further explained and ironed out and amendments that will have to be agreed. I believe that the Committee feels that the Bill includes new checks and balances that are sufficiently different from the previous legislation to warrant further scrutiny and possible amendment at Committee Stage.

I hope that, in responding today, the Minister will provide what reassurances he can to Members on the issues that will be raised in the Second Stage debate. I hope that he can dispel any misunderstandings and reduce any unnecessary concerns about the Bill. I am sure that he will also take the opportunity to undertake to be very flexible in any future discussions with the Committee, as he has done to date. I place on record our appreciation of his help in that regard.

I will now comment as a Member of the House, as the DUP spokesperson on education and as an MLA for North Antrim. I want to address certain aspects of the Bill that continue to give concern not just to my party but to those who want to ensure that the issues will be properly dealt with during Committee Stage. The Committee Stage is not just a process. It will not just be looked upon as something that we have to do. As I have said repeatedly, if the House is to continue to ensure that it has the confidence of the community that we seek to serve, one of the places in which that is best demonstrated is in the huge amount of work that is done in our Committees and in the huge amount of effort that is put in by our Committee staff and by all associated with the Committee process to ensure that there is proper, due regard and scrutiny of whatever legislation or policy comes before them.

As a party, we strenuously opposed the previous incarnations of the ESA Bill, in that it was a direct attack, we said at that stage, on the controlled sector. This sector was already under pressure in that, unlike other sectors, it had no representative body to speak on its behalf. Its teachers were at a disadvantage in seeking employment across all schools, an issue accepted by the Equality Commission as being in need of redress. It appeared to this party that the sector was often at a disadvantage in the sharing of resources, whether capital or recurrent. That was particularly true in the most disadvantaged unionist wards and in the problems around Protestant working-class boys' educational underachievement, which is not unrelated to the situation.

As someone who was educated in the controlled sector, I stand here and say that, since becoming my party's spokesperson, I have endeavoured to ensure that we did not just continue giving the controlled sector platitudes and acknowledgement that it was there but understood the real needs that existed in some of its schools. I remember coming to the House when there was a discussion about trying to take the TRC members off boards of governors, in response to which Members in the previous mandate jumped up and said, rightly, that it was awful, terrible. Some of those Members seemed to disappear when it came to rolling up their sleeves, getting involved and having discussions with the TRC. Indeed, I recall one Member saying that the way in which the controlled sector was being denigrated and was not being represented fairly was awful. I then made some enquiries and discovered that the same Member had not even had any discussion with the TRC, the organisation that represents the Protestant churches' interest in education.

Let me say that the controlled sector and the legislative rights that the controlled sector received in 1940, under Lord Londonderry, are rights that we were very clear would not be given up. They were rights that were not going to be negotiated away. Remember that the efforts of the previous Minister and mandate were to have an ESA board made up, in the majority, of councillors that would have taken away the legislative right and legal place of the transferors. I am glad that we have secured their position. I understand that the TRC will issue a statement later today on the Bill's Second Stage. However, it does us well to remind ourselves what it said — indeed, what other sectors said — on the establishment of the heads of agreement. In November of last year, the TRC said:

"In particular the Transferors welcome the fact that their existing legal rights have been both acknowledged and protected. This, alongside the establishment for the first time of a sectoral support body for controlled schools, to mirror a similar body for maintained schools, will provide a firm and equitable basis to move forward in dealing with so many of the educational challenges that lie ahead."

So, that is an issue that we need to be very clear and focused on in the Bill. We welcome the establishment of the controlled sector body, and I pay tribute to the work that has been done to date.

I know that there are those who will say, "Forty years later, here you come. It is only tokenism; it is limited; it is not statutory", and there will all the negatives around it. I say to those Members: go and talk to the TRC. Go and talk to the bodies that have a legal responsibility on the boards of governors of controlled schools and schools that transferred and ask them what they think of it. Ask them whether they believe that they have been given something of merit and worth. I welcome the fact that the first meeting of that body has taken place.

It is regrettable that a direct rule Administration established CCMS back in the late '80s and gave it the position that it had. It is not that I have any issue with giving sectors sectoral support or a body that represents their cause, but I do have an issue when I look at the history of CCMS, particularly the issue that was raised about area planning. The maintained sector is at an advantage today in area planning over the controlled sector and some others, because, for the last number of years, it has been able to use money that was given to it to have staff employed in area planning to look at their schools, amalgamate, rationalise and do all that they have done. It is for those reasons that the establishment of a body for the controlled sector is to be welcomed. It is an important beginning, and we should not underestimate it. However, we will be vigilant in ensuring that the body is truly reflective of the sector it serves and has an important role in developing a sector that, for too long, has been neglected by the Department. Successful passage of the Bill and successful establishment of the body are — to use that well-worn phrase — inextricably linked.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am grateful to the Member for giving way. I appreciate the comments that he made about the protections that are in place for the Protestant churches. Does he agree with me that, for decades — indeed, centuries — the Protestant churches have shown a commitment to the education of children, which this place is right to continue to recognise and enshrine in law? Indeed, the many Protestant churches that put transferors onto the boards of governors bring a particular expertise around the pastoral care of our children. Schools are not just about educational attainment but about the all-round pastoral well-being of children, which is something that our Protestant churches have brought to our school systems and which, quite rightly, we will continue to protect.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I concur with his comments. At this point we should again give our appreciation to all in that sector who have worked down through the years to ensure that their voice is heard and the sector is reflected and represented fairly. I am sure that some found it a strange situation for me to be in, but, just last year or the year before, I was probably the first Free Presbyterian who was ever welcomed inside the general assembly of the Presbyterian Church, as opposed to being a Free Presbyterian outside the general assembly of the Presbyterian Church. I was there as the party spokesperson for the debate on ESA and education reform. It was clear in the discussions that we had that day that there are many who have given unstinting service but have genuine concern about elements of decline that have taken place in our controlled sector. We have seen that in reports by the inspector and in our constituencies, where there are particular challenges in the controlled sector. We need the sectoral support body to be in place so as to be of help. I trust that it will not be too late for some schools but will be in place to be of benefit to them.

That leads me on to the second major issue: equality of treatment for all in education. When you use the term "equality of treatment for everyone in education", it can unfortunately mean different things to different people, at different times and in different places. The Bill seeks to confer certain responsibilities on ESA and the board of governors with regard to the Irish language sector. We, as a party, are extremely concerned about those clauses. In dealing with these issues, we will challenge them, if the Bill moves to Committee Stage. I find it interesting that, when this was introduced in the Bill, something seemed to happen in the interpretation of the 1989 order. Unfortunately, under the Belfast Agreement, which, I am glad to say, my party was not a co-signatory to, provision was given that elevated to a place of importance two sectors of our education system, namely the Irish-medium sector and the integrated sector. There was a duty on the Department to facilitate and promote those two sectors. All of a sudden, when the Bill appears, only one is mentioned. I do not know whether the Department has decided that it is now time to forget about the integrated sector. I hope not, because invaluable work has been done on the challenges faced in bringing that sector to where it is today. I may have particular issues with the make-up of some integrated schools and all of that. However, when the Irish-medium sector came into our education debate, it was clear that there was a duty to facilitate it. The previous Minister, who I see has joined us, reminded me on I do not know how many occasions of her statutory duty to promote and facilitate the Irish-medium and integrated sectors. However, when we come to the Bill, lo and behold, the integrated sector has disappeared. It is not in the Bill, but the Irish-medium sector is.

The Irish-medium sector is in the Bill in two ways. One is a reference to the fact that it will be consulted. However, more worryingly, it states that, when it comes to placing governors on the board of an Irish-medium school, ESA will have to pay regard to ensuring that the person who is being appointed is in keeping with the ethos and identity of the school to ensure the continuation of that school. Was that the same thought as was in the Department's mind when it appointed two members of that party to Lumen Christi in the city of Londonderry? Were the two members who were appointed to that board of governors in keeping with the ethos and identity of the school? Were they put there to ensure the continued viability of the school? My party will ensure that we deal with those issues in Committee as we take the Bill forward, I hope, after Second Stage.

Furthermore, there are differences in the approach to the role given to boards of governors in the controlled sector with regard to being the submitting authority for schemes of management and the approach to the role in the Catholic maintained sector. That is another area that has given rise to concerns. We, as a party, need to be satisfied that no deals will be done by the Minister or his officials outside the Bill. In Committee, we will assure ourselves that all sectors are treated as equitably as possible in proportion to the delivery of education in each sector. In the Bill, the board of governors is the responsible body, and there should be no diminution of that.

Similarly, we will seek to ensure that ESA is the single employing authority for all staff and that the current discriminatory approach to teachers in the controlled sector is resolved as the Bill continues its legislative passage. Members will know that this has been a problem for a long time. Although it falls within the remit of OFMDFM, particularly as regards exemptions from the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998, we await the Minister's review of that issue in respect of the Catholic certificate. That is important because, if there are going to be employment issues that are challenged and changes to employment arrangements, you cannot look at one and not look at the other. You cannot leave one sector with concerns about employment issues and leave another sector untouched. That is an issue that we will have to give some consideration to.

