Northern Ireland Assembly, 30 April 2013

332 contributions from 56 members. The official report.

Ministerial Statements

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In compliance with section 52C(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, we wish to make the following statement on the eighth North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) institutional meeting, which was held in Stormont Castle on Monday 29 April 2013. The Northern Ireland Executive were represented by the First Minister and me, and the Irish Government were represented by Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Eamon Gilmore. The First Minister and I chaired the meeting.

We had a broad discussion on the economy, particularly on the economic challenges that are faced in each jurisdiction and the budgetary actions being taken to address them. There were discussions on corporation tax and the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA). We noted the importance of building confidence in the economy and the tourism industry and recognised the benefit of mutual co-operation in both. There was also a discussion on the upcoming G8 summit to be held in Enniskillen and on developments during the Irish EU presidency.

We discussed the Irish presidency of the EU in 2013 and welcomed the co-operation that had taken place between Irish Government and Executive Ministers. We noted progress on the various EU-related matters, and we noted that, while both the multiannual financial framework and a reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) have been agreed at European Government level, negotiations are ongoing between the EU Council of Ministers and the EU Parliament.

We also discussed the current situation with EU funds, particularly from Peace III, INTERREG IV and FP7 research and development programmes. The potential for future programmes was also discussed, in particular a new Peace programme.

We welcomed progress under the north-west gateway initiative and noted that there would be further engagement with key stakeholders to seek their views on the future development of the initiative. The Council agreed to review progress on that engagement at a future meeting.

We discussed matters relating to the North/South bodies, noting progress in their corporate and business plans and the implementation of cumulative efficiency savings in the bodies. We also discussed governance issues, including the review of the financial memoranda and changes to the North/South pension scheme. A further report on progress will be provided to the next NSMC institutional meeting.

We noted changes to the boards of the North/South bodies and that an event for board chairs, vice chairs and chief executives had been hosted by the joint secretaries in February 2013. We thanked the outgoing chief executive of Waterways Ireland, John Martin, and the outgoing chief executive of the Loughs Agency, Derick Anderson, for their contributions to the work of the North/South bodies and wished them well in their retirement. We noted that work is under way to identify their successors.

We discussed the St Andrews Agreement review and looked forward to further discussion at the next NSMC plenary meeting.

The next plenary meeting will take place in July 2013, and we agreed to meet again in institutional format in October 2013.

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the deputy First Minister for bringing his statement to the House this morning. Did he receive any assurance from the Irish Government that they will get agreement on CAP reform over the line before their presidency ends in June?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I certainly think that that is their ambition. At yesterday's meeting, we all noted that progress had been made on CAP reform during the EU negotiations. We noted that CAP reform negotiations had progressed in recent months and the ongoing trilateral discussions between the Parliament, the Commission and the presidency aim to reach a final agreement by June this year. Of course, the support provided by the CAP remains crucial for farmers and rural communities, hence the agreement by EU leaders to reduce the CAP budget by 13% in real terms for the 2014-2020 period, compared with the 2007-2013 period. Obviously, that is disappointing, but work continues to ensure that the final agreement delivers a flexible CAP, particularly in relation to the move to flat-rate payments and greening, which can be tailored to address local concerns. I know that our Agriculture Minister and Simon Coveney have been involved in meetings on that issue. Given the fact that the Irish Government have the presidency of the EU at this time, his voice is particularly influential.

Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an LeasChéad-Aire as an ráiteas sin. I thank the deputy Prime Minister — gabh mo leithschéal — the deputy First Minister, for his statement. Were the A5 and the Narrow Water bridge, both very important cross-border projects, discussed at your meeting?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, both issues were discussed. Everybody knows that those projects are vital for cross-border infrastructure, and it was very important that we discussed them yesterday. It is also important to stress that our Executive and the Irish Government are fully committed to implementing the A5 project. Everybody is conscious of the recent judicial review where a judgement was made on one of the 12 objections; in the other 11, the court found for the Department. The issue of habitats and the environmental impact assessment went against the Department. The Minister decided not to appeal but to go for a remedy. It appears that that remedy will probably require one year to 18 months to resolve. However, there is still total commitment from the Executive and the Irish Government to the scheme.

During the discussions with Eamon Gilmore, we also took the opportunity to remind him that the First Minister and I, in previous conversations with Enda Kenny, had pressed the Irish Government to ensure that the decision that they took to withdraw from their part of the scheme — with the exception of £50 million — needed to be reviewed on an ongoing basis. The Taoiseach gave us a commitment that it would be reviewed in 2013. We hope that that will take place this year. If the Irish Government are in a position to come up with their end of it, it could all coincide neatly with what will, hopefully, be a positive development with regard to the A5 when the Department goes through the procedures that will have to be undertaken.

