Northern Ireland Assembly, 26 February 2013

509 contributions from 66 members. The official report.

Speaker's Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I advise Members that I will be absent from the Assembly on Monday 4 March on official Assembly business.

Ministerial Statements

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement on my proposals for social housing following the fundamental review of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE). Further to my written statement to the Assembly on 9 January, I want to take this opportunity to address Assembly colleagues and provide more information on the proposed new structures.

The change in structures is required to ensure that we can continue to deliver well-maintained housing stock, improve the focus on strategy and ensure value for money for taxpayers in the future. That restructuring should not be approached with anxiety. Rather, it is an opportunity for us to become more efficient and innovative in delivering and maintaining social housing to taxpayers and tenants alike.

Over the past few years, there have been a number of reports that recommended that it was time to review the structures to ensure future service delivery. In particular, the Savills stock condition survey report on the NIHE housing stock, which was published in May 2009, identified that over £5 billion of investment would be required over the next 30 years to maintain the current NIHE stock, which Northern Ireland obviously cannot afford. It is important that we look at innovative and sustainable ways of providing social housing, in particular how best we can use the capital value of the housing stock and the rental income to secure borrowing to meet the future need.

I want to stress from the outset that I view this as the start of a process of discussion and deliberation during which my Department will engage and consult widely with key stakeholders to develop the detail behind these high-level proposals and to ensure that there is consensus and agreement. I am committed to working closely with the Social Development Committee and other stakeholders throughout this process.

The Housing Executive has a long track record over the past 40 years of improving social housing stock. My proposals for the reform of social housing are about acknowledging the past achievements in social housing provision whilst clearly focusing on future sustainability and delivery for the benefit of tenants and the taxpayer. The fundamental review of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in 2011 found that the current model and structures no longer allowed optimal delivery of either strategic housing or landlord services. The consensus from a series of meetings with stakeholders concluded that the “do nothing” option was not a realistic solution.

Over the past few weeks since I made the written statement, there has been a lot of unhelpful and perhaps uninformed speculation about my proposals. In light of that and before I outline the proposals, let me say something about what they are not. They are not fully agreed detailed proposals. They are a high-level vision and strategic direction of travel that brings to a new stage much of the discussion and debate that there has been about reform of social housing over the past number of years. It removes the uncertainty about what we are trying to achieve and allows open debate, discussion and consultation on how we can achieve that vision to ensure that we have consensus and agreement. They are not about abolishing the Housing Executive. They are about improving the structures for the delivery of those functions. They do not herald large-scale job losses, and, as I have made clear, the staff in the Housing Executive currently delivering landlord and non-landlord functions will still have to deliver those functions but in different, more focused and financially sustainable structures.

By the end of March 2015, I aim to have in place a sustainable housing system that delivers regional social housing needs through new landlord structures and housing associations and is strategically directed, governed and regulated. There are several proposals that I wish to be explored and developed. First, the Department will continue to have responsibility for overall housing strategy, policy, legislation and funding. Such a model recognises the key role of the Minister, the Executive and the Assembly in establishing and scrutinising the overall housing strategy and priorities for Northern Ireland. My publication of the draft housing strategy for Northern Ireland, 'Facing the Future', on 15 October clearly shows the lead role that is expected of and should be delivered by the Minister and the Department responsible for housing.

Secondly, I want to ensure robust regulation and inspection of the housing sector. That is an essential element of any new structures. The Department operates a robust regulation and inspection regime that provides assurance to the Minister and accounting officer on the quality of services provided by and governance of the housing sector. I want the landlord function of the Housing Executive to clearly operate in that regime, be subject to inspection and be required to register with the Department, as do all other social housing providers. I propose to expand on the existing powers of regulation to include additional powers of intervention and direction where shortcomings are found. That will be within a robust regulatory framework that provides assurances to me, as Minister, and to the Committee that social housing providers that receive public funds are operating appropriately.

In the context of a rent-setting regime, I propose that an independent social housing rent panel is established to agree annual rent levels within the parameters of a fiscal rental policy based on affordability set by me, as Minister, and subject to the scrutiny of the Assembly. This is a critical issue, and it is important to stress that rent policy will be set by the Minister.

I intend that the current Housing Executive non-landlord functions will fall under the remit of a Northern Ireland regional housing body. A number of key housing operations and services currently undertaken by the Housing Executive will need to be delivered at a regional level. This will be a body of housing professionals and experts providing and delivering key operational strategies and services — in effect, the non-landlord functions — including but not limited to administration of the common selection scheme; assessment of need; the social housing development programme; warm homes; and Supporting People. I am clear that these key functions will remain with the regional housing body. Currently, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive is classified as a public corporation. The development of these proposals will require legislative change and include consideration of the most appropriate vehicle for such a body — for example, a non-departmental public body or an agency. In either case, there will be a need to review the governance and board structures to take account of the legislative changes and the new roles and responsibilities.

I support the case for separating the landlord function to both allow appropriate focus on this area of service provision to tenants and to ensure that the landlord function can access private funding to allow suitable investment. The case for the separation of the new landlord function and the positioning of it within the housing association movement is dependent on agreement on the financial considerations, notably the reclassification of the new body being outwith the public sector. Key to this and central to the consideration of the right structures — this is why I referred to the housing association movement — is that we need structures that will be acceptable to and therefore funded by the financial institutions. They will need to have the confidence of the financial institutions. The design process will consider how this can be achieved, looking at the current housing association model and the potential for bespoke bodies to take this forward. Another consideration is how to effectively engage tenants in this process to ensure a focus on tenant services and social housing delivery and improvement. I have no preconceptions of how many landlords there will be, as this will be subject to further analysis, including financial consideration, economic appraisals and engagement with key stakeholders.

To establish effective local government liaison, I propose to review the role of the Housing Council. The Housing Council was established in 1971 and is an advisory and consultative body that considers any matter affecting housing referred to it by the Department or the Housing Executive. The Housing Council is made up of one nominee from each of the current 26 councils. In considering the proposed new housing structures, I was mindful of the need to look at the role of the Housing Council, both in this context and taking account of the role of the Assembly and Assembly scrutiny, and the local government reform proposals and the future functions of councils. The Housing Council in its present format and structure is not the best model for the new system. I propose to consult on the best means to achieve local council engagement in relation to housing matters.

My departmental officials have commenced the programme of work to explore and develop these proposals, the first steps of which have only begun since the written statement was made. On the day that the statement was made, my officials held discussions with the chief executive and the Housing Executive director of personnel and management services to address primary staff concerns and to work jointly to allay staff anxieties. My officials and I have met other stakeholders in the few short weeks since the written statement was issued — the NIHE board, NIPSA, the Social Development Committee, the Housing Council and the chief executive of the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations — to further dialogue that began under the review of the NIHE and to begin the process of collaborative working on taking the proposals forward and addressing concerns. In particular, the Social Development Committee has a key part to play in providing scrutiny of the design of the new structures.

My Department is developing a programme of work to fully explore and design my proposals. A programme board has been established that includes the chief executive of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, to provide oversight of the delivery of this reform. The board's first meeting was held on 28 January.

I am committed to working collaboratively on this process, and I am keen to explore all options for the delivery of sustainable social housing both for tenants and taxpayers. I am committed to ensuring that the implications for staff arising from future structural changes are carefully managed. A detailed programme of projects will be established to deliver reform changes, and human resource issues will be a key aspect of that. Processes for communication and engagement with staff and their representatives will be an important part of the overall work programme.

I want to make one matter very clear. Much has been achieved in housing over the past 40 years. However, changes need to occur if we want to ensure that social housing in Northern Ireland can be a success for the next 40 years. The PwC report concluded and stakeholders agreed:

"'do nothing' is not an option."

Now is the time for change.

The strategic direction, as set out in my proposed plans, is not without its challenges. However, it sets out a compelling and sustainable future vision for new structures to support the future development and delivery of housing in Northern Ireland. It is my belief that this is what we need to do to support the most vulnerable in our society, and my Executive colleagues have supported the exploration of the proposals. I trust that colleagues across the Chamber will also endorse this approach.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. With your indulgence, I will make a few remarks on behalf of the Social Development Committee. I thank the Minister for his statement to the Assembly.

I have had the opportunity to discuss some of these matters at length with the Minister prior to this. The Committee has taken a keen interest in the need to take housing issues forward in this mandate. Although welfare reform has rightly dominated the Committee's programme of work until now, the Committee has argued the need for an overarching housing strategy. The future provision of social housing is, of course, a key element of that.

The Committee has acknowledged the Minister's assurance that this announcement heralds almost a blank canvas that will provide the opportunity for all stakeholders, including tenants, to have a real say in shaping social housing going into the future. The Committee also welcomes the Minister's confirmation that there are no predetermined outcomes for the precise model for the delivery of the landlord function.

The Committee is keen to work with the Minister and his Department in the time ahead, and it is committed to doing so not only so that it can scrutinise the Department's work in this very important area of social policy but so that it can help the Minister and his Department to shape the proposals. As the Minister said, the aim is to make sure that this is a positive development — I believe that it can and will be — so that we will end this mandate setting housing structures and can go into the next mandate and the next 20 or 30 years on a very positive and solid foundation. That means that we can ensure that the people we collectively represent who are in need of a home will get that home and a roof over their head.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I also thank the Minister for his statement. One of the issues that will be in the mind of many Housing Executive tenants will be the sort of benefits that can come from this reform package. Will the Minister give some details of any stock transfers that have already taken place and say how the issue of improvements and rents can be dealt with?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I will address the transfer of stock to housing associations. The first to take place was the Rinmore scheme in Londonderry. That was a good example. There were a total of 55 houses in Rinmore, an area in Creggan in Londonderry. That scheme transferred from the Housing Executive to Apex. Of the 55 properties, 14 have had improvements completed, with the rent charge increasing accordingly. Four are currently undergoing improvements, and the rent charge has not changed at this stage. Improvements to the remaining 37 properties have not yet commenced, and, again, the rent charge has not changed.

There are good examples of work that will be carried forward: multi-element improvements to kitchens, rewiring bathrooms and improving installation and energy efficiency. There are two critical factors in the transfer. First, tenants have been able to benefit from properties that have been significantly improved through the housing association being able to lever in private finance to fund the work, which is something that simply would not have been achieved from the public purse alone. Secondly, throughout the process, tenants were made fully aware of the implications of the transfer for them, not only in improving their home but in other matters.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his long statement. It is disappointing that he said little apart from wishing to "explore" and "develop" proposals for which there is already scant detail. Given that, in July 2012, the Minister accused the Housing Executive of having failed its tenants, I am sure that neither he nor his party, for a series of other reasons, will be sad to see it go. Will he tell us about the future for undeveloped land owned by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member refers to comments that I made about failures and shortcomings in the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. I am sure that the concerns that I expressed at that time were shared by Members from all parties across the Chamber, because there were serious matters to do with the quality of delivery for tenants and serious questions about the value for money of some of the management and maintenance contracts.