The protection afforded to the voluntary grammars, as we referred to earlier, in section 10 of the heads of agreement must be reflected in the legislation. We welcome the establishment through the legislation of the tribunal and the fact that OFMDFM has a key role in the process. I look to the Minister and the party opposite to honour the document published jointly by the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. The DUP has championed the right of schools and parents to avail themselves of academic assessment, and we are determined that the ESA arrangements, if passed, will not damage those rights and will not be used as a means of subverting the rights that we have secured.

That brings me to the clauses that deal with the inspectorate. I know that it was unfair to ask the officials, on their first outing to the Committee on Wednesday past, about that issue, but we took the opportunity to say to them that we had great concern about the inspectorate seemingly being used in the pursuit of political or departmental objectives. I trust that we can come back to that at some stage. The inspectorate should be separate from the Department. I went as far as saying on Wednesday at the Education Committee that the inspectorate could inspect the Department, which caused some eyebrows to rise.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Yes, I will give way.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The Member will be aware that that is why we have an Education Committee.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that. However, it might be useful for us to have some other body, similar to ESA, which he will have, to look at those issues.

I get concerned when I see the powers that the Bill seeks to confer. Although it has been said that the powers will try to bring the inspectorate into line with other arrangements in the United Kingdom, I am concerned that we will have a situation where we have an inspectorate that is very strong in its powers. The provisions, we are told, are similar to those previously drafted, with the exception of the removal of the inspection powers for library premises, as requested by DCAL. I have to ask why the Department feels it necessary to have an inspectorate that can lift papers and lift computers. I place it on record that I trust that it is not being used by the Department as another method of spooking or spying on primary schools that are being put in a very difficult position around transfer. We have seen —

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I am happy to clarify that point for the Member. As with any legislation that goes through the Assembly, Members will look to see whether there is an interwoven agenda. I assure the Member that there is no agenda at play in this, other than improving the inspection powers of the inspectorate to ensure that all young children receive a high-quality education. There is no other agenda at play, and I am sure that my officials will be happy to discuss that with him further as the Bill goes through Committee Stage.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for that. It is something that we will come back to and look at.

CCEA is no longer part of ESA, which has to be welcomed. I welcome the commitment to come back to the issue. As a party, we were concerned about the scope of ESA and its responsibilities in the last Bill.

However, we believe that there needs to be a major overhaul of CCEA, and we will be looking to continue discussions with the Minister to assure us that the clauses in the Bill are not just another one of the Department's famous sticking plasters that we have seen in the past and that we will have education reform that lets us progress in a way that is to the benefit of our educational sector. There is so much going on regarding the issue around CCEA qualifications. There are issues around where CCEA will be placed in the light of the discussions and decisions made by the Secretary of State for Education in England, Michael Gove. We need to have a debate, and I welcome the fact that some discussions are already under way, outside this House, about that matter on the best way to provide for CCEA, a regulatory body and a body that sets examinations being in the one building.

The issue of area planning has already been raised. The current attempts by the Department to control the area-planning process by proxy have been nothing short of disastrous. The effect of the process has been to cause confusion and concern in many schools where that does not need to be the case. If you look at the viability audits, you see clearly how that has happened. A concern has been raised in places where there need not be a concern about the future of a particular school. If we are to give ESA a role in area planning, it needs to take account of the key role, especially in the controlled sector, that is played by the new sectoral body and to understand the importance of the needs and wishes of the local community.

Public services and the public are very clear that they want to have a vibrant and strong school that is at the heart of their community. As a party, we will scrutinise the clauses of the Bill to ensure that we have a school estate that the community wants and needs and not what the Department of Education thinks it should have. That is a major problem and a major concern. To that end, we will seek, in advance of the Bill passing, clear, local structures from ESA that will deliver regional policy in a manner that is sensitive to local needs.

That brings us to the question of where services will be based and delivered. Members are accustomed to going to Omagh, Dundonald or County Hall in respect of the service delivery that the boards have given to our respective schools. I welcome the fact that the Department, I understand, is revisiting the work that was done by the ESA team to look at what type of model we would have for service delivery. Although we will have this debate and all have our views and opinions, the reality is to consider how this will affect teachers in a particular school.

The boards have been run down since the introduction of vacancy control — I remind Members that vacancy control has been in place since 2006 — and CASS is, in many respects, decimated. People, who had previously been there, are not in place or in position to give advice to schools. Principals and governors want to know whether these arrangements will be unwound, delivered or explained to us over the process of time to ensure that they know what the service delivery model will be. If the Minister could later give some indication of how that issue will be addressed, it would be appreciated. Furthermore, there are differences in approach to the role given to the board of governors in controlled schools. We have already said something about that.

In conclusion, a huge amount of work remains to be done. The Bill, with its 57 clauses, I think, and seven schedules, will require considerable scrutiny. As we have been able to bring it to this place — I know better than most how difficult that has been — I trust that, with hard work and determination, we can put in place something that will be of benefit to our education system and to the advantage of education rather than to the advantage of either the Department or any political agenda. Therefore, I support its passing Second Stage.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak to the Education Bill before us today.

Over the preceding four decades, those working for the education and library boards, CCMS, the Youth Council and the Staff Commission for Education and Library Boards, whether staff or board members, played a central role in the development of our education system. It is only fit and proper that, during today's discourse on the need to build a modern, fit-for-purpose education system, we recognise and acknowledge the dedication of those who have shown great commitment to improving the educational experience of learners for the best part of the previous half century. Their dedication not only delivered many key services but developed many new approaches and facilitated much improvement during a long and often arduous journey for our education system.

The Education Bill is, undoubtedly, a milestone in that unbroken journey. The educational case for change is obvious. Despite various excellent schools, the recent viability audit highlighted the large numbers that are educationally, financially or physically unsustainable. Our education system is characterised by an uneven performance of outstanding academic excellence coupled with some 40% of children leaving school without five good GCSEs. Furthermore, the overall performance of our local education system is falling behind that of our economic competitors, and there is little doubt that our present arrangements are not capable of redressing the situation. Indeed, having separate arrangements for the various sectors has restricted the development of agreed good practice and placed obstacles in the path of joined-up planning.

Tasked with modernising the administration of education here in the North, the Bill will replace the outdated administration with one that better meets the needs of the 21st century. At the core of the reform and, indeed, the Bill is the foundation of the Education and Skills Authority. Overseeing the establishment of a modern, fit-for-purpose administration, ESA will focus on assisting the raising of standards, providing support to schools and educational establishments and ensuring the effective planning and delivery of the educational estate. ESA will replace the eight administrative bodies next year and ensure that our education system continues to transform to meet the needs of our young people and our economy. However, that transformation does not represent a wild stab in the dark for our system. ESA will build on the vast work and experience of the various boards and education bodies as —

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Yes.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

He raises a point about meeting the needs of the economy. Has he had any discussions with, for example, Queen's University or other universities that have raised issues about the capabilities of our current cohort of students? Some of those issues will not be addressed by ESA; they will have to be addressed by a revised curriculum, and there are issues with how that will be delivered in our schools.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. I hope to cover that point later.

Embedded firmly in the context of the two previous Bills, the 2012 Education Bill reveals a few areas of fresh thinking, demonstrates a mature flexibility and encompasses solutions to issues that were previously of concern to stakeholders. That has clearly been important in reaching agreement on issues such as the membership of ESA and clarification on the autonomy of schools. As the Minister outlined, the membership of ESA, as set out in 'Heads of Agreement', is to consist of a chairperson, eight political representatives, four transferor members, four trustee members and four other members. This will not only ensure local democratic accountability but preserve the participation of Churches in the governance of education.

I welcome the fact that the Bill will not only deliver a single employing authority but enshrine the guaranteed autonomy for all boards of governors to make decisions in the best interests of schools. It will also provide a framework whereby the ethos of schools can be reflected in employment arrangements. In short, the core principle at the centre of those arrangements is that there will be a single employing authority with schools exercising devolved autonomy.

In addition to ESA improving employment and management schemes put forward by the devolved submitting authority, appropriate checks and balances have been enshrined in the Bill to prevent ESA from acting unfairly in its approval role. This is vitally important for stakeholder confidence, and I have little doubt that the presence of an independent tribunal will help to encourage confidence in schools that ESA will concentrate on its role and leave schools to get on with improving education outcomes.

As Minister O'Dowd outlined, the Bill poses no threat to any sector, nor does it look to alter or detract from the ethos or identity of any school. However, Ceann Comhairle, and this is to be welcomed, the Bill will challenge each and every school to raise the bar in education standards and put the needs of young people at the heart of the learning process. Central to this is a world-class education system for all our young people.

Education must be first and foremost about individuals and equipping those individuals with the tools to value themselves and their society. It has been said:

"Citizens empowered through the gift of education will repay that gift time and time again to their families to their community and the economy."

We must continue to push forward with determination and commitment to educational excellence. Vested interests and reactionary objection must not hide the real and present need for reform. Dogmatic gesticulation should not stand in the way of change; for, in driving forward with the desire for educational excellence, standing still is simply not an option. We need to recognise the fact that, in global terms, unless we bring about change, education outcomes for all concerned will regress.

The delivery of education in the North has developed over the decades into a system designed around the needs of schools and institutions, often at the expense of the education needs of our young people. Certainly, we deliver education through schools and the needs of those schools are important, but we cannot continue to shape our education service around the needs of buildings.