In relation to the Narrow Water bridge, the Department of Finance and Personnel is undertaking a rigorous critical review, as per the assessment process outlined by the INTERREG IVa programme. That process involves DFP reviewing the costs, benefits, value for money, deliverability and risk associated with the project and the verification of all relevant planning preconditions to ensure that they are adhered to and statutory approval is sought and obtained. I hope that there is an early and positive decision, given the importance of the project.

I recently met representatives from the area who are all very exercised about the prospect that the bridge could be built. From my experience and as the Speaker knows well, there is the impact that a very small bridge in our city has had not just on the architecture of the city but on the psychology of the citizens of the city, bringing people together in a very powerful way during the City of Culture celebrations. There is no doubt whatsoever that we will see the situation expedited in the next short while, and, hopefully, we will see a positive outcome.

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

I thank the deputy First Minister for his full report. He said that Ministers:

"discussed the St Andrews Agreement review and looked forward to further discussion at the next NSMC plenary meeting."

Could I ask the deputy First Minister about that aspect of the meeting? At the last North/South meeting, which, I think, was in November or slightly earlier than that, there was a report that proposals relating to the review would be made by Christmas. There is no mention of those proposals in this report.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I encourage the Member to get to his point.

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

I just want to ask the deputy First Minister if those proposals were put to the meeting, and, if they were not, why not? When will there be progress on that issue?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We had a very useful discussion on the St Andrews Agreement review at yesterday's meeting, and the part of the review relating to the recommendations specific to the North/South bodies is now effectively complete, subject to any further discussions at NSMC sectoral meetings. The respective Finance Departments have concluded that the provision of Enterprise-scale shared services within the bodies is not feasible due to a lack of scale. However, they have recommended that the bodies should continue to share knowledge and expertise where it is beneficial to do so. Work by the Finance Departments on the review of the financial memoranda is at an advanced stage, and we hope to have that work completed by December 2013.

At the June 2012 plenary, we advised the Council that there was still some work to do in terms of reference two and three, and we agreed that further reflection on those elements of the review would be needed. At the November 2012 plenary, we agreed that senior officials would meet to bring forward proposals so that we could move to deal with this at the next plenary in July, at which point, we hope, there will be a decisive step forward on the matter.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

What is the Minister's assessment of Peace III and his thinking on the shape and focus of the proposed Peace IV funding?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Peace III has brought enormous benefits to our community. There is no doubt whatsoever that it has contributed greatly to harmony and cohesion in the community and increased working together, not just in the North but between North and South.

Everybody here is very conscious of the discussions that have been ongoing in relation to Peace IV. The First Minister and I were recently in Brussels and were involved in serious discussions around that. That happened against the backdrop of the discussions at European level on the European budget, over which there was much disagreement. We were pleased to see that €150 million has now been committed. That is a great relief, and that money needs to be used wisely. There is also a huge challenge for both Governments to recognise that maybe they could contribute further to that financially. We have recently had discussions on that with the British and Irish Governments.

We cannot pre-empt the outcome of what will be an important vote in the European Parliament. It has already voted down the budget, which is par for the course at European level. However, there is increased optimism that the budget will be endorsed by the Parliament in the next couple of months. If that is the case, the €150 million will be secured. We will then agree how we direct that money in a way that brings maximum benefit to our community.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. I am sure that he will join me in recognising the work of organisations such as the IFA, Groundwork and the Playhouse Theatre and their presentations to the EU on the work of the Peace programme. What regional framework does the deputy First Minister think needs to be in place to continue to support the work of such organisations if and when Peace programmes from the European Union are no longer available?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I certainly would endorse the comments of the Member about the contribution made at the exhibition that took place in Brussels, which we were honoured and privileged to attend. The work that is happening within the IRA — sorry, within the IFA — [Laughter.] Just to — [Interruption.]

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Just to reiterate the point that they have gone away, you know. [Laughter.] The anti-sectarianism work that has taken place in the IFA has to be commended. Other events have taken place since the visit to Brussels that I have been very pleased to attend in my own city. I pay tribute to all those who are involved in that important work.