I have had real concerns about the operation of the Housing Executive since coming into the Department. Therefore, I believe that we are going in the right direction of travel. We are in a better place than we were. We have a new chairman and vice-chairman who have brought great expertise and experience to the Housing Executive, and that has been transformative. We also have a new chief executive. A lot of good work is going on, and there is a good relationship there moving forward.

The Member asked questions about the structure and so on. All those things will be teased out over the next while. The land currently in the ownership of the Housing Executive is a valuable asset. There is work to be done on all these things. We want to ensure that a full business case is worked out for every aspect of the process and every opportunity and every possible line of travel is explored. I do not want to start closing down anything at this stage. We need to start exploring ways in which to get the best outcome and best value for tenants and taxpayers.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the proper manner in which it was brought to the House. The Minister's aim to have a new system and new structures in place by the end of this mandate is ambitious. On the landlord function, his statement indicates the potential for bespoke bodies to be looked at. At this early stage, can the Minister give any details of how those bespoke bodies might look or operate?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

There are two points there. First, we should be ambitious, and the people of Northern Ireland deserve that we be ambitious, so that we get the best possible outcome as soon as possible. That is for the benefit of tenants and the taxpayer. Secondly, it would be presumptuous of and inappropriate for me to spell out at this stage what the bespoke structures might be. That is the work that the programme oversight body now needs to take forward . Every opportunity will be afforded for input. If the Member has particular views and ideas, those will certainly be welcomed. We will take views from the Social Development Committee and other stakeholders as we move forward.

I say in passing — I made this comment earlier — that it is important that we make sure that, whatever form it takes, the landlord function has the confidence of the financial institutions so that we get the benefit of drawing in private sector money.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I must say that it is somewhat concerning and startling that a statement of this significance on the most fundamental reform of housing in years has failed to make any reference to the deeply segregated nature of housing in Northern Ireland. I ask the Minister what support and challenges he will give to the new structures to ensure that they meet the Belfast Agreement requirement to encourage and facilitate shared and mixed housing in Northern Ireland.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

That point has been made on a number of occasions by Members of the Alliance Party. I will simply say that we are dealing here with the social housing sector. Segregation is also a factor in the private sector. Many areas where everyone is a homeowner are as deeply segregated as any other, so it is not unique to the social housing sector. Moving forward, we also need to bear it in mind that social housing segregation can often also be related to other forms of segregation. The Member will be aware that we have segregated education and we have sporting organisations that are effectively segregated. All these things are interrelated because they are all part of society, and they impact on each other and on where people want and decide to live.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive statement. One of the issues that will have to be dealt with will be the significant stock transfer from the Housing Executive. Can the Minister give an indication of his assessment of the capability of the housing association sector to deal with that possible transfer?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

At the moment, the housing association sector in Northern Ireland has 34,000 houses. We have 29 associations. There are mergers going on. Six associations are currently suspended from developing, and 23 are free to develop. So, it is a mixed story. There are encouraging aspects, and there are some that are not so encouraging and require a lot of support. That having been said, even the largest association has 4,600 properties, so you are dealing with associations with fewer than 5,000 houses. We are dealing here with 90,000 stock. There is a huge disparity there. That is why, at an earlier stage, I spoke about bespoke housing associations.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh mile maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. It certainly puts more flesh on the bones of the future of housing and where the strategic direction will be over the next 30 years. However, is it not the Minister's intention to break the landlord function into three separate bodies that would see a north-western housing association, a Belfast housing association and a south-eastern housing association, each containing 30,000 houses? If that is the case, would it not be detrimental to dealing with social need and high housing demand?

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

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

On the question of whether you would break it up into three separate associations or whatever, all these things are still to be explored. There is some evidence from initial conversations with the financial institutions that they would prefer and be more favourable towards a number of housing associations or bodies rather than a single one, but all that is open to discussion over the next while. Nothing is predetermined. If that is a view that the Member wishes to put forward, I will be happy to consider it.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

I also thank the Minister for his detailed statement. In relation to good housing standards, will the restructuring of housing lead to a better standard of housing for the many tenants of the Housing Executive who live in homes without cavity walls and, therefore, have no wall insulation, which results in them facing real fuel poverty due to huge heating costs that they can ill afford?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member touches on an important point, which is that we have to face up to the backlog of work in maintaining the quality of stock. The £5 billion of investment that I said would be required over the next 30 years is a significant figure. In the short term, about £1 billion worth of work is required, and that money is simply not there at the moment.

The Member highlighted the issue of the quality of housing. There are about 9,000 social housing stock properties in Northern Ireland that date to just after the Second World War. In fact, many were built in the 1950s, without wall cavities and, therefore, have no cavity wall insulation. In the past, the issue may not have been as immediate but it certainly is now when fuel prices are rising and people are much affected by fuel poverty.

As a result of having no cavity wall insulation, those houses are very hard to heat. There can also be issues of dampness and other problems that flow from that. There needs to be major investment if we are to deal with that sort of work. I am concerned not only that we move forward with our housing development programme but that we ensure that tenants in older properties are enabled to live in a property that is fit for the present century and easy to heat. At the moment, 9,000 properties do not meet those standards, so there is a huge amount of work to be done. That was identified as a piece of work to be explored as to the best way forward.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his statement, which dispelled a little of the mist but not a lot. At the risk of sounding cynical, is the Housing Executive, having failed to keep its properties properly maintained over the years, now divesting itself of them at virtually no cost to the housing associations? How many landlords will then be there to pick up the pieces? Has any financial work or an economic appraisal been done on the whole exercise vis-à-vis switching particular estates to housing associations, presumably at a knock-down price? How can we ensure out of all of that, Minister, that new building will be going ahead on top of the maintenance that we are hoping will be done by those associations that will gain the houses?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I would encourage the Member to read the PwC report, which did quite a lot of work on exploring the best way forward. He asked whether calculations were done. Of course they were done. That was part of the PwC report. Now, as we move forward to the next stage of the process, everything will be assessed as to the financial viability, the best outcome and what produces the best result. This is all about producing a better outcome for the people of Northern Ireland, for the tenants and the taxpayers.

It is clear that many tenants — and the figure of 9,000 tenants was mentioned — are still living in post-war properties that do not have cavity wall insulation. That is simply unacceptable in this day and age. When you look at an issue such as that, the shambles over some of the maintenance contracts that we had with the Housing Executive, and the difficulties with contractors, it is clear that we need to change the situation. Doing nothing is not an option but everything will be properly assessed as we move forward.

I am not clear as to the reasons for the Member's doubts about the need for this. I think that it is absolutely essential.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. The statement referred to the strategic arm of housing; the non-landlord functions; administration of the common selection scheme; assessment of need; the social housing development programme; warm homes; and supporting people. Where does the administration of housing benefit fit in with those proposals? Will it be taken on by another Department or will it be administered by the private sector?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The issue of housing benefit is now subsumed into universal credit, so that process is being worked through the Assembly, albeit somewhat slowly.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle, Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aíre. On the ninety-odd thousand houses presently in the management of the Housing Executive, would their future not be better placed under the management of a single landlord?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Some people have suggested three; some have suggested one; I have heard people suggest five. All sorts of numbers are floating about. That is a piece of work that is still to be carried out. In due course, when we have had a full exploration and full consultation with stakeholders, the Social Development Committee and everyone with a potential input, we will come to a conclusion. It would be totally wrong, and I am sure Members would not expect me to do so, to prejudge the outcome of a consultation and deliberation that is only just starting.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In the early part of his statement, the Minister reminded us that the stock condition survey, back in 2009, showed that, over the next 30 years, there would need to be investment of £5 billion — money that we could not afford. The Minister's magic bullet seems to be to get in private money. How does he then square the circle of interesting the private sector to that extent while, at the same time, maintaining rents at an affordable level? Is that not really the challenge that the Minister faces? How does he intend to meet the financial deficit while keeping the rents at an affordable level?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

That is a question that the Member has asked previously. It is clear that £5 billion worth of work is to be done over a period of time. That would be funded through borrowing from financial institutions. That is now the practice elsewhere in the United Kingdom. Go to Glasgow or other parts of Scotland, England and Wales, and you will see that that is now the way in which housing is structured. So, we are getting in line with others who have already moved down this road. Financial institutions do have an interest in this. They are prepared to invest, if we have the right structure.

As to the level of rents, I will be setting the framework and policy within which the new social housing rent panel will operate. That will be subject to Assembly scrutiny. The panel will be an advisory body that will set annual rent levels within the overall policy framework based around the fundamental principles of affordability and sustainability. The social housing reform programme will develop the details of how the panel will be established and the parameters in which it will operate.

The Member is, I presume, also referring to the fact that, in general, housing association rents are a bit higher than Housing Executive rents. However, look, for example, at the cost to those 9,000 people living in houses with no cavity walls and no cavity wall insulation. Look at the amount of money they are spending on fuel to produce heat that is going out through the walls. Set that against any modest rent increase, and you will see that they would probably be in a better financial position than they are at the moment. Good housing that is structurally energy efficient and cuts costs is bound to be for the good of tenants. That is the direction in which we need to move.

Pam Brown (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Will he detail for the House the current subvention from the Northern Ireland block grant to the Housing Executive?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

In subvention to the Housing Executive, in 2012-13, the total funding provided from the Northern Ireland block grant is £307 million. Excluding the funding that relates to the programmes administered on behalf of DSD, the SHDP, grants, etc, the net subvention to the Housing Executive is around £75 million this year. Rental income this year is around £270 million, and, with annual increases of retail price index (RPI) plus 1%, which is the norm, rents collectable increases by about £10 million each year. That is the current level of subvention to the Housing Executive.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Le do chead, a Cheann Comhairle, ba mhaith liom ráiteas a dhéanamh ar an obair phleanáil ceantair atá déanta go data agus soiléiriú a dhéanamh ar an bhealach a ba mhian liom an próiseas a chur chun cinn le linn an trasdula i dtreo ÚSO. With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement on the area planning work that has been undertaken to date and set out how I intend to move the process forward during the transition towards the Education and Skills Authority (ESA).

In the delivery of public services, it is essential to plan for the future to ensure that provision is appropriate to best meet the needs of the population. We have a legacy of some 1,100 schools that were established along sectoral lines, without sufficient efforts to strategically plan the pattern of provision. In future, we need a planned network of educationally and financially sustainable schools that are capable of delivering the revised curriculum and the entitlement framework.

In September 2011, I commissioned the education and library boards, working with the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS) and the other sectors, to develop area plans based on meeting the future educational needs of our young people. That process was grounded in the Department’s sustainable schools policy. Seo an chéad uair ar tugadh faoi phleanáil straitéiseach le haghaidh soláthar oideachais ar an scála seo. This is the first time that strategic planning for education provision has been undertaken on that scale. It was the first time that sectors had been asked to plan together. I wanted the planning authorities to set aside individual, sectoral or institutions' needs and focus on how, as a society, we could best provide for the needs of all children and young people in an area.