In his statement to the Assembly last September, the Minister's policy, Putting Pupils First, was launched in an effort to build on Every School a Good School as a signpost for the journey ahead. Referring to the 2006 Bain report, which explicitly spelt out the dangers of continuing along the road of unsustainable educational provision, Putting Pupils First acknowledged that without a determination to deliver change, we set schools and children on an impossible task to reach their education potential. It is with this in mind that we must forge ahead with determination to ensure that we will have a system of education provision in place that delivers optimal education standards for all our young people.

As we move forward, it is vital that the pattern of provision and investment in our schools is dictated by the needs of education excellence in the modern era. We must constantly strive to improve, to go that bit further, to be the best that we can be. At a time when economies around the world are on their knees, our education system needs to drive our local economic recovery, for we will undoubtedly need a vibrant workforce, educated and trained in a variety of skills, which can not only adapt to emerging economic conditions, but can be bold and inspiring as it spearheads our local recovery.

On this day last week, we welcomed the Executive's investment strategy, which acknowledges the huge importance of education in building our society in the years ahead. It outlines:

"A peaceful, fair and prosperous society has at its heart a well educated population, with the skills to engage fully and positively in society and in the economy. The skill-base of countries and regions is increasingly the key determinant of relative economic growth, competitiveness and productivity – factors vital to support higher living standards in an increasingly globalised economy. "

The outworking of the Education Bill is central to those considerations. A modern education environment that cherishes and nurtures all our young people should be at the very core of our vision for restoring economic prosperity in our local communities. That is a vision shared by educationalists and stakeholders throughout Ireland and further afield.

A recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report into global student performance heaped praise on the education system in Shanghai. It is a system which recently initiated far-reaching reforms in the delivery of both investment and educational provision. Shanghai is perhaps particularly salient as it abandoned the outdated practice of concentrated resources at the request of elite schools in favour of building educational success and economic expansion through education reforms designed to empower the individual student.

We cannot extol the virtues of expanding economies throughout the world, yet stay blind to the educational forms that propel such excellence. Without a determination to deliver real and substantive change, we set our young people an impossible task in the face of such challenges. The establishment of ESA is by no means an end in itself but, undoubtedly, it equips our educational leaders with the tools required to build an education system that our young people deserve. This may not be the final stage on the educational journey, but it is, no doubt, a great opportunity for a new beginning.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I fear that, given the length of my speech, you probably will. I am very pleased to speak on such an important matter as the Education Bill. I join others in thanking all those who worked on it. I particularly thank all those who work in our education system and give their time, life, heart and skills to educating our children.

However, I am extremely saddened that we have a Bill that, the more I look at it, seems to be filled to the brim with hidden intentions. Given Sinn Féin's record, we must treat the Bill with healthy mistrust. Given that the previous Education Minister seemed to listen to no one, and that the Department often seems to be of that mind too, the Ulster Unionist Party is opposing the legislation. We know that Sinn Féin would really like to dismantle everything and anything that smacks of Britain, and that it will pursue tirelessly its endless push for a united Ireland at the cost of everything in its path. We must treat this legislation with total awareness and search out all that is hidden within.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. This is not the first time that the Ulster Unionists have taken a different policy position. They had three last week. Can he explain why his colleague, who is sitting beside him, criticised OFMDFM on 23 July for not being quick enough in bringing forward the legislation? All of a sudden, today, we are being told that they have now a principled position on ESA: the first time that the Ulster Unionists have taken a principled position on anything. Hopefully, his colleague has given him the answer as to why, on 23 July, the Member said that there should be more progress on delivering ESA. Can they tell us what exactly they are up to?

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you very much. It looks like we are not allowed to think, read or take on new positions as we learn more. The more we dig into the Bill, the more we find that we have something that gives us great reason for concern.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I am going to get very sore knees at this rate. Yes.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Reflecting on the last point made to the Member, would he care to reflect that the Member who intervened, Mr Storey, said on 18 May 2010 that ESA was dead, was not coming back and that it was:

"bureaucratic legislation that satisfies the control freakery of the Department." — [Official Report, Bound Volume 51, p339, col 1.]

Perhaps the Member might reflect on who is doing somersaults today.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

My knees are not good enough for somersaults. However, I enjoyed that point. Thank you very much.

The Bill is the 'Where's Wally?' for every politician. We have to search through it from top to bottom and from word to word to try to understand what it means and why it has been written in such a way. Hidden in every clause, sentence and schedule could be a "Wally" of hidden Sinn Féin chicanery. Anyway, enough about wallies; let us move to better things.

We would normally welcome a Bill that purports to streamline our education management so that we can put in place high standards of educational achievement in all our schools. We would normally welcome, as should everyone, such intentions. Children, and their education, must be given the very highest priority. However, we cannot support this legislation because we do not fully understand all that is in it. We find ourselves in a similar position to last week when the Welfare Bill came before us. Do we oppose it outright at Second Stage, or do we let it move forward? In this case, we have decided to oppose it outright. It is sad that we find ourselves pressurised by the need to pass the Bill quickly to stop our education system collapsing into further decline at a time when we really need to take our time to make sure the legislation is right. It is very sad that our education system has been allowed to fall into such a mess.

It is 10 years since our deputy First Minister banished the 11-plus from our education system in such an ill thought-out manner, without even the slightest thought of how it was going to be replaced. We have had 10 years of no long-term strategy, 10 years of trying to impose one side's view of education on everyone else and 10 years of, we assume, attempts at dealmaking, such as the previous ESA Bills. It is sad how much time has been wasted. If the original manner of government envisaged in the Belfast Agreement had been used, we might have an agreed long-term strategy instead of the carve-up deals and counterdeals.

The Programme for Government had planned for this Bill to be passed last summer and for the body to be in place by April 2013. The pressure is on, but let us not hurry it and get it wrong. The UUP will oppose the Bill all the way, as it is a flawed piece of legislation. If it moves forward, it will not be our doing.

We want to see an education system that really works for everybody and that puts children and their education first. Why on earth can we not sit down like grown-ups, produce an agreed long-term strategy and design a system that works for everybody? At present, England and Wales have learned their lessons and are moving towards academies and streaming, but we seem to be determined to move totally in the other direction.

What has happened between the end of the summer and now? It was announced that ESA would come forward as soon as the autumn Assembly session began. What went awry? Was it to do with legal matters? Or was it that the First Minister realised that he could not sell to his own party what he had agreed? After all, it is his MLAs, as well as many Sinn Féin MLAs, who will have to explain the Bill and the area planning to their electorates. I wonder whether I am right. Are cracks appearing between DUP members?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I am very happy to give way. I hope that you will clarify that for me.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

The Member has come to the House today and has given us a lecture on fractured relationships in parties. He is probably speaking from experience, given the number of differences that there are in that corner between the Members who even wish to appear here. Let me make it very clear: there are no differences between Peter Robinson and myself; and there are no differences between Peter Robinson and the members of this party. The Ulster Unionist Party might be in disarray, but this party is still united and going forward.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. Let us have interventions that are clearly linked to the Bill, especially as this is its Second Stage, which is when we talk about its principles.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Thank you very much. It is nice to find that I have obviously hit a sore point. If I am right, we may be close to a betrayal of all that is great in our education system. We may be close to a betrayal by our First Minister as grammar schools, voluntary grammars and even the maintained system are thrown to the lions. I want to ensure that I leave with you the thought, which I have articulated previously, that we are on course towards achieving the lowest common standards of education, rather than the highest. We should be raising our standards, not dragging them down.

Today, we have a Bill that is so complex and yet so vacant of detail that no one in the Chamber really knows what they are letting themselves in for. We have a heads of agreement, which were agreed in November 2011, as the basis of the Bill. Indeed, any decision that is agreed in that office would immediately make me suspicious about its intentions and all the political bargaining that must have inevitably occurred in the run-up to such an agreement.

Following last week's Education Committee meeting, we know that it is the heads of agreement that have yet to be finalised. Let me read you part of it. It states:

"10. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in the new arrangements will undermine the following principles;

a) There will be no change to the ownership arrangements which negatively affects the respective role of the Boards of Governors of a school."

I will read that again.

"There will be no change to the ownership arrangements which negatively affects the respective role of the Boards of Governors of a school."

Who wrote that? What on earth does it mean? It is appalling jargon. I raised that, as well as the lack of intelligibility of the heads of agreement, at last week's Education Committee meeting, only to be told that that section of the heads of agreement has yet to be finalised.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. If the Member was as forensic in his detailed analysis of the Bill, he might go and ask someone from the community that he claims is being fed to the lions where some of that language came from. He might then discover that maybe it is not as badly written as he is claiming. Maybe some investigation by the Member might be useful.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I am rather enjoying this. I do feel that there is a mass in there that we all need to read. Yet the more I listened to the Chairman of the Committee, the more I felt that, all through his speech, there was a lot of uncertainty and certainly a lack of surety as to whether he really supports the Bill.