In the context of Peace IV, we will have to consider how we can ensure the continuation of that good work. There is a huge responsibility on everybody to recognise that sectarianism is very damaging to our society and economy. Given that we will see an IFA cup final shortly between Cliftonville and Glentoran, I appeal to everybody associated with both clubs, including the supporters of both clubs, to engage in that game in a way that will bring maximum enjoyment to themselves. There is always a danger in the context of such occasions that a tiny minority who are not representative of the overall fan base will try to exploit them for their own end. We need to see increased exhortations on behalf of people within clubs and communities to impress on people how negative that is and how damaging it is for community relations.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the deputy First Minister outline the topics included under "Future Development"?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

One of the most important discussions that we had with the Tánaiste yesterday centred on youth unemployment and the prospect that a fund that exists at European level can be used in a way that will bring benefits to ourselves and the South. Whether we can exploit that fund remains to be seen. However, we have emphasised to all our Departments the importance of continuing to draw down funding from Europe and to meet our Programme for Government commitment of increasing that by something like 20%. Those discussions are continuing. It is important that we continue to emphasise to people that the programmes that are in place, which are very wide-ranging — far too wide-ranging for me to go into in detail this morning — are crucial.

We have to go forward with an Executive approach, but Departments, some of which could, maybe, do a wee bit more, need to consistently examine how they can put in a better performance on financial drawdown for the sort of programmes that, I know, the Member would like to see take place, not least for his own area.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Is the Irish presidency of the EU proving to be beneficial and successful for our own agriculture sector and the ongoing talks centring around the reform of the common agricultural policy?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

He was basically asking whether the Irish Government's presidency of the European Union was beneficial to the farming community, North and South, in the context of the CAP negotiations. I think that I gave a clear indicator earlier that those discussions are ongoing and that Minister Coveney and Minister O'Neill are collaborating to ensure that we get maximum benefit for farmers, North and South.

When the Irish Government's EU presidency began, there was a lot of concern that the issue of budgets would not be resolved, but it appears that it is on its way to resolution. There will, hopefully, be a final vote in the European Parliament prior to the end of the Irish Government's presidency of the EU. If that and the CAP negotiations were settled, I think that the Irish Government would regard their presidency as a huge success, albeit low-key.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Members who turn the amplifying system away from themselves will not be heard in the House.

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

I thank the deputy First Minister for the statement and the answer he gave about the A5. However, can he confirm that any obstacle that is in the way will be removed as quickly as possible so that the project can progress without any diversion of moneys to other projects? Secondly, in relation to CAP reform, will the deputy First Minister acknowledge that, under the current budget proposals, there will be a severe, drastic cut to the rural development programme relating to Northern Ireland, because of the Cameron approach to the budget?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

On the Member's first point, I know that there is huge concern in the west amongst all the councils and, indeed, the elected representatives that the A5 project could be jeopardised. Indeed, some in the media — mostly commentators, I suppose; I am not blaming media organisations — went as far as to say, more or less, that the project was dead in the water. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a very important item for the North/South Ministerial Council. It is of an international dimension, and I think that the commitment reasserted at the meeting yesterday between ourselves and the Tánaiste that we are still committed to the project is clearly there for everybody to see.

I think that the Department is moving with all haste to deal with the one area of difficulty — the habitats — and the need for an environmental impact assessment. Obviously, that might lead to all sorts of new processes being put in place, which will cause a delay of, maybe, something between a year and 18 months, but, in the context of that being resolved, we are absolutely committed to providing the funds to ensure that this road will be constructed.

As I said, I hope that any financial review that takes place in Dublin with regard to their budgets will recognise the importance of coming back on board on this vital scheme. It is not just important for us here in the North. Sometimes, when people talk about the A5, they talk about it being a road to Dublin. Clearly it is a road to Dublin, but it is also a very important internal road for the North of Ireland. It is important for people living in the area that the Member comes from and people living in Omagh to get to Belfast and to link with the new road at the Ballygawley roundabout. It is a road that ticks all sorts of boxes internally within the North and between North and South, so we are absolutely dedicated and committed to ensuring that the project goes ahead with funding being made available.

The Member is absolutely right about the CAP: there are difficulties. The European Union has taken its own decision and has imposed cuts. It is now a matter of seeing what the final outcome will be when the deliberations end in a vote at the European Parliament. Our Minister and Minister Coveney are working closely together to minimise whatever difficulties will be presented to the farming community, North and South.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an LeasChéad-Aire. Will the deputy First Minister provide an update on any discussions relating to EU matters?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We had a wide-ranging discussion on the EU. Yesterday, the Tánaiste made it clear, not only during the meeting but in the press conference afterwards, that he regarded the ongoing discussions between the EU and the Governments of the United States and Canada as vital in the context of the island of Ireland and, specifically, the North. Any increased trade agreements with those English-speaking countries would clearly suggest that, when they consider foreign direct investment or further trade agreements, they are more inclined to focus their attention on English-speaking parts of Europe. That gives the island of Ireland a big advantage.