The sustainable schools policy sets out the minimum number of pupils needed for schools to be deemed sustainable. Too many have focused on that minimum rather than on assessing the practicalities involved in delivering the entitlement framework as part of an education system that is fit for the 21st century. However, I have always made it clear, and I reiterate it now: area planning is not about budget cuts or school closures simply to save money. It is about strong, vibrant schools using the limited resources that we have, efficiently and effectively, to secure better outcomes for all children and young people. It is not about what is best for an institution; it is about what is best for pupils.

I turn now to the viability audit. To ensure there was a common understanding of the challenges facing education here, I believed that we needed to provide comprehensive information on each and every school. So, information on the quality of provision, enrolment levels and financial capability was drawn together for each school. They were known as the viability audits, which were published by the boards in March 2012.

For the first time, parents and the wider public had access to information about the level of pressure some schools were facing and would continue to face into the future. I think I can safely say that they sparked an important and, sometimes, heated debate. The audits were maligned in some quarters and misquoted or misused in others, but they helped us all to understand the extent of the problems facing our education system and allowed informed debate and discussions, which would not have happened previously, to occur.

Going forward, I want to ensure that schools, parents and stakeholders continue to have that information available. I want to see the ongoing mature debate that is needed to deliver practical area solutions. Therefore, today, I am reporting that my Department will build on the viability audits. My officials will identify relevant, up-to-date information at school and area level on such issues as finance, enrolment and performance, and I will require the boards, and, subsequently, ESA, to publish that information annually, commencing in April of this year. That information will be designed to give the public a clear picture of the shape of education provision in their area.

I turn now to post-primary plans. I took receipt of the post-primary plans at the end of December 2012. That followed a public consultation exercise with almost 50,000 responses. That level of response is to be welcomed. There were individual responses from parents, pupils, school governors and staff, education sectoral bodies, elected representatives and the wider public. Some responses were petitions about saving individual schools that were perceived to be under threat, while others took a more strategic view about the vision for the future of our education system.

The consultation responses recognised the underlying issues and the need for change. However, I recognise that change is never easy. Overall, there was a desire for greater clarity on the proposals, more opportunity for engagement and greater consistency across the plans. There was a call for more innovative ideas and a willingness to explore more cross-sectoral solutions.

A LeasCheann Comhairle, in moving forward with area planning, we will endeavour to take those underlying themes on board. I take this opportunity to thank those who are responsible for the development of the plans. They sought to respond to the challenges that were laid down. My Department has assessed the draft area plans against the terms of reference and guidance. Although the plans do not totally meet the terms of reference that I set out, they do, in some areas, contain sound proposals. I regard them as the foundation on which to move forward.

Some areas of the plans are well developed. For example, there are firm proposals in Lurgan for amalgamations in the Catholic maintained sector. I know that many people have done a lot of soul-searching, and I am pleased to say that, by assessing the issues realistically, a very practical solution has been arrived at that is in the best interest of young people.

In Enniskillen, the Western Education and Library Board (WELB) articulated a clear plan for the controlled and voluntary grammar sector. I have announced that that will now be advanced in planning. Again, with regard to the Western Board area, I confirm today that I am moving ahead with the Programme for Government (PFG) commitment to develop the Lisanelly site as a shared education campus and the area-planning solution for Omagh. I will inform the relevant schools' managing authorities that future investment in the Omagh area will be prioritised towards schools being built on the Lisanelly site.

Not surprisingly, there are many areas where there are a number of interrelated complexities to address. They will require a good deal more work to bring about an agreed solution.

An area-planning solution for west Belfast remains elusive. I find that unacceptable, particularly in the light of the most recent report into child poverty, which highlighted west Belfast as having the highest levels of child poverty. A proven way out of poverty is quality education. CCMS and the Commission for Catholic Education need to bring forward definitive plans that provide equality of access to quality education for all the children of west Belfast without further delay.

Also In Belfast, we are faced with a particular situation with the number of young people who currently travel into the city. Over 12,000 pupils travel into Belfast from other areas every day, and almost 10,000 of them come from the South Eastern Education and Library Board (SEELB) area. We need to ask ourselves whether that is what we want for the future. Is it sustainable economically, educationally and environmentally? I will commission a specific piece of work to look at that issue. I want all sectors to be involved. I want dialogue with schools and communities that will result in practical long-term solutions. The pattern of provision in the corridor between the South Eastern Board and the Belfast Board areas is an area on which I believe that more focused and detailed work is required. I will also ask the relevant boards to give that immediate attention.

With regard to the next steps, I have written today to the chairpersons of the boards and CCMS outlining the Department's views on each of the area plans and setting out how I plan to move forward. I have also directed that the plans that were submitted to me in December 2012 should be made available to the public on the boards’ websites.

I have highlighted specifically a number of areas where I wish to see action. They include, for all boards, further development of a single approach to area planning and the presentation and content of the area plans; introduction of an appropriate mechanism to facilitate active engagement between all sectors to ensure that each has the opportunity to influence the proposals; and development of an action plan to deal with the specific priority areas and to address gaps in the area plans.

Planning to plan is not enough. We need to build on the achievements to date and to maintain the momentum on area planning. The time for endless discussion is over. It is now time for decisions.

As we move towards ESA, my Department will provide clarity and leadership on area planning. In the coming weeks, my officials will work closely with each board and CCMS on the details of their area plans and on where further work is needed.

To co-ordinate and oversee the continuing development of area plans, I will establish an area-planning steering group to be chaired by the deputy permanent secretary. The group's work programme will be aimed at filling the gaps in the current draft plans, embedding a single approach to area planning and identifying priority areas for action in the short to medium term. Membership of the group will include the controlled, maintained, integrated and Irish-medium sectors.

The primary area plans that I commissioned were received in my Department at the end of January 2013. I have directed that they be released for consultation on 19 March, with an extended consultation period open until the end of June. That will allow for wide-ranging discussion. My intention is that dialogue at local level, taking on board the lessons learned in the post-primary process, will result in more practical and sustainable solutions, including the potential, where appropriate, for increased sharing of accommodation and resources. I am also conscious that my response to the recently published independent review of the common funding scheme is likely to impact on primary school planning in the medium to long term. However, I am clear that we cannot delay. We must press ahead with planning in the primary sector.

We must ensure that our primary education sector can continue to demonstrate its ability to perform at the highest international level, as illustrated by the recent progress in international reading literacy study (PIRLS) and trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) report. That means that we need to ensure that our schools are focused on quality of teaching and learning, not struggling to survive.

Change of this scale needs to be managed, and we will continue to take account of the constraints on recurrent and capital budgets that we are facing in the coming years. School budgets need to be used to maximise the impact for the benefit of children and young people.

I have made clear that the new school building programme needs to support strong, vibrant schools that are capable of delivering high-quality education long into the future. My recent announcements on the school building programme have been grounded in the principles of area planning and the work done to date. Investment will continue to be targeted at proposals where there is clarity and agreement on the shape of area provision. I will say to managing authorities, schools and their communities that it is now time to look to the future. Protracted debate and avoidance of decision-making will mean delayed or no investment.

Area plans for special schools were submitted to my Department in February 2012. Some of the plans included special units alongside the consideration of dedicated special school facilities. That made it difficult to determine an overall regional picture of the highly specialised facilities needed to support our most vulnerable children. The plans also predated the finalisation of the special educational needs review. I have decided that we need a co-ordinated regional assessment of future need for dedicated special schools. Therefore, I am commissioning the development of a regional plan for those schools, which will aim to be completed within six months of the commencement date.

A Cheann Comhairle, mar fhocal scoir, creidim go bhfuil réadú atá ag méadú go bhfuil athrú ag tástail agus ag tarlú. There is a growing realisation that change is needed and is happening. Area planning is the key to securing the changes needed to make our education system capable of competing with and, hopefully, exceeding the achievements of the best in the world. To make that happen, we need to be progressive and forward-thinking. Most of all, we need to show leadership. That means leadership at every level. We need to set aside any form of self-interest and put the interests of all our children and young people at the centre of the process. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I listened with interest to the Minister's statement. He referred several times to the viability audit that took place. Has he absolutely confirmed in his mind that the information in that audit is 100% accurate? There is some anecdotal information that suggests that false targets were set for some schools, which put them into stress in the audit when, in reality, only around 25 post-primary schools are in stress. Does the Minister concede that there may be issues around the accuracy of the audit?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I cannot comment on the accuracy of the audits because they have not been published. They will be published in April. However, I assure the Member that a robust process will be put in place to check the authenticity of the information in the documents. The viability audit that was published previously was proof-checked with the schools involved. I understand that all the documents were passed by the schools and managing authorities before they were published. I am aware of one or two cases in which schools questioned documents following their publication. Doubts were cast about some of the information. However, that was only in one or two cases that were brought to my attention.

I assure the Member that we will liaise with the Education Committee on the information that will be published in the documents. I am not fixated on the title "viability audits", as that may thrown up the wrong assumptions about what the document is about. We will choose an appropriate title and check with the Education Committee what information it believes should be contained in it and how that information should be validated, etc. We will move forward from there.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I welcome the Minister's statement to the House. I especially welcome his commitment to examine the ongoing practice of bussing more than 10,000 pupils from the south-eastern region in and out of Belfast each day. For seven years, I was one of those pupils, and I know only too well how long a school day can be when you are required to travel on four or five buses a day just to get to and from school. Moreover, given that many of our inner-city communities suffer from educational underachievement, that practice of feeding the proliferation of selective schools in Belfast is definitely not benefiting the communities they are there to serve. Will the Minister give a commitment to look at that when he moves forward with the focused work on this issue?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thank the Member for his question. When we look at the information about inner-city Belfast and at where some of the selective schools are placed, it is clear that they are not benefiting the local communities around them.

As you put it, 10,000 pupils from the South Eastern Education and Library Board area and 12,000 pupils in total are bussed into Belfast every day to attend school. Now, it is a major city and you would expect a certain amount of flow into it. However, questions have been asked about whether some of the selective schools are in the right place in the greater Belfast area, or whether they should go to where the main draw of their catchment is. I am not answering those questions. They have been posed to me, and we need to put in a mechanism that will bring us to the answers and how we move forward in the future.

Clearly, in education provision in inner Belfast, I have posed the question about west Belfast, but that question could also be asked of north Belfast. What is being done to ensure that those who live in inner-city Belfast or in socially deprived areas are gaining access high-quality schools? The area plans do not answer those questions, but I believe that the answers are easily accessible.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for a very welcome statement. There is much in it that we have been calling for, but I particularly welcome the, as he put it, "more opportunity for engagement". Despite the consultation process getting lots of answers, there is a still a mass of parents and teachers who do not know what is going on. When we get to the steering group, which I welcome, how will he make sure that it actually listens to principals and teachers, those who are not on it and, particularly, the voluntary grammars as well?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The role of the steering group is to examine the plans as they are currently formatted and to see how we can close the gaps in those plans. If there are dramatic changes to the plans as a result of those further discussions, and in circumstances where firmer proposals come out, there will be a need for consultation. However, in even the exercise of getting the plans in to shape, there will be a need for further discussion with local communities, schools and community leaders in those areas — whether that be informal or formal discussions around these matters. The key point that we have to get to is the decision-making. I emphasise again that future investment will be made in areas where decisions are made. Protracted conversations and the avoidance of decision-making is not the way forward for this matter.