I go back to the heads of agreement. At times, it does seem to have been done on the back of a fag packet, put together at the last minute. We are about to start legislation based on a set of agreed principles that have yet to be finalised. Were there no wordsmiths available that day? Two weeks ago, teachers in post-primary schools were pulling their hair out as they battled for three days with the Northern Ireland Literacy Assessment (NILA) and the Northern Ireland Numeracy Assessment (NINA). They were on their computers trying to carry out assessments using a system that had been hurriedly piloted so that it could be rushed in this October. Are we about to see the same again? Here we have a core piece of legislation being pushed through before the heads of agreement have even been finished.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Will the Member give way?

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I will take an intervention.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not know whether the First Minister or deputy First Minister were before the Education Committee last week. I was not there, but I suspect they were not. The heads of agreement, as presented to me as Education Minister to bring forward as a policy memorandum, are complete. The work of the First and deputy First Ministers is complete on that section. The legislation then proceeds by a policy memorandum, which was brought before the Executive and received approval. The policy memorandum sets out the broad aspects of the Bill and was approved by the Executive. I then brought the legislation to the Executive, and it has been approved in the sense that it has been forwarded to the Assembly for the Assembly to pursue. Is the Member going to take on his role as an Assembly Member? Are his fellow colleagues going to take on their role as Assembly Members? I do not care personally whether they trust me or not. The question they have to ask is this: do they trust themselves?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Mr Speaker, I have to answer that. Of course we trust ourselves.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member will have an opportunity after Question Time to answer the Minister. As we move quickly towards Question Time, I ask the House to take its ease until that time.

The debate stood suspended.

Oral Answers to Questions

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Question 3 has been withdrawn and requires a written answer.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

1. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister how the gaps in the childcare provision are being met whilst a childcare strategy is being finalised. (AQO 2642/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will ask my colleague Assembly Member and junior Minister Jonathan Bell to answer this question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

The Programme for Government 2011-15 commits the Executive to publish and implement a childcare strategy that will provide integrated and affordable childcare. Our Department is leading the development of that strategy. Any new childcare strategy needs to be evidence-based. We have, therefore, commissioned research that will quantify, among other things, the current demand for childcare places, the current provision, the uptake data and the barriers to uptake. We believe that the research will deliver its final report early next year, will inform the development of the childcare strategy and will allow for more effective childcare provision.

Further evidence will come from public consultation. We are currently preparing a document that will inform the consultation on the childcare strategy. In developing the consultation document, we have engaged fully with other Departments and with the main childcare stakeholders. We have allocated some £700,000 to PlayBoard's school age childcare programme up to 31 March 2013. The funding is intended to maintain the after-school childcare capacity pending the development of the childcare strategy.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the junior Minister for his response. Can the junior Minister assure the House that the £12 million allocated to childcare remains ring-fenced for its intended purpose and will be spent over the next four Budget years?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I am confident that the full £12 million will be spent over the comprehensive spending review (CSR) period up to 31 March 2015. It is important that the funding is spent on high-quality projects that will make a real difference. Departments need to ensure that any bids to the fund will be completely additional to their own spend, and a significant range of further bids are currently under consideration in the Department. That is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of pounds that we have already spent on this matter.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Can the Minister give an outline of the number of registered childcare facilities available? In his view, is there sufficient childcare out there?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I will take those questions in the order that they have been asked. The information that I will give you is from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety up to 31 March 2011. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety will publish its new children's social care statistics bulletin on 26 October. That will include statistics on registered childcare facilities as of 31 March 2012. As of 31 March 2011, there were 5,058 registered childcare providers, and they offer a total of 53,223 registered places. The Department is very concerned that we get proper and robust data, and I know from listening to my constituents in Newtownards through to Ballynahinch through to Portavogie that there are major concerns about the availability and cost of childcare.

The vast majority of childcare providers are childminders — some 75%. They offer 36% of all registered places, day nurseries offer 25%, and playgroups offer 22%. Out-of-school clubs are sitting at 11%, and crèches and summer schemes are at 6%. We have commissioned the data to see where there are gaps, whether they are geographical or in respect of types of childcare provided. Most Members are aware that there is concern about the availability and cost, and, as I said to Mr Gardiner, we intend to spend the £12 million by the period recommended.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Can the Minister give me some assurance that any potential impact of welfare reform cuts on childcare provision and the affordability of childcare is being considered in the development of any childcare strategy?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

We are very much aware of what is going on in respect of welfare reform and the proposals that have come through. With the childcare strategy, we are looking at ensuring that there is proper parental choice. It is not just about the number of places but about the quality, so we have been in discussions with many of the early years organisations about the quality and standard of childcare that we expect our young people to have access to. We will also look at how accessible it is; how affordable it is, which I think your question directly related to; how sustainable it is; and whether it forms part of an integrated approach. Those are the six policy principles that we will look at in our childcare strategy.

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

Will the Minister outline the measures being considered to ensure that our rural communities are provided with affordable childcare options?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

There is already significant funding for rural areas, particularly in the Armagh region. As I say, in developing our childcare strategy, accessibility is critical, as I outlined to Mr McMullan. It has to be affordable, available and integrated into an overall approach. The issue of rural accessibility, of course, has to be factored in. You can see already that rural issues have been considered in the initial tranche of funding from the Department and that we have already delivered in respect of rural childcare. We envision making childcare in rural areas sustainable, affordable and integrated.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

2. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the social investment fund. (AQO 2643/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Following Executive agreement on the final operation of the social investment fund (SIF), I can confirm that membership of the community and political steering groups has been finalised, and members have been officially appointed and notified. They will participate in a workshop scheduled for 17 October and 18 October. A council officer from each zone will also take part in the workshop. The names of the council officers who have been nominated are outlined in the published list. However, the formal appointment of the four statutory and two business representatives will be made after the workshop.

The workshop provides an opportunity for the steering groups to familiarise themselves with each other and formally meet officials. Very usefully, the groups will also have the chance to work with the technical assistance provider allocated to their zone. We have set aside a four-month period for the area planning process, and we expect to have completed plans for the proposed projects, supported by economic appraisals, with the Department by February 2013.

Considerable work has already been done to ensure that appropriate and robust structures are in place for the effective delivery of the area-based plans. We are confident that that is the case and that we are now in a position to achieve maximum impact from the fund. The focus going forward will be on assisting communities to identify and evidence objective need and to develop robust area plans that will improve the lives of the people living in the prioritised areas.

We are determined to make a real and lasting difference to the most vulnerable in our society. The social investment fund, together with our announcement last week of six Delivering Social Change signature projects, demonstrates our commitment to address some of our most intractable social and economic issues.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

I thank the First Minister for his answer. What is the relationship between the announcement you made last week on Delivering Social Change and the social investment fund?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

This gives me an opportunity to indicate that the SIF zones, in the work that they will do, will not act on their own, outside of everything else that is going on in government. They will be part of the integration of all the services that we provide. DSD and other Departments will provide other projects in the same kinds of areas. It is important to recognise that the social investment fund will enjoy the benefits announced by the deputy First Minister and me. Indeed, we have structured at least one of those in the social investment zones. It is important to recognise that we are looking not simply at the themes outlined in the social investment fund document but at how they play into everything else that government is doing to ensure that what we are asking for from SIF is real added value and is additional to what Departments and other agencies are doing.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Given the delays so far, what guarantees do we have that the £80 million set aside for the social investment fund will be spent within the four-year timetable that was set out at the launch?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

We will listen to what the steering groups have to say. If they are looking for more time, we will seriously consider that. There is a difficulty, particularly if people are looking at capital schemes, about whether that can be realised within the time left in the CSR period. So, we will look at that. The £80 million is ring-fenced, but, if it appears that the groups require more time, we would be sympathetic to that.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the First Minister for his responses so far and, despite my different political views, extend my genuine congratulations on the new addition to the Robinson family.

It has taken about 20 months to get to the point of appointing the steering groups. I declare an interest as a member of the east Belfast steering group. Is the three-and-a-half to four months now available to the groups to develop those area plans a reasonable amount of time?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

If it is not, we will, of course, listen to them. The people whom we have appointed will know their area well, know the needs in their area and will, no doubt, be able to put proposals together. If they require more time, again, we will look at that. I do not like the suggestion of delay; we have in fact grown an organisation from the grass roots. This is something completely new and different and something that people will probably want to replicate for other areas of government work. It was more important for us to be sure that we got it right rather than getting it quickly. That is why we ring-fenced the money — to ensure that there would be no funding loss to local communities because they moved from one Budget year to another.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. Given the slower than expected spend, have the First Minister and deputy First Minister considered rolling the social investment fund programme into the next CSR period rather than rushing to spend the £80 million in the final two years of this one, given the obvious pressure that that would put on the zones?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I have no doubt that groups will be able to come forward with a series of proposals about how the money should be spent. I am pretty confident, having spoken to a number of them, that they know what their areas need and will come forward with proposals. When it comes to issues such as current expenditure, very clearly you can spend it on an annual basis as you move towards the end of the initial fund period. However, if you are talking about the construction of buildings or infrastructure in some form, I can say that there is a long lead-in to the planning process, the drawing up of plans for whatever the building may be and the construction. It might be optimistic to imagine that that could all be done within the initial period. Therefore, we may well have to look at putting it into the first year, at least, of the next CSR period.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Question 3 has been withdrawn.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

4. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister for an update on the minority ethnic development fund. (AQO 2645/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will ask my colleague, junior Minister Jonathan Bell, to answer this question.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I am pleased to be able to advise the Member that an extension to the current minority ethnic fund will commence with immediate effect and will run until 31 March 2013. The information was conveyed to the minority ethnic sector last week. The extension to the fund will allow for engagement and consultation around the development of a racial equality strategy and how that relates to a longer-term fund. Officials will meet sector representatives in the very near future to discuss the fund and the strategy.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for conveying this very good news. Unfortunately, funding has been granted on a six-monthly basis in the past year and a half. I would like to hear an assurance from him that, from next April, the fund will continue and continue on a much longer basis, in order to provide continuity and certainty for the sector.