We had a useful update from the Tánaiste on the Irish presidency of the EU, which, as we all know, runs to the end of June. The Irish Government are focusing on securing stability and driving recovery in Europe, leading to job creation and growth, which all of us want. The Tánaiste was keen to acknowledge the attendance of our Ministers and officials at a range of presidency-linked events and the assistance that we have provided through secondees from a number of Departments that are working on the presidency. Of course, the most significant issue is the agreement on the provision of funding of €150 million for a further Peace programme. The discussion was wide-ranging and dealt with all those matters.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his statement. It is good that things are progressing. What will the legacy be at the end of the presidency? What can people look back on and say, "We have moved forward. This was our main achievement during the six-month period"?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, the presidency is being held by the Irish Government. We had our own discussions with them prior to their taking over the presidency. From their perspective, the big concern was whether there would be agreement on budgets at European level. The last time that the First Minister and I were in Brussels, the British Government, in particular, were getting a very bad press from European leaders because people thought that their approach would slow down the prospect of an agreement and, as a result, be damaging when future budgets were being decided. That has now been resolved, and there is agreement at governmental and European level. The European Parliament will now be the only body to adjudicate on this. I think that a vote will probably come in June. If that and the CAP negotiations go though in the way in which they have designed them, I think that the Irish Government will consider that to be a major success for them.

We have renewed our efforts with Brussels and are trying to get the drawdown of extra funds to the target of the increased 20% that we sought when we outlined our Programme for Government. That is why it is critical that all Departments are energised about trying to capitalise on that. As a result of our discussions yesterday, the First Minister and I intend to pursue one or two new angles that were suggested by Eamon Gilmore.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his answers so far. In reply to a question on the A5, he mentioned getting the Southern Government back on track with the financial programme. Can he confirm whether there was any discussion on the £50 million due from the Irish Government in 2015-16?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Irish Government are still committed to that; they have not withdrawn that commitment. During yesterday's meeting, the First Minister and I emphasised to the Tánaiste the importance of the review promised by Enda Kenny when the Irish Government announced that they were withdrawing their commitment because of economic circumstances and their negotiations with the IMF and the European Bank. I think that that will be a very welcome review during this year.

It is hard to say at this stage whether we can be optimistic that the review will mean that the Irish Government come back on track to the full extent that they initially committed to, but we certainly intend to pursue that. We do not intend to give up because this will be, I think, a very important economic driver for us in getting proper infrastructure in the west that will benefit everybody, not least by putting three major companies to work, which is a very important aspect, and, of course, their employing local people, which is also critical. As we go forward, we are very committed to this project and to seeing it through to completion, which will require the Irish Government coming back on board.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I want to ask about the pension scheme for the North/South executive bodies set up under the Belfast Agreement, not the North/South body that the Minister knows best and to which he inadvertently referred some time ago. The pension scheme for those bodies entails lavish employer contributions. In one case, over 31% of salary is contributed by the employer and a mere 1·5% is contributed by the employee. When will that lavish squander be addressed by bringing the scheme into line with what exists in the Civil Service scheme? Is it good enough for it simply to be pushed back for another six months? Why not address it now instead of looking at it further down the road?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

At the NSMC meeting on 28 March 2013, we noted that the NSMC approved an amendment to the North/South pension scheme, which means that increases to the scheme for benefits paid in the northern currency will be in line with the consumer price index. Prior to that, they were increased in line with the retail price index. The amendment ensures that the North/South pension scheme follows public sector pension policy, as agreed by the Executive.

We also noted that the two Finance Departments are in discussion about how to further amend the scheme. These amendments will ensure that northern members are not immune from pension reform. The first amendment will increase employee contributions on average from 1·5% by 3·2 percentage points. That will align with the employee rates payable from April 2014 in the principal Civil Service pension scheme here in the North. The second amendment will introduce, by April 2015, the wider Hutton reforms, such as the introduction of a career average revalued earnings scheme and a linkage between the North/South pension scheme age and the state pension age.

Basil McCrea (Independent, Lagan Valley)

In an earlier answer to Mr Maginness about the St Andrews Agreement review, the deputy First Minister said that the group had discussed North/South issues. However, it seems that a wider discussion is needed here. Will the deputy First Minister outline whether there are ongoing discussions on the matter and whether he thinks that those should be treated as a matter of urgency?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, these situations are kept under constant review. I outlined our approach to the matter in my earlier answer. With respect, I think that there is a vagueness in the question. I am not trying to score a point. If the Member would like to communicate his concerns to me more directly, I could give him a much fuller answer.