There are lessons to be learned from the post-primary area planning process and from how the boards conducted the consultation process. I want this to be more hands on, and I want communities, school leaders and community and political leaders to be involved. That will not necessarily be a simple paper exercise; it has to be face to face as often as possible. I also want people to involve themselves not in the needs of individual schools, but in what it says on the tin. This is about area plans; let us discuss the educational needs of areas, rather than bogging ourselves down with the needs of individual schools.

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

I thank the Minister for his statement. I note his concern about "finance, enrolment and performance" and that he does not want children travelling around the country. I also note that he met the UN representative on the rights of the child recently. Will he reassure me that rural children, families and communities will have the same access to education services that is enjoyed by their urban counterparts as area planning progresses?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I assure the Member of that, and he will note that my sustainable schools policy was rural-proofed. Any future policies or decisions that flow will also be rural-proofed.

I am glad that he mentioned my meeting with the Chairperson of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. The meeting with that gentleman, who has since given a speech to representatives of the community in Belfast, was very informative. There is a responsibility on us all to ensure that the commitments of the UN rights of the child are delivered, and I ask all parties to examine their own positions and policies to ensure that they are in line with the recommendations of the UN Rights of the Child Committee.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his statement, towards the start of which is the interesting line that he wants:

"the planning authorities to set aside individual sectoral or institution needs".

Yet, from this process so far, it is hard to draw any conclusion other than it will be an exercise in area planning within existing sectors. Is the Minister prepared to give a commitment that, in the right circumstances, the Department will honour its obligation to encourage and facilitate the integrated sector and will actively consider that model, if it is the best option, taking into account parental preference and all other considerations?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I will defend robustly anywhere that my Department has stood up to its responsibilities to facilitate and promote the integrated education sector. However, as the Member said, it is a sector: can he guarantee me that, when the integrated sector goes into a room as a member of the steering group that I will set up, it will discuss education in its totality rather than the needs of the integrated sector? Will the Irish-medium sector go in and simply discuss its needs? Will the boards or indeed the CCMS go in with the same approach?

In my view, they are responsible enough to go into that steering group and discuss education needs in their totality and present their points of view on education. However, when it comes down to the planning and decision-making, I believe that all the sectors that will be represented around that table are more than capable of looking at the picture holistically, of ensuring that we come forward with plans that meet the needs of our education system in its totality and of placing a greater emphasis on sharing within education.

One of the reasons that I have established the steering group is that I am not satisfied that enough account was taken of all sectors' needs during the previous process. The Irish-medium sector and the integrated sector had lobbied me heavily to be on the previous body. I did not agree with them at that stage; but when I reflect on the current area plans, I believe that there is a need for them to be on the next steering group. They will be represented there, but as educationalists to bring forward area plans and not just to speak about the needs of their individual sectors.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Minister talks in his statement about three actions points, the second of which is to craft an inclusive consultation process. He goes on to tell us that this inclusive process:

"will include the controlled, maintained, integrated and Irish-medium sectors".

Where does the voluntary grammar sector sit in this inclusive process?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I have not ruled out the inclusion of the voluntary grammar sector. The question that I have not answered —

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

You did not rule it in.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

You have the answer as well as the question? You are brilliant. You have the answer as well as the question. Had I known that — [Interruption.]

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

Order.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

— If I had known that, I could have done without making the statement — [Interruption.]

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

Order. The Minister will resume his seat. I have to tell both of you to make your remarks through the Chair, please.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I was just saying, Mr Deputy Speaker, that if I had known that, I could have stayed at home and he could have made the statement, asked the questions and answered them.

I have not included the voluntary grammar sector because of the question of who represents it in planning at an area-based level.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Governing Bodies Association (GBA).

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Does it? The Member is hinting to me that it is the GBA. If the voluntary grammar sector comes back to me and confirms that the GBA can act as its representative body in discussions on the totality of education, I will certainly take that into consideration. However, I want to be assured that those bodies that will sit around the table are there to represent the sector that they say they will represent and will enter those discussions based on the needs of education in its totality. So, let us have that discussion. I have no difficulty with having that discussion or that confirmation. I have not ruled them out. You are right that they are not on the list, but I have not ruled them out.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement. Does he agree with me on what can be achieved by area planning? We only have to look at the unique achievements in the Strabane schools estate, with the amalgamation of the town's two post-primary schools and the ongoing amalgamation of some of the primary schools. That is one of the best examples of area planning being tried, tested and proven to work for the educational provision of our young people in Strabane. It is a good model for going forward. Does the Minister agree with that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I think Strabane is a very good example of how area planning can and should work. It has not been an easy journey for either the controlled sector or the maintained sector in Strabane in reaching the decisions that they have made, but they have reached those decisions. They have made firm decisions on the way forward. The maintained sector has moved forward with the newbuild facility at Holy Cross College, and it is moving forward from strength to strength. The controlled sector is now moving forward as well. I have confirmed that its schools will move forward with area planning. A new school will be built, which will service the needs of the entire community in the Strabane area.

That is proof, is proof were needed, that area planning can work, and area planning will be backed up by the Minister and the Department with future investment. There are other examples, such as in Lurgan, where schools are coming together. Again, there were difficult and emotional discussions, but people have made the right decisions about the future of education in the area, and it can be done. I say to other areas that, when they are in doubt, they should look around for other examples of where it is working. Strabane is a fine example of where it is working.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

The Minister has made his statement, and I certainly heard a lot of words, but, unfortunately, not a lot of substance. Nonetheless, will the Minister detail a timeline of the next steps that he referred to in the statement? He said that we need to set aside any form of self-interest. Does that include the Minister?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes, it does include the Minister. I am open and frank with the House. If I had the legislative ability — I assume that you are referring to academic selection — I would bring a proposal to the House to have the phased removal of academic selection, similar to that proposed by the previous Minister, Catríona Ruane, over a three-year period. I would bring that forward. I am not going to get agreement on that at this stage, but that does not stop me working away to persuade people to move away from academic selection.

Area planning, however, is not simply about academic selection, although academic selection does have an impact on it. We have talked about the 12,000 people travelling into Belfast, the needs of the controlled sector and the needs of the maintained sector, and stuck in the middle of that is a group of voluntary grammar schools, which need to be facilitated. I will find out how we can facilitate them, but they also need to play their part in area planning and engage with the educational partners around them. Everyone has to have a bit of give and take in relation to how we move forward with area planning. My position not being achieved does not stop area planning moving forward. Others' positions not being achieved will not stop area planning moving forward.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for his statement. Given that area plans for special schools were submitted a year ago, why has it taken so long for the announcement of a regional assessment? Are children in special schools being left behind?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

No, I do not believe that they are being left behind. We are quite lucky that our special schools estate is delivering a very good service to our young people. I introduced special needs area planning because I wanted to find out about the initial landscape of it. I used that initial plan to make a number of decisions about capital builds in relation to area planning around special needs facilities. I made a decision on a special needs school in Ballymena and one in west Belfast, the St Gerard's Educational Resource Centre, etc. So, the information has been used, but further work needs to be done as regards our special needs schools. We need to look at it on a regional basis.

The previous document that looked at special needs schools looked at units at schools, etc. I want a more focused piece of work around our special needs schools, because there is a wide travel distance for our young people travelling to some of the special needs schools.

I want to use this opportunity to wish all the young people who were, thankfully, not seriously injured in the crash this morning near Downpatrick, all the best. I understand from the latest reports that the majority of the young people are OK. The driver is shook up but, thankfully, no one was seriously injured in that accident. I wish them all the best.

No one has been left behind in area planning. I have made investments, and I want to ensure that the next piece of work that we do is more focused and more strategic.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his update, and I welcome the fact that there has been a large number of respondents to the consultation. It is clear that those voices need to be heard.

In his statement, the Minister said:

"There was a call for more innovative ideas and a willingness to explore more cross-sectoral solutions."

He also said:

“My Department has assessed the draft area plans against the terms of reference and guidance. Although the plans do not totally meet the terms of reference that I set out, in some areas, they contain sound proposals. I regard them as the foundation on which to move forward.”

Does the Minister agree that the reference to looking at cross-border solutions has not been adhered to and that much more work needs to be done by the managing authorities to assess the opportunities that lie in our education sector there? Will he outline to the House how those opportunities can be delivered, particularly in places with particular needs such as rural County Fermanagh?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I agree with the Member. I do not believe that the cross-border element of the terms of reference has been fully achieved. There remains potential for cross-border planning of our schools estate to benefit people on both sides of the border. I want the steering group to look at that as a specific piece of work. We continue to have discussions at the North/South Ministerial Council with Minister Ruairí Quinn on those matters to see how we can move that process forward.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his statement. As he is very much aware, there is a strong lobby for new schools in the Holywood area. I see that there are proposals for further discussions on the corridor between the South Eastern Education and Library Board and the Belfast Education and Library Board areas. Will the Holywood newbuilds be included in those discussions?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Yes; in general, I see the Holywood newbuilds being part of those discussions. I will meet you and a delegation from Holywood in a number of weeks' time to further discuss those matters.

As I said previously to you and to representatives of the schools, we need a firm decision in that area, so that I, as Minister, can make a proposal on the way forward. I need decisions in the local area and a confirmed area plan for the area, which has to take into account the flow into Belfast and vice versa. There is a bit more work to be done in that regard, but I look forward to the discussions with you and representatives from the area, which will assist us in moving forward towards an agreed pathway for the Holywood area.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his statement, in which he referred to the post-primary sector in Fermanagh. Where does the responsibility for the proposals lie and who will make the final decisions on their progress? Does it lie with the Department, the Western Education and Library Board or the schools' boards of governors?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

That depends on the sector. If you are referring to the controlled sector, I can say that the decisions will rest with the relevant education and library board. Decisions for the maintained sector will rest with the maintained sector. Those bodies will have to be included in the discussions on the way forward for the area planning process. That will be the deciding factor in signing off on area plans.

I made an announcement about the controlled sector in Fermanagh. I made that decision on the basis of proposals that were brought forward by the Western Education and Library Board. I agreed that those proposals were the best way forward for the controlled sector in the Fermanagh area, and they are progressing through planning.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the announcement of a new school build at Glenwood Primary School in my constituency.

The Minister mentioned west Belfast in his statement but the problems that he acknowledged apply equally in north Belfast. There are major socio-economic problems right across the constituency. Will he take urban constituencies such as North Belfast into consideration and will his steering group, when it reports to him, consider working with groups such as Integrated Services for Children and Young People in the greater Shankill area to get a viable solution to the problems that face many young people across the constituency?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

You are right. I emphasised west Belfast in my statement as an example of where decisions need to be made. Those decisions can be brought together more easily in urban areas than in rural communities, where there are longer travelling distances etc. However, we have instances in west Belfast — I will come to north Belfast in a second — of schools looking at each other across the roads and of schools on the one site divided by a fence. To me, not much area planning is required to bring a resolution to that issue.