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I appreciate the concerns that have been raised. We are still working with the sector on the racial equality strategy and on what it specifically wants out of the fund. We want the strategy and the funding to be interconnected so that they can deliver both what ethnic minorities are reflecting that they need and the support requirements that they have. We will look at how the fund can continue to deliver the key service that the sector provides on the ground. The strategy should reflect what the sector says as a whole. Therefore, we need to look towards the strategy and see how we can connect it with the fund. I have spoken to many of the groups, and they are happy that, with this extension, they will be able to continue the level of service that they have been providing. We will look at it in connection with the strategy.

One thing that I will make clear — we have raised this at the all-party group meetings, and I appreciate the work that Ms Lo and my colleague David McIlveen have done in this respect — is that the principles of the shared aims of eliminating racial inequality, of equal protection, of equality of service provision and of participation, dialogue and capacity building will be at the heart of the new strategy, which I hope will connect fully with the new fund. We will reveal details of both when we can.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I welcome the announcement of the six-month funding extension, which will provide much-needed services. However, given that the extension is to pre-existing funding, is there opportunity or scope for groups not currently being funded to secure funding during these six months?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I appreciate the work that the Member does in south Belfast with the minority ethnic community and the meetings that he has had with me in recent times in connection with that work.

Last week's announcement that the funding will be extended was made to allow the groups that are currently being funded to continue to receive funding, and I think that that has been welcomed right across the minority ethnic sector. Development or core funding was awarded to 24 organisations for 2011-12. Twenty-two of those groups continue to be funded.

A deficit over the next six months clearly exists for groups that were not previously funded, as the Member points out. Our officials will work with those groups, and they are currently looking at what options may be available to include in the new funding period those not currently being funded.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I welcome the racial equality strategy. The junior Minister knows my concerns about strategies that do not turn into actions. Will we be guaranteed no more brinkmanship over payment so that groups will not have to wait until 31 March and beyond to get their next bit of funding and will instead have a little bit of comfort?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I announced at the very start not a strategy but that the funding is immediately in place, is available now and will run until 31 March 2013. We will certainly work with all the groups, not only on the strategy but with our racial equality panel. We will continue to look at times when there is a need for crisis funding, and we will work right across the sector to try to ensure that service provision is as good as it can be. The funding is there with immediate effect until 31 March 2013. That is the action.

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

I welcome the junior Minister's news. Does he agree that minority ethnic communities unfortunately remain the target of vile racism from certain sections? Will he join me in condemning the distribution of a racist leaflet in south Belfast over the weekend by the National Front and add his voice to the voices of all the other people in the community who are asking for any information out there to be passed on to the police?

Jonathan Bell (DUP, Strangford)

I condemn fully any form of criminal behaviour that involves racism, homophobia or attacks on people's homes, property or ethnic heritage and life. That goes without saying. There is no truck with that at any level. In my role in the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, I took part in the NIACRO seminar on hate crime. Hate crime takes many forms. I will not single out any particular one. Last weekend, in my constituency, there was a horrific attack on a woman who has three children. Last Thursday night or Friday morning, children could have burned to death in my constituency, as we have just seen happen in Essex. Wherever there is hatred, we will seek to do all in our power to oppose it and to inform and educate people. We know that people from ethnic minorities a make significant contribution to our educational life. My wife is a nurse, so I know of the contribution that they make to nursing. We know of the contribution that they make to business and the hospitality sector. Overall, it is a positive contribution. Northern Ireland should be and will be a welcoming place for all of its people. We will do all in our power to ensure that that happens. Where it does not happen, we will seek, through the Department of Justice, to ensure that those responsible are brought before the courts and made amenable for their actions.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mr Lunn is not in his place to ask question 5.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

6. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what action they are taking to ensure that the problems with administering the social investment fund are not replicated in other programmes. (AQO 2647/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

As it is an Executive fund, moneys allocated to the social investment fund do not sit in the OFMDFM budget line but are held centrally by the Department of Finance and Personnel. In addition, the central fund of £80 million is ring-fenced. Over the next few years, we will consult steering groups on both the reprofiling of spend and the length of the first implementation period for area-based plans.

I am not clear what problems Mr Cree refers to in his question, as we have not yet administered the social investment fund. If he refers to the time that we spent ensuring that the right structures and processes were in place, I can assure him that that was time well spent. Given the fund's scale and nature, we have expended significant effort and resources on researching best practice and learning from other initiatives. We are determined that the administration of the social investment fund will prove innovative and workable.

Part of the process was a very useful and informative public consultation. Having listened to the views expressed by organisations and individuals, we significantly changed the operation of the fund so that it reflected that useful feedback. It is worth recording that the feedback on the concept of the fund and its four key strategic aims and objectives was almost universally positive.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his response. He indicated that the time frame may be a little bit longer depending on what transpires. Will he assure me that the fund will be delivered in line with its original objectives and meet the Programme for Government commitments? Does he have any views on the likely duplication of European funds post 2013?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

Of course, I assure the Member that, in line with what was the intention, the themes will remain the same. We are now setting up the steering groups. Their kernel, the community and political representatives, is in place, and representatives from the statutory and business sectors will follow shortly. All of that remains as originally intended.

Obviously, the timetable is tight for some of the spend to take place. We will look at that carefully. We will not, however, reduce the spend available to groups. It may be available on a slightly longer timetable. The deputy First Minister and I are still considering schemes, and we will monitor and assess them as they are processed. We will look at an extension of the process or even at a long-term future for the scheme beyond the initial period that we outlined.

We are confident that it was essential that the groundwork was done, and I believe that it will prove beneficial as we move into the area planning stage. I hope that the political representatives who will be present will, alongside and in tandem with the community sector and other representatives, bring forward some innovative schemes. The kind of seminar that we hold helps to look at how good ideas in one area might also work in another area.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

I thank the First Minister for his answers to date. Could the social investment fund fund additional literacy and numeracy support, if communities want that in their area, to support the project that he and the deputy First Minister announced last week?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

The deputy First Minister and I announced a scheme that has been widely welcomed by parents, the general community, teachers and even the press. It will bring real benefit. It will take time for the Department of Education to be able to roll it out. It is spread across the whole of Northern Ireland. It could well be that some of the social investment areas will determine that they need something by way of a top-up in their area because of a particular need. It is one of the themes in the SIF document, so it is allowable if it is something that they want to do. The whole idea of the fund is to allow areas to determine for themselves the way in which their area is at present deficient and how it could be helped by some additional funding. If it comes from the grass roots, it by all means lies in the processes of the fund.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answers to date. How does the social investment fund sit in the overall Delivering Social Change framework?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

They are complementary. Indeed, one could look even at neighbourhood renewal and other projects that are under way. All of them can work together. That is the importance of having the local input: they will know what is happening in their area from other Departments and schemes, they can see where the deficit is, and they can seek to meet it through the fund. By all means, we are happy to continue the work that we did earlier this week on the general issues involved. The Department will have a role in that regard. As I indicated, what happens under the SIF should be additional to what we do in other areas.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

7. asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister what steps are being taken to address the parades issue in advance of next year. (AQO 2648/11-15)

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

There has been a discussion at Executive level on parades and associated protests. At the last meeting of party leaders, we discussed the best approach to establishing the views of all stakeholders. It was agreed that suggestions would be brought to a further meeting on the best process to advance the issue. The right to assembly, the right to express cultural identity, the right to protest and the rights of those in and living in proximity to parades are at the heart of the proposals agreed at Hillsborough on parades and protests. The principles of mutual respect and tolerance are key to resolving the issue of disputed parades and counterparades. The deputy First Minister and I have met various participants on both sides of the argument. We remain committed to facilitating discussions in any way that is helpful. We have indicated to Executive colleagues our determination to agree a process on taking this complex issue forward before the year ends.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the First Minister for his statement. Will he give a commitment that OFMDFM will consult all parties as well as the party leaders' group and that any alternative to the Parades Commission is simply not that that came from the Hillsborough agreement?

Peter Robinson (DUP, Belfast East)

I would have thought that we were consulting all parties when we talked to party leaders, unless the Member is saying that party leaders are not representative of the party that they lead. I hope that we have met that. Of course, the parties are all represented on the Executive as well. There is no intention on the part of the Executive or party leaders to stifle discussion and debate on these issues; we want it to be as wide as possible. We want to encourage people to take part. That is why we are looking at what the processes will be so that people can feed into them.