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

In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the fourteenth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in transport sectoral format, which was held in Armagh on Wednesday 17 April 2013.

Before doing so, it is fitting that I record that a further death, of someone aged 25, occurred on our roads in the past 24 hours. Given that the statement touches on road safety issues, I think it only appropriate that the House notes and expresses condolences to the family of the young person who died so tragically.

The meeting was attended by me, by the Regional Development Minister, Danny Kennedy, and by Minister Varadkar TD, Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. I chaired the meeting. I will address those agenda items for which my Department has responsibility: mutual recognition of penalty points; road user safety; and vehicle safety policy and enforcement. I would also like to report that there was a transport sectoral meeting in Dublin on 28 March for a very short number of minutes to facilitate the approval, in advance of the end of the financial year, of an amendment to the North/South pension scheme.

I think that this has been touched on elsewhere this morning, but the Council meeting in April discussed the importance of the Narrow Water bridge and noted the timeline for the drawdown of European funding. The Council also noted that the project had obtained planning permission and a marine licence and that that involved extensive engagement with stakeholders. It looks forward to the assessment process being completed as soon as possible.

I emphasise that the planning consent and marine consent have been issued and that the standard pre-commencement conditions in advance of construction are all proceeding satisfactorily. I wrote to the First Minister and deputy First Minister in advance of the institutional meeting yesterday about the Narrow Water bridge matter to try to accelerate a conclusion to it.

The Council also discussed the negative impacts of the use of illegal fuel on the transport industry, on revenues to the exchequers and to the environment. There will be a further statement to the House about last week's North/South environmental sectoral meeting, where the impact of the use of illegal fuel was discussed. All of us who were present viewed the situation as acute.

I met representatives of the haulage industry yesterday; I have now met them twice over the past four or five months. They confirmed to me the severity of the situation and the impact on legitimate business of those who use completely or partially laundered fuel. That is something that I believe that the NSMC and the respective Governments need to further interrogate and address.

The Council noted that the steering and working groups on the mutual recognition of penalty points are continuing to take forward their work and that a further update will be provided to the next NSMC transport meeting, which is scheduled for November. The Council agreed that that is an important road safety initiative, and it is aware that it is a complex and groundbreaking matter.

The public consultation on the proposals, which was launched in Northern Ireland on 12 March 2013 and which is closing on 14 May 2013, was also noted. The Council further noted the commitment from both sides, North and South, to have the necessary primary and secondary legislation in place by 31 December 2014. This will be a first for Europe: the mutual recognition of penalty points between two jurisdictions that are members of the European Union.

Where road user safety is concerned, the Council welcomed the continued sharing of knowledge and experience between officials from both jurisdictions on the delivery of our respective road safety strategies and on measures to further reduce road casualties. I particularly welcomed the recent launch of Ireland's road safety strategy, which took place at an EU road transport safety conference on serious injuries that was held in Dublin on 20 March. That event was attended by Minister Kennedy and me. It was a very important event, because, although a lot of attention has been focused legitimately on road deaths, less attention has historically been paid to serious injuries. That is a matter that Leo Varadkar and the Irish Government are quite clearly attending to and taking forward as part of the EU presidency.

On that occasion, I also met the chair of the Road Safety Authority (RSA) in Dublin, Gay Byrne. I have written to him, subsequently, to suggest some further North/South activities between the RSA and the Department of the Environment (DOE) on road safety. I also shared progress on the drafting of our road traffic amendment Bill, which will include provisions to tackle drink-driving, reform the learner and restricted driver regime with the introduction of graduated driver licensing, and make the wearing of helmets mandatory when riding a quad bike on public roads. I hope that that Bill will come before the House, subject to Executive approval, for First and Second Reading in advance of the summer recess.

We also welcomed progress on Ireland’s road traffic Bill 2013, which will include provisions to further reform Ireland’s driver licensing regime, adjust the penalty points regime and make a number of amendments to legislation regarding commercial vehicle roadworthiness testing. We shared information on new road safety campaigns in each jurisdiction, including Vision Zero, which I launched last week and which has already been the subject of positive public comment even though it is a very challenging campaign; a new 60-second TV campaign launched by the RSA in March 2013 to educate drivers on sharing the roads safely with cyclists; and a seat belt wearing campaign that is planned for launch by the Department this autumn.