I agree with the Member about North Belfast. I have received representations from representatives of North Belfast and the Shankill area about how we should move forward on the educational attainment of the young people in that area. That will take community involvement and the involvement of the education board and the Department. I am happy to play my part in all that as well. I am more than happy for the voices of the representative bodies in that area, which the Member referred to, to be heard as part of an area-planning process. Indeed, they need to be heard as part of that process.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for his statement. In the statement, he made reference to a number of plans in particular board areas. However, he did not mention the North Eastern Education and Library Board, which is a board that has progressed with more specific proposals than others. I imagine that the Minister has received a huge response to the proposals for schools in the Magherafelt area. Will he give us an insight into his thoughts on the way forward in the Magherafelt area? Does he recognise that there has been a lack of engagement that is resulting in increased anxiety in schools?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

The danger of using examples in a speech is that you may leave others out. My speech was between 15 and 20 minutes long, and I thought that it was long enough. If I left board areas out, it does not mean that they do not have good examples. I recognise the work on area planning that the North Eastern Education and Library Board has conducted. Indeed, some of the capital announcements that I made previously were as a result of the work that the North Eastern Education and Library Board conducted.

I am not going to give my views on the Magherafelt area, because continuing work is required on that. However, I will encourage the Member, as an elected representative of the area, to ensure that the decision process moves forward and that she uses her influence. Decisions need to be made in the Magherafelt area, particularly on the controlled sector and what provision will look like in the future. It is an area that the steering group will have to look at. As I said, it is one of those areas in which I want decisions to be made. There is still work to be done there, but it does not need to be protracted or long ended. People need to make decisions; that is the key to success. It is not up to me to tell that local area from afar what the solution is. It needs to come together, make the decision and present the rationale for that decision to me, as Minister.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister is on record saying that, although area planning itself does not have a stated purpose of ending academic selection, it will contribute to changing the educational landscape in such a way as to make academic selection more irrelevant. Will the Minister, therefore, tell the House frankly how important a tool area planning is to him in liquidating academic selection? Is that his real driver in area planning? Will he be frank and candid with the House about that?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I thought that I was frank and candid with Mr McCrea when he asked me a similar question. I am on record saying that, if I believed that legislation for a phased removal of academic selection, which my predecessor, Caitríona Ruane, promoted, would pass through the Assembly, I would bring it to the Assembly. However, I know that we will not achieve consensus on that.

Is area planning the key to removing academic selection? No, it is not. However, I believe that the more that people discuss education and the more that educational partners in the one area come together, the more irrelevant academic selection becomes. You can then provide excellent education across a range of schools, or in one school, without the need for selecting and rejecting children at 11 years of age. I do not distance myself at all from the remarks that you attributed to me. I assure the Member that area planning is not some sort of clandestine method for me to remove academic selection. However, I believe that its outcomes, the discussions with educationalists and the realisation that you do not need academic selection for educational excellence will come to reality.

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

Before calling the next Member, I will say that there is too much noise coming from the Benches. Please take private conversations outside. I call Mr Mervyn Storey.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

In his statement, the Minister refers to sectors, as other Members have done this morning. Will the Minister tell the House when CCMS will be brought into the tent or told to stay outside it? Quite clearly, the controlled sector has had enough.

Today, the Minister announced that, in March, he will progress with the area plans for primary schools. In the past 10 years, 50 controlled primary schools have closed, of which 19 were maintained schools. Ten controlled secondary schools have closed, of which three were maintained schools. No voluntary grammars have closed.

I say to the Minister and the House today that the purge on the controlled sector must come to an end. As the DUP spokesperson, I make it clear that that will have to be the case.

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

Will the Member please ask a question?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Minister give the House a clear indication and an assurance that CCMS's cavalier attitude to area planning will come to an end?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not recognise the claim that CCMS has a cavalier attitude to area planning. It is in the tent. If you want to ensure that your facilities and estate are upgraded or replaced, you have to be involved in area planning. If you are not there, I am not building. It is as simple as that.

To talk about the number of school closures is to have the wrong debate. If the Member can point me to any schools that I have closed in my tenure that I should have kept open, that is the debate that we should be having. If a school can no longer provide the education necessary to facilitate the curriculum and the achievement of first-class, world-class education systems, I am of the view that it should be closed. That is the harsh reality. For a public representative to say that a facility should be closed may be a difficult concept to grasp, but if it is the wrong facility in the wrong place, it should be closed. I do not buy into the numbers game that there have been 50 closures here and none there.

One of the methods used for primary schools and, indeed, post-primary schools by the maintained sector has been to amalgamate schools. The Department does not necessarily register the amalgamation of primary schools and of post-primary schools as a closure, although it is, in effect, the closure of one of the schools when they amalgamate on one site.

I will not play the numbers game that says that if I have to close a controlled school, I will look for a maintained school and an integrated school to close. I may be tempted to look for a voluntary grammar school, but that is a different story.

The Member makes a serious point: the voluntary grammar sector will have to include itself. I refer to Mr Morrow's comment, and we will see how we facilitate it in the discussions. Whether it be the non-selective sector in the maintained sector or the controlled sector, it should not be taking all the hits. It is everybody's responsibility to ensure that we have a sustainable schools estate.

Michelle McIlveen (DUP, Strangford)

On reading the statement, I was curious about the piece of work that the Minister is commissioning on the number of pupils travelling from the South Eastern Board area to Belfast and, in particular, how that may limit the parental choice of my constituents. Having listened to his response to Mr Hazzard, I am speechless, and that does not happen very often. The Minister is suggesting that well-established schools in Belfast may be in the wrong location. Is the Minister telling the House that he is planning to move those schools and, if so, at what cost?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I do not know why the Member is speechless, considering that the population flows out of Belfast, and so on. Over the years, it has been decided that well-established hospitals in Belfast were in the wrong place. The fact that a school has existed in point A for a number of years does not mean that it has to continue to exist on that spot. That is particularly the case if it is drawing pupils from a geographical area beyond Belfast. Why are we congesting our roads by driving pupils to school and why are we spending hundreds of thousands — perhaps millions — of pounds busing children to schools in Belfast when those schools could be built at another location that is more accessible to the draw of pupils?

However, I have no answer to any of those questions. I said in my statement that I am commissioning work that will have to include the schools that already exist in Belfast — the well-established schools that the Member refers to. Their views will have to be taken on the matter. I cannot tell the voluntary grammar schools where to place themselves. I cannot tell them where to be rebuilt. However, we have can have a conservation with them about where the best place is for them to exist in the future.

Some of the schools have already asked themselves this question: where do we see ourselves geographically 10, 15 and 20 years done the line, serving education? They are already asking themselves that question. This piece of work will be valuable, not only to the Department but to those schools as well.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a ráitis. Tuigim go bhfuil an plean ceantair do dheisceart Ard Mhacha socraithe cheana féin. D’ardaigh mé cheana féin leis an Aire an gá atá le hinfheistíocht a dhéanamh i scoil Naomh Iosaf i gCrois Mhic Lionnáin.

I thank the Minister for his statement. I understand that the area plan for south Armagh is well settled, and I have already raised with the Minister the need for investment in St Joseph's High School in Crossmaglen.

There is little reference in the Minister's statement to progress being made in many areas of the region, outside of two or three. Four years after the 'Together Towards Entitlement' report was published, is he confident that the steering group that he will establish will move the process on at any greater rate? Go raibh maith agat.

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Chomhalta as a cheist. I announced that I would be bringing forward the area planning process in September 2011. The group first got together in February 2012, so the work has been going on for about a year in real terms. At times, progress has been slower than I would have wished it to be and it has been frustrating. However, there has been progress.

This is not the best way to plan going into the future: we are dealing with five education and library boards, CCMS, the Irish-medium sector, the integrated sector and the voluntary sector. I hope that I have not left anybody out of that list. So, we have to get all of those people to work together and, for the first time in their collective histories, agree an area plan. Underneath that, you have 1,100 schools, all of which have an opinion about themselves — and rightly so — and believe that they should be the core school in their area and be maintained at all costs. So, you have to deal with all that and try to develop a plan.

So, we have made progress. I mentioned to one of the other Members that I have listed, as an example, areas of progress in some of the board areas. There are other areas that I can list as examples, but the overall picture has been that more work needs to be done on area planning.

Will the steering group move that forward? Yes, it will. The steering group will move it forward until the establishment of ESA, and then ESA will take responsibility for area planning. Area planning is going to be a continuous process of moving towards a sustainable schools estate.

On the issue of different versions of the plans and moving forward, there may be a couple of years' more work in this. However, at each stage, you will be able to examine the plans and make definitive statements about certain areas. I have done that: if you look at my capital builds announcement, I used area planning as the tool for deciding where new capital builds would be. As area plans move forward again, and when there is more money available for capital investment, we will look at them to see where capital investment should be. In terms of the school enhancement programme, which I recently announced, area planning will be the tool used to decide where that money should be spent as well.

So, it is an ongoing piece of work. As with many things in this society, things do not always move as quickly as they could.

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

I thank the Minister for his statement. In reference to the educational campus in Omagh, can the Minister state whether the area-planning template matches the terms of reference of the Department? Can he assure us that all of the schools are positively engaged? What is the timescale for the consummation and development of the project?

John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin, Upper Bann)

I confirmed this morning that the area planning solution for Omagh is Lisanelly, and that my future investments in the Omagh area will be in the Lisanelly site. As I mentioned to you during the Adjournment debate a number of nights ago, there has been a very democratic system. There has been local consultation, the council in the area has debated this and supports the Lisanelly project, the local representatives in the area support it, the Assembly supports it and it is a Programme for Government target that I intend to achieve. So, it is one of those areas where there has been enough discussion: it is now time to move forward. As I said to you in the debate the other night, I am looking at a variety of ways to fund that project, and a number of international partners may be willing to provide some funding towards it.

All those aspects are going forward. I confirmed this morning that the decision on area planning for Omagh has been made: Lisanelly is the only show in town.

Executive Committee Business

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I beg to move

That the draft Companies (Public Sector Audit) Order (Northern Ireland) 2013 be approved.

I will briefly set out the background to the draft order. The proposed legislation is necessary to update the list of not-for-profit public bodies that are subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG). Since 2008, when the original legislation was made, a number of new not-for-profit companies have been created, and some companies that were previously listed have been dissolved or transferred out of public sector ownership. Hence, there is a need to revise the list of bodies to take account of those changes.