This is a very serious issue. We all become very aware of it when we get round to June and July, but it is now that we need to deal with the issue. We are determined to try to get the process under way before the end of the year. I hope that everybody will come forward in a constructive manner to attempt to resolve these issues, which are toxic in our society.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the alleviation works on the Sullatober Water in Carrickfergus. (AQO 2657/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I am pleased to inform my colleague that the Sullatober flood alleviation scheme, which provides protection to 28 properties, was completed in September. The area of park occupied during the construction of the scheme has also been fully reinstated and is open to the public.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

That was a necessary and welcome project. However, a four-month project took 13 months to be delivered on the ground. What were the financial implications of that nine-month delay?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The scheme involved a considerable amount of earthworks, and the prolonged wet weather we experienced meant that the works took longer than originally anticipated. Additional works were also required to reinforce the banks of the pond, and staff were diverted from the project to deal with the impacts of flooding elsewhere.

I am pleased to say that the original estimated cost at the project's feasibility stage was £350,000 and we were able to deliver the project for £250,000. That is, obviously, a good news story.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. Will the Minister outline what major flood alleviation infrastructure schemes are planned for 2012-13?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As well as undertaking a number of minor schemes, the Rivers Agency has also completed construction of the Lodge Burn drainage infrastructure scheme at Coleraine, will complete the refurbishment of the Portna sluice gates, will commence construction of the Ballygawley flood alleviation scheme and will complete the construction of interim flood alleviation works in east Belfast. So there is quite a big programme of work for the Rivers Agency in the time ahead.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

2. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the implementation of the Forestry Act (Northern Ireland) 2010. (AQO 2658/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The commencement order of September 2010 brought into force most of the provisions of the Forestry Act 2010. Since then, under section 1 of the Act, we have continued to develop forestry land to deliver a wide variety of ecosystem services, including providing 400,000 cubic metres of timber to underpin a wood-using industry that provides 1,000 jobs a year, facilitating millions of visits to forests for recreation and tourism, and providing secure habitats for many birds and animals, some of which are rare in Ireland and are also important for achieving conservation objectives in a European context.

Under section 4, which provides for other use of forestry land, we have developed a business case for the commercial development of forestry land for wind farms and tourism. Under section 7, we have entered into formal arrangements with district councils to improve the recreational infrastructure of forests, and construction is under way to build footpaths in Fermanagh and cycle trails in the Newry and Armagh and Down districts. Under section 6(3), work is ongoing to develop a register of the location and size of woodlands and their types of trees. Preliminary results were published on our website in March, which showed a welcome increase in the area of woodland to about 8% of land area.

We still have to implement the provisions that create a public right of pedestrian access to forestry land, that restrict the felling of trees in woodlands and, if the need is established by affirmative resolution of the Assembly, that regulate the control of animals in land adjacent to forests. The provisions for public right of access and the restriction of felling depend on making subordinate legislation, and we are working on that. Following major consultation last year on the by-laws and the draft felling regulations, those have been substantially revised, and I expect to introduce the regulations before the end of this Assembly session. In my view, there is no pressing need to regulate the control of animals in land adjacent to forests at this stage.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I am very grateful to the Minister for her detailed response. Are there any other aspects of the Act that the Minister considers might need to be improved at a later date through secondary legislation?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said in my original answer, much of the legislation has gone through and the regulations have come forward. We had to do some work on the by-laws. There was obviously a considerable amount of interest in that area, and I thank everybody for raising all the issues — lots of views were expressed. We were able to take on board some of the suggested changes, and I hope to bring regulations to the Assembly before the end of this session.

I do not think that there is anything outstanding that is of worry. There is lots of potential in our forests, particularly in social and recreational use, and the potential use of Forest Service land for wind turbines. There is lots of potential, and, as I said, there is nothing of concern at the minute that has not come forward under the Act.

Joe Byrne (Social Democratic and Labour Party, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Can she give any indication what plans she or the Department has to develop the potential of forestry and the timber industry over the next 25 years?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very much committed to ensuring that we increase our planting, as we are aware that it is not at the level that we envisaged. We want to expand tree planting from 8% up to 12% cover, and we can do that through the woodland grant scheme and the other agri-environment schemes. I think that there is lots more potential in that, and we have set out the way forward. The strategy has been set out, and I am happy to provide the Member with that if he wishes to look at it. If we continue to work in partnership with people such as the National Trust and the Woodland Trust, there is a lot of potential for us to ensure that we increase our planting. As I said in my original answer, over 1,000 people are employed in this industry, so it is key that we support it and take all actions to do so.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Does the Act provide for recreation and leisure facilities that are compatible with forests so that the Forest Service can actively promote them?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, absolutely. The policy document, 'A Strategy to Develop the Recreational and Social Use of Our Forests' has been brought forward, and that works with, for example, local councils in promoting tourism potential. We have a brilliant natural resource that we need to use. Councils have tremendous ideas about things that have tourism potential, such as cycle paths, and, through the policy, Forest Service clearly has the remit to promote such things.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answers so far. Given the great potential that we have in our forests for participation in local interests and tourism, what is the Department doing about the lack of mountain biking facilities?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Forest Service's recreational and social use strategy that I referred to recognises that benefits can be achieved from working with our partners to ensure that mountain biking and all other recreational opportunities are fully developed.

For example, I was at the launch of a 34-kilometre multipurpose trail network at Castleward forest that was developed through close partnership between Forest Service and the National Trust. Forest Service is working with Down District Council, Newry and Mourne District Council and other partners, including the Tourist Board, to develop a 40-kilometre mountain bike trail network at Castlewellan Forest Park and Rostrevor forest. Forest Service is also working in partnership with Cookstown District Council on the development of a trails project at Davagh forest, which includes mountain bike provision.

Construction of trails in those three forests has commenced, and that will represent a significant new mountain biking resource in the North. I think that there is so much more potential for us in continuing to develop those trails. I have met many of the mountain biking organisations, and they are very keen for us to get involved with them and to promote this area. I think that there is a lot of potential there.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Ceist uimhir a trí, le do thoil.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the damage that sudden oak disease (P ramorum) causes to forests, particularly in south Down. (AQO 2659/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. P ramorum has the potential to attack a wide range of woody plants and could cause significant damage to woodland and other habitat if it were to become established. Symptoms include bleeding cankers on the tree trunk and dieback of foliage, which, in many cases, eventually lead to the death of the tree. It poses a threat to certain tree species and other ecologically important plants.

During a visit in July to Moneyscalp wood at Tollymore forest in south Down, where my Department has committed significant resources to control the P ramorum disease, I was able to see for myself the damage that that pathogen can cause. Felling of over 30 hectares of larch trees at two public forests and two private sites has been undertaken to contain the spread of the disease in the area, along with an ongoing programme to monitor and control the disease in rhododendron at private sites. My Department remains committed to managing P ramorum disease in trees, woodland and on other plants and is funding research, carried out by the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, that is looking further into host/pathogen interactions.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagraí go dtí seo. Will the Minister be making a statement about the tree disease ash dieback?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for raising that issue, as that is a relatively new disease. Although it is important to recognise that the P ramorum and P lateralis diseases in forests are causing extensive damage, press and science reports suggest that the disease that is causing the ash dieback — Chalara fraxinea — is even more damaging. Regrettably, that disease has now been found in County Leitrim, as the Department there announced on Friday.

I hope that there is still time for us, both North and South, to work together to find and eradicate the disease wherever it occurs. To give ourselves the best chance of that, I have decided to move to bring in emergency legislation to ban the importation or movement of ash trees for planting unless they are known to come from a disease-free area.

I am also concerned that untreated ash wood may be a possible pathway for disease to enter Ireland, and I am minded to extend the ban to cover that also, although I acknowledge that the movement in plants presents the greatest risk. I will work closely with Minister Simon Coveney, as we need to make sure that we have a consistent fortress-Ireland approach. I will also keep the authorities in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) informed, as this is, ultimately, a matter for EU legislation. In due course, I will announce the details of the legislation, the results of surveys and any other practical measures that need to be taken.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what is the rationale for the retention of the Agricultural Wages Board. (AQO 2660/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Agricultural Wages Board sets minimum rates of pay and conditions for workers in the agriculture and horticulture sectors, including the large proportion of migrant workers, here. In addition, as I have previously said, I firmly believe that the Agricultural Wages Board's structure is a valuable forum for wage negotiations and, importantly, is used as a benchmark for the wider agrifood industry. In November last year, I launched a public consultation on a review of the board's structure, and, following its conclusion, I gave careful consideration to the responses that were received. I believe that the decision I have now reached is in the best interests of agricultural workers here.

The Agricultural Wages Board provides higher rates of pay, more generous sick pay and greater holiday entitlement than the basic existing employment legislation. It will now continue to protect the rights of low-paid agricultural workers here, including migrant workers, by ensuring that they have enforceable employment conditions, which I believe can have only a positive impact on the sustainability of the rural economy. As we try to grow the economic potential of the agrifood sector in these difficult times, it is essential that workers in the industry are protected and have the skills not only to help the sector flourish but to encourage others to consider a career in it.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for her response thus far. Members will be aware from last week's debate on the farming crisis that the Agricultural Wages Board is powerless to do anything to ensure that farmers receive a fair wage. Has the news not yet reached Dundonald House that we have a national minimum wage that was, after all, introduced 13 years ago? Will the Minister tell the House how much the Agricultural Wages Board has cost taxpayers in that 13 years?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The cost of maintaining the Agricultural Wages Board for the past five years, about which I can speak, has been between £20,500 and £26,500. That is not an extortionate amount to run a board that is protecting the rights of agricultural workers. It is helping us to retain suitably skilled individuals who want to work in the industry. It is also helping us to attract people into the industry. The reality is that the agrifood sector is continuing to do well throughout the recession, and we have to continue to make sure that we have people who are available to work in that industry. In my view, the board is a way to protect such workers.