We welcomed the continuing proactive co-operation to target a wide range of illegal activity in the goods haulage and passenger transport industries. I accept, especially having met the haulage industry yesterday, that further tension is needed in the escalation of enforcement, especially in respect of goods haulage. When I met the hauliers yesterday, I adjourned the meeting to reconvene on 29 May to see what more can be done in the interim period. Nonetheless, there will be an increasingly targeted approach towards enforcement and continuing liaison on cross-border enforcement operations in both jurisdictions.

We welcomed the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Ireland and the UK on mutual recognition of vehicle-type approval, which should help trade. The Council also noted the continuing co-operation on enforcement of EU tachograph and drivers hours rules and proposed a training exchange for enforcement officers, which will take place in 2013.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I, too, express my sympathies to the family and friends of the victim of that latest tragic road accident.

I thank the Minister for his statement. I welcome the ongoing co-operation between the two jurisdictions to improve road safety across Ireland. Given that the mutual recognition of penalty points between North and South would require a multi-agency approach in Northern Ireland, and given that the Minister has given the commitment that the necessary legislation will be in place by December 2014, will he confirm that he has Executive agreement to bring forward a Bill on this important issue? If so, when does he expect it to be introduced?

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

I thank the Member for her question. To date, the number of deaths this year on our roads in Northern Ireland is 18, which is around twice the figure for this time last year. It is difficult to extrapolate from that what the figures will be over the next four and eight months. Nonetheless, it is a very timely and stark message to all of us and all road users. It is a message that is also understood in the Republic, where there has been an even more disproportionate increase in the number of road deaths in the four months of this calendar year than there was in the same period last year. That is something that Leo Varadkar, when Mr Kennedy and I attended the EU serious injuries conference, raised and spoke about to the media.

That is why we have this campaign, Vision Zero, and why I will be writing to all MLAs, all civil servants and all Ministers to ask them to go online and make the personal commitment to do what they should be doing with respect to road safety. These issues are very personal when it comes to serious injuries, road deaths and their impact on families. If we make that personal commitment, we may be able to make some contribution to ensuring that the figures at the end of the next four months are not of the same pattern as the last four months.

The approach being adopted by Minister Varadkar and me on the mutual recognition of penalty points has been discussed and agreed through the NSMC structures. Policy proposals are currently being developed and, on the far side, those proposals will go to the Executive for approval in advance of legislation being tabled. The principle has been approved. As is normal with new law, we are now going through the relevant processes to bring about the right outcome.

It is not straightforward work. This will be the first time that there will be mutual recognition of penalty points in the European Union; nobody has gone down this road before. Consequently, given the complexity of the regimes North and South, there is a need to create the right administration on the far side of the law being introduced to ensure that there is mutuality in the recognition of penalty points for the categories that will be captured. It is not going to be all categories; it is going to be those areas of greatest threat, namely drink-driving, the wearing of seat belts, excess speed, careless driving and the use of telephones in cars. The administrative, legal and management issues are very challenging. Nonetheless, the two Governments and the respective Ministers have made the commitment that we will have the law in place by 2014 and the practice in place by 2015.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

I want to touch on one of the latter points in the Minister's statement, about:

"co-operation to target a wide range of illegal activity in the goods haulage and passenger transport industries."

What amount of illegality has been detected as a result of that co-operation? What kind of illegality has been taking place? Is there evidence that the co-operation that is taking place between both jurisdictions, on each side of the border, is actually lowering the level of illegality?

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

The question is very timely, given the conversation that I had with the hauliers yesterday. It is their view, for example, that, even in the past number of months, because of challenging economic circumstances and the benefit — I use that word in a very neutral way — to hauliers that use illegal fuel in savings per gallon and benefit per mile, its use is having a hugely disproportionate impact on legitimate businesses.

It is the view of the legitimate businesses that up to and maybe in excess of 50% of hauliers are now using illegal fuel. It is also their view that those multiple small family businesses in the North, in particular, that have served this part of the world very well over many years, face the most immediate threat, given the scale of illegal use. I am only using that as one example of vehicles and hauliers that are not in compliance. There are many examples of the failure of compliance; it is not just that people are using illegitimate fuel.

So, what are we doing in that regard? In my previous remarks, I indicated that I think that the situation is acute and that there is going to be a need to escalate all our enforcement actions, be it through the Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA), the Organised Crime Task Force, the various policing and criminal asset agencies North and South or the respective tax authorities. Mindful of that, I think that there is a need for a gear change. A lot of work is going on, but a lot of further work is required. For example, I have a map in my Department on which we have identified those parts of the North, particularly in south Armagh, where fuel sludge has been abandoned on multiple occasions — in essentially the same place — to be collected by the relevant authorities.