The new legislation will permit the Comptroller and Auditor General to report on as well as certify the accounts of the relevant bodies, providing scope for him to comment more widely on matters pertaining to the bodies in question. That ties into the general legislative framework for other audits and provides for stronger accountability. I commend the order to the House.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. As the Minister set out, this is a straightforward piece of legislation. The purpose of the order is to amend the list of not-for-profit public companies to be subject to annual audit by the C&AG from that set out in the Companies (Public Sector Audit) Order 2008. The proposal noted that the opportunity is also being taken to enable the C&AG to report on as well as certify the accounts of the bodies to be subject to that legislation. It stated that that is in line with the general legislative framework for other audits and will provide greater capacity for the C&AG to issue a report without necessarily qualifying or modifying his or her audit opinion.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

The Committee agreed at its meeting that it had no objection to the policy proposals. The formal statutory rule before the Assembly was considered by the Committee together with the accompanying report from the Assembly's Examiner of Statutory Rules, and the Examiner raised no issues by way of technical scrutiny. The Committee, therefore, agreed to recommend that the draft order be approved by the Assembly.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat. I support the proposal.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman for keeping their remarks as brief as mine. It means that we can move on quickly from this business.

I thank the Committee for its work on the legislation. As I said to the House, the order is necessary because the list of bodies to be audited has changed over time. Some have been added, and some have been taken off. It gives additional powers. Someone asked me whether this means that the Northern Ireland Audit Office will get additional resources. The answer is "No. It will not get additional resources". However, I understand that the Audit Office is content that the additional work can be done within the existing generous budget that we already make available to that body. I commend the order to the Assembly and trust that it will have Members' support.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the draft Companies (Public Sector Audit) Order (Northern Ireland) 2013 be approved.

Private Members' Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to one hour and 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes in which to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who are called to speak will have five minutes. As a valid petition of concern was presented on Monday 25 February in relation to the motion, the vote will be on a cross-community basis.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I beg to move

That this Assembly approves the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee to deal with issues surrounding flags, emblems, symbols and language at Parliament Buildings and to report to the Assembly.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I want to read a few quotes from the Good Friday Agreement:

"We, the participants in the multi-party negotiations, believe that the agreement we have negotiated offers a truly historic opportunity for a new beginning."

"Táimid tiomanta don chomhpháirtíocht, don chomhionannas agus don chomhurraim mar bhonn leis na caidrimh laistigh de Thuaisceart Éireann, idir an Tuaisceart agus an Deisceart, agus idir na hoileáin seo".

"We are committed to partnership, equality and mutual respect as the basis of relationships within [the North of Ireland], between North and South, and between these islands ... We acknowledge the substantial differences between our continuing, and equally legitimate, political aspirations ... affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of [the North], the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of both communities ... recognise the birthright of all the people of [the North] to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of [the North] ... All participants recognise the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity, including in [the North], the Irish language, Ulster-Scots and the languages of the various ethnic communities, all of which are part of the cultural wealth of the island of Ireland ... All participants acknowledge the sensitivity of the use of symbols and emblems for public purposes, and the need in particular in creating the new institutions to ensure that such symbols and emblems are used in a manner which promotes mutual respect rather than division."

Tagann na hailt seo ó Chomhaontú Aoine an Chéasta, agus tá roinnt mhaith eile cosúil leo. Ritheann an teanga chéana tríd: urraim, cearta, caoinfhulaingt, comhionannas, éagsúlacht, Éireannach, Briotanach. An bhfuil an réaltacht ag cur leis na focail? These are some of the quotes from the Good Friday Agreement. The language running through it is "respect", "rights", "tolerance", "equality", "diversity", "Irish" and "British". Does the reality match the words?

We have watched the hysterical reaction to the democratic decision of Belfast City Council, a compromise position in relation to the flag that does not afford equality to nationalists and republicans. Indeed, it is a mirror image of what happens in other councils, for which Members of the House voted in their capacity as councillors. We have listened to the weak excuses as the PSNI has failed to police illegal parades and illegal roadblocks and the intimidation of elected representatives. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

We have watched as a significant number of Members joined those illegal roadblocks. Thankfully, because of public pressure from beleaguered businesses and civic society, they have come off that — not before time. We have witnessed the failure of leadership from many on the Benches opposite over the past few months. One example of that failure of leadership was the motion put forward by the DUP to the Assembly Commission. It is a Commission that claims that it operates on consensus, it has a unionist majority, and, on June 2, 2002:

"The Commission agreed that the flags issue is a political issue best handled by the Assembly."

Putting forward this motion is a political stunt by the DUP. The DUP, before Christmas, was calling for a forum to discuss the issue of flags and identity. Today, it has tabled a petition of concern to block the establishment of such a forum. It seems to me that both unionist parties are letting themselves be led by illegal, antidemocratic protesters like Bryson and Frazer, instead of trying to come at the issue in a sensible, mature way. This is 2013, not 1913.

Is é an cur chuige daonlathach plé agus vóta a dhéanamh sa Tionól, ach feictear go bhfuil eagla ar an DUP agus ar an UUP — agus níl a lán den UUP anseo — roimh dhíospóireacht sa Tionól.

The democratic approach would be for the discussion and vote to take place in the Assembly, but the DUP and UUP are afraid, it would appear, to have the debate in the Assembly. Who is afraid of democracy? Why would anyone be afraid of the establishment of an ad hoc group to deal with issues surrounding flags, emblems, symbols and language at Parliament Buildings and to report to the Assembly? As Assembly Members, we have a duty of care —

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for giving way. She goes on at great length to elaborate on the cowardice of the DUP and the Ulster Unionists on the issue. Would she like to tell the House why her party and her colleagues in the SDLP have consistently boycotted the Commission meetings? Would you like to elaborate on that?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I thank the Member for his comment. First, I say to him that his party should have no fear of democracy and equality. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

The place for discussion of flags, symbols and emblems is the Chamber, not the Assembly Commission. The UUP knows that, and where are its members today? Where are they in defence of their wonderful democratic position? Where are they? I see a lone presence in the Chamber. The least they could do is to come out and defend their undemocratic position in relation to this. Even at this stage, I call on the parties opposite to support the setting up of an Ad Hoc Committee, to look at the principles that I read out from this agreement. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

They are basic, fundamental principles. Who is afraid of democracy? Why should anyone be afraid of the establishment of an ad hoc group?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I will, yes.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

The Member asks, "Who is afraid of democracy?". If the party opposite is so keen on democracy, will she tell this House why it absents itself from the Mother of Parliaments at Westminster? It takes salaries, money and all the benefits, but it does not go to the most democratic forum in the United Kingdom.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

That is a typical deflection tactic from Mr Storey. [Interruption.]

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

Answer.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I will not deign to give an answer to that deflection. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member must be heard.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Let us talk about the issues here, in this part of Ireland. Let us talk about the agreement. Let us talk about the agreements that we have reached as political parties. Let us talk —

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

We did not sign up to that —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

See this nonsense that "We have not signed up to the Good Friday Agreement"? It is another pretence to their electorate. You signed up to power sharing, North/South, the Equality Commission and the Human Rights Commission. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. Let us not have a debate across the Chamber.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

So, let us not pretend that you do not support these institutions. The difficulty is that you want to cherry-pick what you do in these institutions.

I say to the Members opposite that, as Assembly Members, we have a duty of care to employees in this Building and, to date, the Assembly Commission has failed in that duty. Some of the staff in this Building have come to me saying that they feel that their traditions and identity have not been respected and they do not work in a neutral environment — [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

— and they feel discriminated against.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Will you allow a situation where a Member refers to members of staff in this House? I ask the Speaker to rule on this issue. I ask the Member to withdraw the remark, which is scurrilous. It is a very dangerous position for any Member to place members of staff in.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

On the point of order, there is a mechanism outside the Chamber if staff have a problem with the Building. I advise Members to be careful and caution them against drawing staff into a political situation. I warn all Members of the House to be very careful in what they say. Allow the Member to continue.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

I think it is very important that, in our duty of care, we ensure that all members of staff work in a neutral environment or an equal environment. The current environment is not neutral, and it is not equal. Their views need to be listened to and acted on. It is very important that all traditions are respected in the House and in the Building. Do I and the people who voted for me feel that our identity is cherished, that we have parity of esteem and that our ethos and identity are respected?

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

National insurance number?

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Even as I ask the question, I am being interrupted rudely. We come up Prince of Wales Avenue; we come past Carson's statue; we come in under Britannia's lions — [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Poppies are sold at every entrance during November, yet our national flag is not flown and our Irish language is not given the place that it deserves. [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Our symbols, such as the Easter lily, are not given parity of esteem.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

War symbols.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

You see, there is more rudeness from across the Chamber. There is more rudeness, because they do not want to listen to the message.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I do not want to listen to you.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Well, there you go. I will ask the Speaker to rule on that. It is my right to speak here, and if you do not want to listen to me —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. Members need to be mindful of their language in the Chamber. It is a democratic institution. I should not have to remind Members where they are. Allow the Member to continue.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I respect the right of people in the unionist community to have their heroes, symbols and emblems, but I expect that respect to be reciprocated.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is almost up.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

The days of forcing one flag on everyone are well and truly over. When are they going to stop ignoring people's views? I urge all parties to vote for this proposal. Who is afraid of democracy? Sinn Féin is not. Bring it on.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The issue of establishing or not establishing an Ad Hoc Committee to deal with the issues that the Member mentioned needs to be looked at in the context of where we are. The Sinn Féin Member for South Down said that these issues should be dealt with in the Chamber, yet the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee would not mean that they are dealt with in the Chamber; they would be dealt with in the way in which other issues are dealt with in Ad Hoc Committees — outside the Chamber. However, let us come to the central core of —

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Will the Member take an intervention?

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Yes, I will.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Actually, it would be dealt with in the Chamber. In the first instance, it would be dealt with by all parties sitting round a table in an Ad Hoc Committee, and a full report would then be brought to the Chamber.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has a minute added on to his time.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Getting an extra minute is at least some good from the intervention, Mr Speaker.

So, as she has just confirmed, the Ad Hoc Committee would meet outside the Chamber, which negates what she said. That is almost pedantry. Let us get down to the core of the issue. It is really not conducive to good debate for the Member or anyone else to wave redundant documents from 15 years ago. That really is not conducive to where we are now and to the progress that we need to make for the future. We need to establish —

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Yes, everybody is looking to get in.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I ask the Member sincerely to reflect on the comment about the Good Friday Agreement being redundant, given the huge democratic support that was given to that agreement across the whole island of Ireland.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Member should have listened to what I was going to say. If we are talking about the underlying principles of integrity and respect and about some of the other issues that cover a range of documents, there is not an issue. The issue is the way in which that document was implemented over our heads and how it brought into a democratic forum those who advocated violence. That is the point that I was making. That issue is redundant, dealt with and, hopefully, will never come back again.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Will the Member give way.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Yes, I will.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

The Member talks again about a redundant document. DUP Members have shouted from their seats about the fact that the DUP did not support the Good Friday Agreement. Will the Member not accept here and now that the people of Ireland — North and South — voted overwhelmingly for the Good Friday Agreement?

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I am glad that the Member put it like that. The people of the Irish Republic, in that country, voted overwhelmingly in favour of the Belfast Agreement. Undoubtedly, that is the case. The position in Northern Ireland was completely different. Yes, there was a majority — 15 years ago. I do not know why people are obsessed with what happened 15 years ago. We are more interested in what happens today, tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. The position is that —

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

No, I am running out of time to give way. It is not like me to be generous, but I have been very generous. I am not going to be any more.