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

The Minister mentioned migrant workers in particular, which suggests that a number of people from here cannot be recruited. Will the Minister indicate the number of people, particularly from the migrant workforce, who are employed directly on farms and who the board seeks to protect?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I can write to the Member with a specific breakdown of figures, which I do not have with me. The key element to this is that there was a balanced approach to the consultation that we carried out; some were in favour and some against. The reality is that this board will protect those working in this industry, and we need people to stay in this industry if we are to continue to grow it. If it is to continue to be the leading light that it is throughout the recession, we need to support those workers. I am happy to provide the Member with a proper breakdown of the number of people that it employs.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the wildlife intervention programme. (AQO 2661/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

On 3 July 2012, I announced to the Assembly Agriculture and Rural Development Committee that I had asked my officials to design specific wildlife intervention research. This approach would involve testing live badgers; vaccinating and releasing the test-negative badgers; and removing the test-positive ones. The purpose of this intervention research is to assess the impact of this approach on the level of TB in badgers and cattle in the field study area. This balanced approach would provide a focus on removing diseased badgers and protecting uninfected ones. It would avoid removal of uninfected badgers and could lead, in time, to a reduction of TB in badgers and a reduced transmission of TB from this source to cattle.

The first step is to commission initial modelling work using local information. This modelling is necessary to help inform the cost and subsequent design of the study and to ensure that the design is scientifically robust. Preparatory work to gather the relevant information from our databases has been completed, and we expect results to become available from the modelling over the coming weeks and to be completed by the end of December 2012.

The outputs from that modelling will then help inform the design and costs relating to the specific test and vaccinate or remove study proposal. The design for the study will be complex, and we want to make sure we get it right. I recognise that there are many practical design, costing and approval processes to consider the progress. We will also need to conduct badger sett surveys in the study areas early next year. Subject to the completion of the necessary preparatory work, I wish the study to proceed as soon as possible next year.

Finally, I have been very encouraged by the wide spectrum of stakeholder support and engagement for the test and vaccinate or remove intervention research. Farmer, environmental and private veterinary representative organisations are participating fully through the newly constituted TB stakeholder working group on the development of this wildlife intervention research.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. The wildlife intervention programme is based solely on the Brock Stat-Pak, which has 49·3% accuracy and is only used on badgers. Is that an admission that the Department is not using the wildlife intervention programme to look at any other sources of TB in any other species of Northern Ireland wildlife?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. As I said, it is proposed that badgers will be captured and blood samples will be taken to test for the presence of TB. It is likely that the Brock Stat-Pak blood test will be used, because it is the only available test that is a set-aside test and can be completed quickly in the field, so there is less distress for the badger. Other tests require the recapture of the badger or prolonged confinement, but that is not a good approach.

I do not think it is correct to say — as I have heard you comment before — that that test is no better than tossing a coin. I do not think that is a fair way to look at it, because the specificity of the test is almost 50%. It is a very sensitive test, which means that it is highly likely to detect the most highly infected and potentially infectious badgers so that we can remove that source of infection. The test is also highly unlikely to give any false positive results, which is key, because I have no desire for any unaffected badgers to be harmed. It should be remembered that all badgers that give a negative result to the blood test will be vaccinated. If any test negative badgers are in the early stages of infection, they will be detected by subsequent blood tests, as the Stat-Pak test is able to differentiate between animals that are vaccinated and animals that are infected.

We have to look at the whole gamut of infection. People have different ideas. As you know, this is not a simple solution or a quick fix for that disease. It is a very complicated disease, which is why different approaches are being taken in England, Scotland, Wales and here. All of the research that is going on will inevitably lead to an improved situation so that in future we can hopefully get to the stage where we are free.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Has the Minister considered any geographical areas or spread with regard to the wildlife intervention programme? Has she even done any work on the amount of land that will be needed to cover the study effectively?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The test and vaccinate or remove wildlife intervention research is a completely new approach. The design for such a study is going to be very complex, and it is important that we get it right from the outset, otherwise we will be going down the wrong path.

As I said, the first step in developing the research approach is to undertake the modelling of the approach using the local information. That modelling work is necessary if we are going to be able to identify the appropriate study area, the sufficient size that we need to work on and the appropriate duration of the study to ensure that the design is scientifically robust. That modelling work is going to help inform the study design and costings. When that has been completed, which will be over the next number of months, we will know more about the scale and area of the study and be in a better position to select the most appropriate area to start off with.

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

I thank the Minister for her answers so far. Will she indicate what the budgeted cost was for delivering the programme?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member will be aware — I have told the House before — that we set aside £4 million for the TB prevalence studies, so we still have those funds. The costings that we will reach towards the end will be informed by the prevalence studies that we are involved in now. When we gather all of the information, do the local modelling and identify the area, the size of the area and how long we will need to be in the area, we will be in a better position to give final costings for the project.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

6. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the work of the Agri-Food Strategy Board. (AQO 2662/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Agri-Food Strategy Board was appointed to agree a strategic plan to develop the agrifood sector to 2020 and beyond. It has met on a number of occasions since it was established earlier this year, with recent activity concentrating on the gathering of evidence with which to develop a strategic plan for the agrifood sector. The board recently completed a call for evidence where key stakeholders were invited to feed their views on the industry to the board. The responses are currently being considered by its members.

In addition, subgroups have been established covering the main subsectors in the agrifood industry. Those are chaired by Agri-Food Strategy Board members with membership from the wider industry and will provide the board with specific input relative to each sector. That will ensure that the strategic plan, when completed, will recognise the requirements of the individual subsectors and target specific recommendations for each of them.

The chair of the board, Tony O’Neill, has briefed the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment on the work of the board to date. I understand that both presentations were well received, and Tony agreed to keep members informed of progress. I understand that the board is still on track to deliver a comprehensive strategic plan for the sector by the end of the financial year.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for that very detailed reply. In an earlier answer, you indicated the significance of the agrifood sector to the economy. Can you give us any indication of when you think the strategy will be available? You mentioned that it might be towards the end of the year.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is important that we always mention the fact that the agrifood sector continues to do well. Through the recession, with all the negative stories, agrifood continues to do well. We need to support that industry to be able to continue to do well. These are obviously particularly challenging times for the industry because of the weather and rising costs and falling prices.

We have to continue to work with the industry. That is why the work of the Agri-Food Strategy Board is so key. The strategy and associated targets will be developed in conjunction with the wider industry through not only industry representation on the board itself but wider consultation. It will be up to the new board to determine the methodology and timing of the strategy. However, I envisage that the work will be well advanced by the end of this year. I expect to take receipt of the final report by the end of this financial year.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Given the increasing international competitiveness for contracts in this industry and the growing need for our producers to tap into markets such as China and the Far East, can the Minister detail what resources she and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI) have allocated to the strategy board for that purpose?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for her question. It is absolutely an export market that we are targeting. We are targeting export-led growth, which is why the work of the Agri-Food Strategy Board is so important. DETI and I established that board earlier in the year because it is so important that we work collectively. Industry and government very much need to work together.

As regards moving forward, when we receive the final report, there will be a number of recommendations and targets. We will then decide how we work together to deliver on those. That is when we can look at the new rural development programme and how we can shape it to suit the needs of industry. We are doing this work at an ideal time. It will lead very nicely into the new rural development programme and ensure that it is shaped to meet the needs of industry from now until 2020.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagra. I attended the meeting of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment at which Mr O'Neill presented on behalf of the Agri-Food Strategy Board. One of the key issues in respect of efficient delivery of the strategy and projects on the ground is realisation of funding from the banks. He drew a very strong contrast between here and parts of England.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I ask the Member to come to his question.

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

Has there been any direct dialogue between the Minister's Department and the local banks to ensure that we have efficiency of finance so that the projects are delivered on the ground?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I can confirm to the Member that I have met all the major banks to raise the issues that he spoke of. Earlier in the year, I met the banks to discuss single farm payments and explain the process so that they could better understand the needs of the farming industry. That work is ongoing.

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

7. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, following her statement on 2 October 2012, whether her Department has any contingency plans in the event of the ground conditions being considered unsuitable for slurry spreading on or after 1 February 2013. (AQO 2663/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The contingency, in the event of ground conditions being unsuitable for slurry spreading after 1 February, is adequate slurry storage capacity. The closed spreading period for slurry is from 15 October to 31 January, which is 16 weeks. Livestock farms are required to have slurry storage with a minimum of 22 weeks' capacity. The minimum slurry storage capacity exceeds the length of the closed spreading period by six weeks. That is to ensure that farms have sufficient slurry storage in the event of weather and ground conditions being unsuitable for slurry spreading outside the closed period.