There is a road in Northern Ireland where sludge has been dumped following fuel laundering on 10 separate occasions at around the same location. Given that scale of problem, that works itself through with the impact on the hauliers and so on.

So, what are we doing? First, there will be a roll-out of operations that will try to create cohesion between the Southern authorities and the Northern authorities in targeting hauliers who are suspected of failing to comply. The failure of compliance is significant. The figures from the last compliance survey indicated that compliance was at only about 70%. Therefore, at any one time, up to 30% of heavy goods vehicles were not in compliance. That is an improving situation; nonetheless, it is not good enough.

Secondly, we believe that there are hauliers who are using Dublin port in order to move their goods into Britain. Although there appears to be a lot of rigour in the enforcement in Britain at the Scottish ports, in our view, there is not similar enforcement at the Welsh ports. Consequently, I will be writing to the relevant authorities in Britain and the South asking whether the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA), which is the relevant compliance agency in Britain, given that it seems to have a rigorous approach for vehicles from Northern Ireland going into Scotland — there is some evidence and some would claim that that is disproportionate compared with vehicles from other jurisdictions — is applying the same rigour in its other operations, especially at the Holyhead port. Arising from yesterday's meeting, I will write to the relevant authorities to ensure that compliance enforcement is robust at all points of entry and is targeted against hauliers who we suspect are not complying, be that around tachographs, the quality of their vehicle or the illegal fuel that they might be using.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. I welcome the Minister's statement. I welcome the very last point you brought up, Minister, because it seems that a number of small operators who leave here through Belfast heading to Stranraer are unduly stopped by VOSA in England compared with anyone who is going to Holyhead. When do you think you will hear anything back about that? Will you consider meeting hauliers who are having such problems?

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

As I said in my previous remarks, I met hauliers yesterday. I also met them in December when I asked them to come in following the closure of the haulage firm Target. There had been some suggestion — this may not be the full answer, by any means — that part of the reason for the closure of that business was that it was getting squeezed by other hauliers whose cost basis was less because they were using illegal fuel to give them a competitive advantage.

I adjourned yesterday's meeting in the late afternoon with the words that we would reconvene on 29 May, because, in my view, the situation is so acute — there is no other conclusion to draw from that — that it needs immediate intervention. I think that DOE and DVA, through the roll-out of new law on goods vehicles, are escalating their response to the threats that they face across the range of compliance issues, be it around illegal fuel, the conduct of drivers or the quality of vehicles.

So, there is a new regime in place. I will give you one example. New law was rolled out late last June. The consequence of it was that, in January this year, a new enforcement regime was introduced, arising from which there have been 19 so-called public inquiries into the conduct of hauliers. Two of those hauliers are now on the verge of having their haulage licence not just suspended but withdrawn. That was welcomed by the hauliers yesterday. The new regime, created by law through this Assembly in a previous mandate, has now moved to the point where enforcement is interrogating 19 hauliers about which we have concerns. Two of those hauliers are on the verge of losing their licence.

That is the sort of approach that we need to adopt and escalate going forward. I will meet hauliers; I have no difficulty with that. I will meet the representative organisation again on 29 May in order to take these matters forward.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Like other Members, I offer sympathy and send thoughts and prayers to all those victims this year. There were 18 deaths, which was most worrying going into a new year.

On the matter of the Narrow Water bridge, will the Minister acknowledge to the House the importance of that project infrastructure for south Down right through to Carlingford lough? Is there any likelihood of seeing progress on this most important matter?

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

Let us be frank about this. We are at the eleventh hour or one minute to midnight, or whatever way you want to convey it. We have run out of road, or run out of bridge, when it comes to this matter being concluded. If that does not bring people to their senses, I do not know what will.

Yesterday, at the North/South institutional meeting, a paper was delivered on how to maximise the drawdown of EU funds. At that meeting, we were trying to scope out how to draw down and maximise EU funds, and on the same agenda there was the issue of the North/South review, part of which, in my view, is to do with Narrow Water. So, on one hand, we are asking to draw down more funds, and on the other hand, there is a risk, which I trust is diminishing, that we are not going to draw down the EU funds for Narrow Water.

Can someone in politics or in government reconcile that to me? President Barroso has opened up the European funding door for us, but in my view we have a lot more to do in order to get through that door. That is as much a comment on my Department as it is on government. How do we reconcile the fact that while Barroso opens the door for European funding, we close it when it comes to Narrow Water? That does not add up politically, and it is disrespectful to the European authorities. More than anything else, it cuts off our nose to spite our face. Whose noses will be cut off? It will be the many people in south Down and County Louth and in the Mournes and the Cooleys; people who need more economic opportunities.