The factual position in law is that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. I know that the Member for South Down does not like that and does not want that, but she has to accept that. That is the reality. It does not matter how many Ad Hoc Committees she wants established or how many votes she wants, because that is the reality. It is not going to change next week, next month, next year or any time in the future.

A reflection of that reality is that the flag of the United Kingdom flies in the Parliament of the United Kingdom in London. Some people referred to what happens in the Irish Parliament, and many Members talked about a document from 15 years ago. The flag of that country flies on that Parliament in Dublin regularly throughout the year, so, if the honourable Member for South Down wants parity of esteem for flags, I await the introduction in that Parliament with her colleagues of the dual flags of the union flag and the tricolour flying on Dáil Éireann. I have not heard anybody say that that would be a contribution towards Britishness and Irishness and the recognition of both identities. Nobody says that. Why? Because the process that the Member for South Down and some of her colleagues seem to be engaged in is a one-way process. In Northern Ireland, they want recognition of dual identities, but, in the Republic, it is a solo identity. I do not know why I am regarded as being hard line when I say that. That is the factual position, and the honourable Member cannot seem to accept it.

The Member for South Down referred to rights and responsibilities and to issues that flow from the integrity of these institutions. For once, in one small part of what she said, I agree with her. We also need to establish that, when it comes to the rights and responsibilities —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is almost gone.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

— of others in the context of what we do here, everybody has to accept that a petition of concern has been tabled.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is gone.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

We have stated where we stand, and we move on beyond this redundant piece of legislation.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

It is certainly heating up. It looks as though it will be a very interesting afternoon.

Flags, emblems, symbols and language are always emotive and sensitive issues in Northern Ireland. That is particularly the case in the current, often volatile situation that we have seen on the streets over the past number of months. We have seen the difficulty that the decision at Belfast City Council has caused, and I ask that the Assembly do not make the same mistake. The necessary consensus in all the issues must be sought and agreed before changes are made. This debate should be carried out with that in mind, and we in this House should set an example.

The Assembly Commission currently has clear responsibilities under section 40 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. That includes providing the Assembly with the property, staff and services required for the Assembly's purposes. During my time on the Commission, that role has included looking at issues such as flags, emblems, symbols and language in the context of our work in promoting equality of opportunity and the desirability of good relations.

I will just correct the proposer of the motion. The Commission comprises five members, and no one in the House would contend that the Alliance Party is a unionist party. The Commission is the proper place for this subject to be discussed. For that reason, I and my party are opposed to the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee. Why do we need a new way of dealing with these areas when we already have an appropriate mechanism? One must assume that the underlying reason for this motion is the ongoing flags issue. Certainly, the discussion so far supports that.

The Commission has attempted to meet on a number of occasions recently to progress this matter, with the SDLP, Sinn Féin and the Alliance Party, on two occasions, boycotting the meetings. If those parties are not prepared to discuss the issues within the context of Commission meetings, why should we expect any progress on an Ad Hoc Committee?

The situation with the flying of the Union flag at Stormont is straightforward: we do not have a designated day list that is consistent. For example, it appears that Belfast City Hall goes with the designated day list published by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in London, which offers 18 designated days for Northern Ireland.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Yes.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Is the Member stating clearly today, therefore, that the Ulster Unionist Party is holding to its long-standing position of supporting designated days at Parliament Buildings at Stormont?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an extra minute.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

Thank you for that. You will have to wait for the answer.

Parliament Buildings at Stormont is governed by the list in the Flags Regulations (Northern Ireland) Order 2000. That has 17 days, but, with the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother and the Princess Margaret, we are now down to 15 days. It is the wish of my party, through the Commission, to look at how that anomaly can be rectified, because it is entirely inappropriate that the number of days is left to dwindle, as is happening.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

No.

A suggestion may be that the list used at Parliament Buildings is tied to the list used by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, or we can look at a Northern Ireland-specific approach. There is no reason why the Commission cannot deal with this. Indeed, a consultation is being drawn up along those lines.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

No.

I reiterate that my party is seeking to effect change that is fair through reaching a consensus. That is why it is so disappointing that others are not willing to participate through the usual forum. We are not seeking to push through a decision using a majority, as happened on Belfast City Council. We are also not seeking to go on a solo run, as David Ford attempted to do in the Justice Department with the stripping of the emblems of the Northern Ireland Prison Service. We are simply looking to consult on the best and fairest way forward.

As I said, my party is not willing to agree to the setting up of an Ad Hoc Committee of this nature. It is time-consuming and inappropriate, and the mechanism is already in place for discussion and debate. It is disappointing that, while the economy is still struggling and unemployment remains high, we are devoting so much time to flags and emblems.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Will the Member give way?

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

No.

Important and emotive as flags and emblems are, I think that the majority of people in Northern Ireland would rather that we found solutions to job creation, educational underachievement and housing issues.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I support the motion. For many weeks now, protests have been held across Northern Ireland about the flying of the Union flag at Belfast City Hall. The depth of feeling across the community about the issue shows that we have still not dealt sufficiently with the flags, symbols and emblems of the respective identities of so many people in Northern Ireland. To that end, as the SDLP member of the Assembly Commission, I welcome the motion to the House, which is the appropriate place to discuss the motion.

We are all here to lead, and this is what leading does, through the setting up of this ad hoc group — not just looking singly at flags but looking at emblems, symbols and a language strategy. A mature discussion by all should take place in the Chamber. That is how we demonstrate to those in the community and the outside world that the Assembly does not shy away from the difficult decisions and that we are capable of maintaining political recognition of the sensitive issues around flags, emblems and symbols.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for giving way. Clearly, the Member is talking about consensus, and I am sure we will move on to that. We have heard much about consensus in the Chamber. Very clearly, on Belfast City Council — I declare an interest as a member of Belfast City Council — there was no consensus on the flag. However, a majority of people in that chamber decided to drive through the policy. Your party clearly supports that majority in City Hall, but there is a consensus in the electorate to send a unionist majority here. You simply will not recognise the majority that resides here. I say to the Member, with the greatest respect, that in the City Hall vote your party voted in committee to remove the flag entirely, then shifted its position, led by Sinn Féin, to have designated days.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member has an extra minute.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for the intervention. The original motion that was tabled to the Assembly Commission is clearly watered down now. The predetermined outcome that was originally in the motion has been taken out. I maintain the case that it was the DUP, the Ulster Unionists and the Alliance Party that, on the original Assembly Commission, decided on the designated days. Go back to 2001. It was those same parties that, in 2001, decided on the setting up of an ad hoc group to look at flags, symbols and emblems. There is no difference between then and now. That is the best place to bring forward ideas and thoughts, and, reflecting on what Lesley Cree said, to bring about consensus. There was never going to be consensus on the original motion that was tabled by the DUP and the Ulster Unionists, because it was seen as trick and stunt politics. Those trick and stunt politics failed.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate that the Member was not here 10 years or so ago, but he should be aware that the setting up of an Ad Hoc Committee was in a period when this was, essentially, a Secretary of State matter. Indeed, where it was a reserved or excepted matter, the format was that an Ad Hoc Committee would be set up, as was done for a number of other issues, such as criminal damage compensation. That is why an Ad Hoc Committee was established at that point to look at the issue of flags, not within Parliament Buildings but across all of Northern Ireland.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member for the intervention. It was also the case that the DUP accepted the Northern Ireland order from the then Secretary of State on the designated days. That is what it accepted at the Assembly Commission. Then, when the tensions on the street were very high, the DUP tried to pull a stunt over the other parties in the House. That was not going to happen. The SDLP was certainly not going to be part of that.

Getting back to the motion, Mr Speaker, I stress that the proposal is not a threat to any party in the Assembly. It is an opportunity to positively and constructively address issues around emblems, flags and symbols and should be seen as such. Let me make it clear that there is no appetite in the SDLP for any point scoring on the issue. There is no appetite for that. However, we all have a job to do on behalf of the public. If passed, the motion would give us a chance to speak candidly in Committee — a much calmer environment — about our views on these matters. That is not what is happening with some Members, who really are stretching it to the limits.

I remind Members that the Commission carried out an internal good relations audit in line with its section 75 responsibilities in conjunction with Holywell Consultancy. Holywell Consultancy examined various documents, including the Assembly's corporate plan, the engagement strategy, the good relations action plan, the secretariat staff survey, the dignity at work policy and the Assembly equality scheme. I want to highlight some of the areas where we have fundamentally not been able to achieve consensus, but we are prepared, as reasonable politicians and in representing our parties on the Assembly Commission, to get to a consensus. The difference here is that two parties were trying to force through a situation. It is not and never has been the practice or policy of the Assembly Commission for any party or joint party motion to be tabled. That is what our concern was. The parties need to reflect on what they did prior to Christmas. It was done to the fiddle of those outside who were calling the tune.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Member's time is almost gone.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I appeal to Members. I know that there is a petition of concern to guillotine the motion. However, this is an important subject, and the only way we can deal with it is through an ad hoc group.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I support the motion. I want to first address why the motion is before us. As was already mentioned, back in December, the unionist parties used a mechanism to bring a motion to the Assembly Commission. At that time, I made it clear that I was not prepared to discuss the matter during constant violence and intimidation. There are those who have said that by doing so I was boycotting the Commission meeting. However, I believe it was a principled stand that gave those proposing the motion the time to reflect on their role as Commission members, allowed some of the heat to go out of the situation and prevented us from making a knee-jerk reaction.

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

Will the Member give way?

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

No, I am not going to give way at the minute.

In the background, however, I met other Commission members to see if we could get consensus on the manner in which flags could be discussed in a formally constituted Commission meeting. I reminded my fellow Commission members that our role is to serve the Assembly and not individual parties and that, when making decisions, we should have due regard for equality. I also reminded them that, in June 2000, the Commission had agreed that the flag issue was a political matter best handled by the Assembly and that the Commission would operate to the existing regulations and take its direction from the Assembly.

There is an option for Members to bring a motion forward, and, although I do not agree with the DUP and UUP's motivation for doing that, they brought it forward, and they were operating in line with Commission procedures. Also, as the Commission's remit includes responsibility for good relations in this Building, regardless of whether some feel that flags and emblems are a matter best dealt with by the Assembly, the reality is that the corporate body has a role to play in this. I feel strongly that the matter will not be resolved satisfactorily without due regard for equality. Therefore, I was not willing to support the original motion. However, I showed leadership by trying to bring forward a revised motion that could be acceptable to all. Let us be clear: by agreeing to the new motion, the DUP and UUP have moved substantially from their original position in four ways. First, we are now asking for a report, not a consultation; secondly, there is no longer a predetermined outcome; thirdly, an equality impact assessment is now included; and, fourthly, the assumption that the Commission is the only place for the final decision to be taken has been removed. That is what consensus politics is about. The Speaker also sought to have all Commission members present in order to formally agree how wide-ranging such a report might be. Unfortunately, however, some members still felt unable to participate in the discussion.