I appreciate that managing slurry can be challenging, and wet weather and ground conditions can create practical difficulties. However, since the closed period was introduced, farmers have worked hard to manage slurry and protect water quality. There has been significant investment in new slurry storage tanks, and slurry is now being used more efficiently.

Farmers have also been investing in advanced slurry spreading machines with support from my Department’s manure efficiency technology scheme (METS). Those machines provide more flexibility in the slurry spreading process and deliver a range of productive and environmental benefits. METS has provided some £2 million of grant support, and over 200 advanced spreading machines have been funded to date.

I am pleased to say that water quality in our rivers is improving, and it is important that farmers keep up the good work.

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

Thank you, Minister. What ongoing communication exists between your Department and the Department of the Environment on farming-related environmental issues?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I confirm that I regularly meet the Environment Minister on all of such issues, because quite often with a lot of the directives that we work under, particularly in this instance with the nitrates directive, NIEA is involved in the enforcement. So, we have to work very closely. That communication is ongoing at an official level and happens when needed at ministerial level.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister outline whether there are any plans to deal with obnoxious problems associated with the spreading of treated human waste on agricultural land?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is not really relevant to the substantive question, but I am happy to write to the Member.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

Has the Minister had any discussions with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) about the dangers associated with farmers not being able to spread slurry on fields, which results in a backlog and an accumulation of slurry in tanks?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Work is ongoing with the farming community to prepare for the closed period and for the difficulties that farmers might find themselves in. As I said, that is a joint piece of work — the Department of the Environment is the enforcer through NIEA, so we have to continue to work with it. I have not met the HSE on the issue, but everyone involved in that area of work regularly engages with one another, and that engagement has to happen.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

8. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to outline the progress that has been made in tackling the lack of broadband in rural areas. (AQO 2664/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As you know, last year, I announced my Department’s intention to invest a further £5 million in broadband, having previously invested £2·5 million. My officials are carrying out some analysis to produce a prioritised list of rural areas that can be fed into the DETI broadband delivery UK (BDUK) project as the list of areas to be targeted by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) funds. The analysis will consider such criteria as deprivation, access to services, concentration of rural population and the number of farmers, to name but a few. It is vital that we address broadband isolation for rural dwellers, and I will ensure that those funds are specifically targeted at rural areas to eliminate “not spots” and improve line speeds.

The BDUK project is citizen-centric, and it is clear that the vast majority of postcodes on the list published by DETI are in rural areas. That reinforces my commitment to address the issue, and I am sure that the rural Members will agree that we have to do everything we can to ensure that people living, working or conducting business in rural areas have access to services that can offer download speeds of at least two megabytes per second.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagraí go dtí seo. The Minister responded comprehensively. I was going to ask whether she will ensure that the funding that she has available will be delivered to those areas in greatest need of the facility.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Member for his comments. The issue is a key one; there is no point in just saying that we want to target rural areas and not following through on that. It is very clear to me that we have to target those areas that have no speed or very slow speeds.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

That concludes Question Time. I ask the House to take its ease before we move to the next piece of business.

(Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Molloy] in the Chair)

Question for Urgent Oral Answer

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

First and foremost, all health and social care organisations must comply with the law in Northern Ireland. The current regulatory framework, the Health and Personal Social Services (Quality, Improvement and Regulation) (Northern Ireland) Order 2003, is an additional safeguard that is applicable to a wide range of establishments and health and social care services. I have asked my officials to consider whether the current regulations apply to this establishment and, if not, whether they require amendment to ensure that they provide the appropriate safeguards as intended by the legislation.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Is it not the case that the current Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) monitoring arrangements, by virtue of the manner in which they are constituted and the powers given, would ensure only that the unborn are killed in hygienic conditions and would not address the wider concerns of how many abortions will be conducted in this clinic, on what basis they will be conducted, whether the basis will be verified and transparent and how it will be seen that all those matters are entirely within the law in Northern Ireland on abortion? Will the Minister give an assurance that, as he looks at this issue, those are the matters that, at the end of the exercise, will be addressed?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

The Member will recall that, in August, I confirmed that officials were developing a data collection system to collect robust statistics on terminations taking place in Northern Ireland. It is my intention that all terminations that take place will be recorded by this system. So, work is still ongoing on this matter.

Sue Ramsey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister is well aware that a number of concerns have been expressed about the lack of guidance, including, this morning, from the Royal College of Midwives. Can the Minister outline a definitive time frame for the introduction and publication of guidance on the issue? Can he detail the rationale for the delay in reissuing the guidelines?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Unfortunately, I cannot. The truth is that guidelines have been produced twice, and they have been taken to court twice, where judicial reviews were twice upheld, once by those who supported abortion and once by those who were opposed to abortion. So, it is a huge legal minefield to produce guidelines that will not be judicially reviewable, and therein lies the problem. I have so much different advice on how we should move this forward, and it is very challenging to identify a way forward that will be judicial review-proof. Therefore, I am not in a position to indicate when we can introduce guidelines, and, to this extent, I am sympathetic with doctors and those who work in this field.

I make it very clear that we have the law that was passed and two sets of legislation on the matter, the most recent being in 1945. In 1939, a hearing that took place under Lord Chief Justice Bourne gave considerable guidance. I know that that took place in England, but, because it was on the same law as currently applies in Northern Ireland, it is still used by our courts. So, there is very strong and clear advice, which is that, if individuals carry out abortions — terminations of pregnancy — that are outside of the legislation, they are breaking the criminal law. In breaking the criminal law, they are subject to a sentence of up to life imprisonment. To that extent, those who are engaging in the Marie Stopes clinic would be well advised to observe the law. Some journalists might think that the law is a paper tiger, but that is because it has been largely observed. If some people think that they can get away with not observing the law, they may find that it is not a paper tiger but one with a lot of teeth. I caution any physician who would seek to challenge it.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I understand that the courts have instructed the Minister to provide guidance on abortion, but does he accept that the issue is more for the Department of Justice than the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

In so far as it is criminal law, it is very much a matter covered by criminal justice. As the Abortion Act 1967 does not apply in Northern Ireland, abortion here is regulated by criminal law and clarified by case law, as I identified. I have the responsibility for ensuring the health and social care of the population, and Minister Ford has the responsibility for the criminal law in Northern Ireland. We will provide the aftercare for women who have had an abortion, whether in Northern Ireland or elsewhere, but a lot of these matters are for criminal justice. I have instructed my Chief Medical Officer to contact the Chief Constable and the permanent secretary in the Department of Justice to indicate to them where we believe the law lies and to discover what action they intend to take.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

It is evident that the Marie Stopes website promotes abortion. Will you confirm that, in the absence of guidance, there is no requirement for all other options to be presented by someone working in this field before abortion is presented as an option?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

We are back to the criminal law. If Marie Stopes is advising people that they can have an abortion before the period of nine weeks, as they indicate, and that it wishes to carry out abortions in instances where the life of the mother is not under threat and the permanent or long-term mental health of the woman involved is not impacted on, it would clearly be breaking the criminal law. I suggest that doing the latter in terms of mental health could not be managed in a short period. I think that it will have to be done to royal college standards. Marie Stopes should be very cautious about what it does here, and we will ensure that the law is fulfilled.

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

Given that the position of the SDLP and all major parties in the House is that we do not the support the extension of the 1967 Act to this jurisdiction and that the context for termination within the current legal framework is very clear — a healthcare context — will the Minister please confirm to me that he considers it his duty to bring forward guidance? I appeal to him, in the interests of society and health, to do so at the earliest possible date.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, I do. It is my strong desire to bring forward very clear and adequate regulations. On a personal level, I want to do that, and I also want to do it because it is an instruction from the court, and I want to show due respect to the court. I have outlined previously the difficulties that we have, and my suspicion is that whatever guidelines we bring forward will be challenged by someone. It is very difficult, therefore, to ensure that they are bomb-proof when it comes to judicial reviews, because both previous sets of guidelines were overturned in court.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Given that the organisation has come to Northern Ireland quite quietly and quickly, will the Minister explain why, if his Department knew about it, guidance and clarification was not issued as soon as he and the Department were aware that it was coming?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I am not sure what the Member means by "guidance and clarification"; I do not know whether he is asking about the Marie Stopes clinic or about the two previous answers that I gave to other Members.

I am not exactly sure of the Alliance Party's position when it comes to Marie Stopes. Some members may welcome it; others may not be so welcoming of abortion coming to Northern Ireland. We will see who wins the day in the Alliance Party. We saw who won the day recently on other issues.

The Marie Stopes clinic may have been capable of being regulated. It depends on the nature of the work and those carrying it out. It can only be properly assessed when we get to this point, which is somewhat unfortunate. Nonetheless, we will make every effort to ensure that full and adequate regulation is applied to that organisation, and we will work very closely with all other organisations to ensure that that is the case.

We will seek to ensure that, in Northern Ireland, the law is not broken. We have made it very clear how the law stands in Northern Ireland on abortion . I am totally and wholly opposed to the application of the 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland. Were the time reduced to 12 weeks, I would still be opposed to its application to Northern Ireland. That is the nature of it. I do not think that there is any appetite for abortion on demand in Northern Ireland. I trust that that will be the case in the future and that the Assembly will show due respect for the public.