Here we are today with a motion to establish an Ad Hoc Committee to deal with issues surrounding flags, emblems, symbols and language at Parliament Buildings and to report to the Assembly. Parliament Buildings hosts a large number of events and visitors each year and has a significant opportunity to play a leading role in the encouragement of dialogue, shared learning and mutual respect for different faiths and cultural backgrounds. The Stormont building and its history represent challenges that require careful presentation, and I believe that those challenges can be met through attention to detail and sensitive negotiation. The Good Friday Agreement was endorsed by the majority of people, and, regardless of whether some think it is redundant, the fact remains that those who signed up to the agreement and those who have taken office in the new institutions have a duty to ensure that such issues are dealt with sensitively and with an outcome that is balanced for everyone.

The existence of an Ad Hoc Committee and the work proposed for the Commission are not mutually exclusive. One might even inform the other. Therefore, I am content to support the motion. There is a need for mature debate.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

No, I will not give way, thank you. There is a need for mature debate around these contentious issues — [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. The Member should not persist.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

We need to balance the role of the Commission, members of which are to act with integrity, including political impartiality, with the party political views of Members, which could be expressed via the Ad Hoc Committee. We should see the motion not as a threat but as an opportunity to look at issues that will allow the Northern Ireland Assembly to be reflected as an Assembly for everyone. We have an opportunity to show leadership in addressing difficult and challenging good relations issues, and we should take it today.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.38 pm.

On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr Dallat] in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions

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

Question 1 has been withdrawn and requires a written answer. Question 6 has been transferred to the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) for written answer. Mr Roy Beggs is not in his place to ask question 2.

Net Fiscal Balance Report

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

3. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline the purpose of the net fiscal balance report by his Department and how it is used. (AQO 3487/11-15)

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

5. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline the purpose of the estimate on VAT produced by his officials for publication in the net fiscal balance report. (AQO 3489/11-15)

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to take questions 3 and 5 together.

The purpose of the latest net fiscal balance report is to provide a broad overview of public sector finances in Northern Ireland for the financial years 2006-07 to 2010-11. As Members will be aware, the report provides an estimate of our overall net fiscal balance position, or fiscal deficit, which is, essentially, the difference between government expenditure and revenue raised locally. In that regard, the VAT estimate is merely one element. I remind Members again that, as the report indicates, it is not intended to provide an accurate estimate of individual revenue items such as VAT, which has been estimated in the absence of actual regional data.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister will know that income tax, VAT and corporation tax make up an estimated half of the North's revenue. That is based on two surveys. There are question marks over where the headquarters of particular companies here are based, which affects the figures for corporation tax. Those figures have, potentially, been underestimated. Does he agree that the estimates are insufficient for the Executive and that there is a need for him and the Executive to put pressure on the Treasury to release more accurate figures, which, of course, it has?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

We do not, in all cases, have the exact figures for revenue that is collected here in Northern Ireland. That is not only true for Northern Ireland, but for other devolved Administrations. One thing that I would say, however, is that the methods that are used are accepted under the codes for collecting official statistics and are recognised by the Office for National Statistics. Secondly, of course, the Scottish Government have accepted that the methods that are used for Scotland, which we mimic here in Northern Ireland, are acceptable ways of calculating estimates.

Let us bear in mind that, in gathering many official figures, initially, estimates have to be made. Take, for example, the balance of payments figures for the United Kingdom, which tend to be estimates. Indeed, sometimes revisions are made as a result of more information becoming available later on.

The Member mentioned corporation tax. He mentioned one of the things that was not initially included. One of the reasons why we extended discussions with the Treasury was exactly to drill down and to try to get information on those figures. I am happy that, where there is dispute, there is a mechanism in place for dealing with that and for getting more accurate figures in the longer run.

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

Mr Mitchel McLaughlin is not in his place to ask a supplementary question.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for explaining the net fiscal balance. Does the Minister have a strategy for reducing the fiscal deficit? What would be in that strategy?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

We do not want to be reliant on subsidies from central Government because, of course, when fiscal decisions are made at that level, it leaves the Northern Ireland economy a victim to changes. What is the Executive's policy on that? What do we seek to do? The reason why we have given primacy to growing the economy, especially the private sector, is to reduce our dependence on the transfer of funds from Westminster or parts of the United Kingdom to Northern Ireland. I point out to the Member that we are not in a unique position. Indeed, of all the regions of the United Kingdom, probably only two are in surplus; the others are in deficit. That is very often because of where most economic activity is generated. The more that we can generate and grow our economy here, the less dependent we will be on public sector spending, especially for benefits, etc, and the more revenue we will generate, whether through income tax or national insurance. Will we ever not have a deficit? I doubt it very much. I think that nine other regions of the United Kingdom are also in deficit because of their geographical position and because it is difficult to attract investment and generate economic activity. That is the benefit, of course, of being in the Union: we are part of a bigger constitutional unit in which the weaker areas can be helped by the stronger ones.

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

Go raibh míle maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagra. I suppose that many people listening to the questions and answers here today will be surprised to learn that we do not have accurate figures on revenue collected. Can the Minister suggest any steps that could be taken to ensure that, in future, we have more accurate figures?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

First, I want to dispel the idea, which seems to be behind all the questions, that, somehow or other, the figures are simply made up. They are not. The methodology for collecting the figures has been accepted by those who are responsible for compiling official statistics in the United Kingdom. They abide by the code that is laid down for compiling statistics. These are not wild guesstimates; they are estimates based on criteria and methodologies accepted by those who are responsible for compiling statistics.

As far as greater accuracy is concerned, the more that one drills down into the figures, the more that one tries to ally the figures to a measure that closely reflects them. I will give the Member an example, which is how we estimate VAT. We look at the household survey to see what people in Northern Ireland spend their money on, and we take the VAT attributable to those kinds of goods and multiply it by the number of families, which gives us the estimate. To me, that is a fairly robust way of estimating the amount of VAT gathered in Northern Ireland: what are people's spending methods, what is the rate of VAT levied on those goods and how many families are there? Of course, given that the list of things that people spend their money on —

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

The Minister's two minutes are up.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

— is generalised, that figure is, to some degree, bound to be an estimate.

Special Advisers

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

4. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to outline the appeals mechanism in the code of conduct for special advisers. (AQO 3488/11-15)

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I interpret the question to mean what appeals mechanism is set out in the arrangements introduced in September 2011 for appointing special advisers.

My Department applies the vetting/character checking process to prospective special advisers, as it does to all other civil servants. Under those arrangements, I undertook to review the appointment process. My Department makes a recommendation to the appointing Minister about a test of character. For special advisers only, an independent appeals process has been built into the decision-making process. If a Minister or a prospective candidate for a special adviser post disagrees with the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) recommendation, an appeal can be made. That will be to an external body that will not have any contact with DFP, the Civil Service or Ministers. The panel will be totally independent, and it will take a number of factors into consideration when hearing a person's appeal.

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

I thank the Minister for his detailed reply. From the tenor of the reply, I assume that this appeals mechanism has not yet been used. In the event of it being used, who would choose the independent members of the panel, how big would the panel be, and where would those members come from?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

It has not been used to date. All special advisers have gone through the vetting process, but it has not been necessary to use the panel as yet.

The panel would be made up of outside individuals. They would be chosen by the Department, and, I imagine, would probably be individuals such as trade union officials, people who have been involved in adjudicating on labour relations issues or other such independent people. They will be totally independent of the Department, the Civil Service and any of the parties — there would be no political involvement in any of that. We would envisage an appeal panel of uneven numbers, probably three.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

How far apart are the arrangements that the Minister has put in place and those in the private Member's Bill that has been brought to the House by Mr Allister? Does he still believe that that private Member's Bill is necessary?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The view that I took —

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

Order. I warn Members that this is Question Time to the Minister of Finance and Personnel and not on a future private Member's Bill.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

I think that the question that was being asked was what was my view vis-à-vis the arrangements that I have in place and the arrangements that Mr Allister has brought to the House.

It was always my view that something that is agreed among the parties would be much better, rather than having to go down a route of a vote being taken in the Assembly on the issue. Whether it had a statutory basis or simply had the basis of guidance that I had issued, the important thing to me was that it had the agreement of all the parties. Sadly, at the time of the Bill's introduction and its Second Stage, that agreement was not in place. Therefore, I took the view at that stage — I still hold it — that, given the concerns, it was necessary to have something in place that we could apply to all special advisers.

The concern I had at that stage with Mr Allister's Bill was the fact that there was no appeals mechanism, and as I said in answer to Mr Maginness's question, I believe that an appeals mechanism is important. Basically, Mr Allister's arrangements were much more absolutist than mine, and I always believed that they could be improved by including an appeals mechanism. That would allow us to have those arrangements on a statutory footing, and they would apply to everyone who was appointed as a special adviser.

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

I am prepared to take another couple of supplementary questions, but that is on the basis that they are about the question and not the Bill.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as uchta a fhreagra. Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank you, and I thank the Minister for his responses. Given that the CBI and the trade unions supported the guidelines produced by OFMDFM, will the Minister call for those to be implemented? That will ensure that employers have the flexibility to select the right person for the job.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Whether we use the guidelines that I introduced or put the issue on a statutory footing, a number of important things should be considered. First, the arrangements should apply to all special advisers. Secondly, they should assure people that they can stand the test of time and cannot easily be changed in the future. Thirdly, they should give everyone a fair opportunity, even if they have involved themselves in something in the past that people would have regarded as wrong and tarnished their public image. They should be given the chance to show that they had changed, etc. Those were the important things to me. That was what was on offer; it was not accepted, and the Assembly will decide at some time in the future what is the best way of doing that. I am saying only what all the ingredients are. There should be a mechanism for vetting people who are appointed to such posts. If they disagree with that vetting, there should be a mechanism for them to have their say. There should then be an independent assessment of the case that they have made to decide whether they are suitable for the job.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Does the Minister agree that one of the fallouts from the Mary McArdle appointment was a realisation that procedures that had no regard for the thoughts or interests of victims were lacking in a material consideration? Therefore, as well as looking at pertinent matters such as contrition, any review mechanism should, if it can, devise a means whereby the views of those most directly affected, namely, the victims of the individual, can be taken on board.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

My view was that any mechanism of appeal, review or whatever it happens to be should be transparent and clear enough to ensure that people appointed to these positions had the confidence of the general public. If they had been engaged in something in their past, they would be able to show, because of changes in their attitude, lifestyle and the fact that they had shown remorse for their deeds, that they could gain that confidence. If one of the ways of building that confidence is to feed in the kind of information that the Member suggested, of course the Assembly needs to look at doing that in any appeal mechanism.

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

Question 5 has been answered. Question 6 has been withdrawn and transferred.

Procurement: NIAO Report

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

7. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel for his assessment of the Northern Ireland Audit Office report 'Department of Finance and Personnel — Collaborative Procurement and Aggregated Demand'. (AQO 3491/11-15)