Imagine the situation — I am not prejudging this — in which a planning application is made for a new ferry between Greencastle and Carlingford. I am not saying that that application is going to come in soon —

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

It will.

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

Someone is saying in the background that it is. I am not prejudging in any shape or form what the outcome of that might be. However, that would be an infrastructure project between two parts of Ireland, between the people of Louth and the people of Down, along with a bridge at the same time. What message would that send out for economic and tourist opportunities and the building of North/South relationships between those two parts of this island?

If this matter is not concluded in the next couple of weeks, we may be past one minute to midnight in getting it over the line. Therefore, there is only one way forward, which is to make the decision now.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for that. I share his condolences with all those who have been bereaved through traffic accidents this year and in previous years, and also yesterday in County Fermanagh.

The Minister may be aware of significant delays in obtaining operator licences. I wonder whether there is any tie-up between the Republic of Ireland operator licence and the UK operator licence, and whether any lessons can be learned from either jurisdiction in deliberating on those applications.

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

I note what the Member says. It has not been brought to my attention heretofore that there is a delay in issuing operator licences. There should not be delays in issuing consents, whatever their character, be they environmental, planning or road licences. That is part of good government and making sure that our economy works in the interests of all our citizens. If the Member has examples of delays in operator licences being issued, I ask that he bring those to my attention. It has not been brought to my attention thus far by other political representatives or representative organisations for the haulage business. However, if it is brought to my attention, I am more than willing to look at it.

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

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his statement. The Minister had discussions with the Southern Government about changes that they are making to the road traffic Bill 2013 and specifically, as referenced in his statement, the amendments on commercial vehicle roadworthiness testing. Will that, in effect, bring standards in the Republic of Ireland up to and in line with standards in Northern Ireland, or are there implications for hauliers and commercial vehicle users in Northern Ireland?

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

I will have to get back to the Member on the specific details. Although I said 2013 in my statement, I think that the Bill is proposed for 2014. However, I will come back to the Member about whether the roadworthiness regime is to be advanced in the image of what we have in the North.

We agree with the Republic that some previous European proposals about roadworthiness were overreaching. My Department, through London, and Minister Varadkar, directly with the European Commission, raised serious concerns, as did the Committee, about the scale and ambition of some European roadworthiness proposals. As I understand it, in the latter months of last year, the scale of those proposals was mitigated in a way that will not disadvantage people here.

We had another conversation on the proposal in London, which has now received Royal Assent, to charge foreign operators to use roads in Britain and Northern Ireland. That will go live next year. I am in sympathy with the Irish Government's view that there should be exemptions for some roads. Those exemptions should not be restricted to a small number of what were previously called unapproved roads, which weave in and out of the border area, criss-crossing at places that people are not aware of, but be broader than that. Given the need for spatial planning on the island of Ireland and the fact that the Irish Government have contributed so substantially to the roads infrastructure in the North and have further ambitions for future years, London should be more flexible about exemptions to the proposed charging of foreign operators using roads in Northern Ireland and Britain.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Aire as ucht an ráitis atá romhainn ar maidin.

The Minister has written to Gay Byrne and Noel Brett of the Road Safety Authority about elements of its strategy that the DOE might adopt in the North. Will the Minister give us details about those additional elements? Has the NSMC considered the merits of speed limit signs in the North changing to kilometres per hour, as is the case in the rest of Europe?

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

I did write to Gay Byrne. We had a conversation in Dublin Castle about the increasing number of deaths in the three months to date in the North and in Britain. We had years of reducing the number of deaths on the roads in Ireland, with only 48 deaths in the North last year. However, given the serious situation and the risks, could further work be done to profile road safety issues? Given the profile of Mr Byrne, in particular, could he come to the North to get the road safety message out more clearly, both here and on the island generally?

I outlined some possibilities: for example, in the event that the Executive endorse the Bill, which is now all but drafted and contains the road traffic proposals that I referred to earlier — graduated driver-licensing, a reduction in alcohol limits and helmets for quad-bike riders on public roads — there may be an opportunity to demonstrate the Government's authority over road safety issues and encourage more and more people to apply their minds and attention to better driving. There are other examples of that nature.

The more that we co-ordinate on an all-Ireland basis, the better we will be. That is why I am writing to Ministers who are responsible for road safety in all Governments in these islands to suggest that, in the margins of the forthcoming British-Irish Council meeting, which is scheduled for June, we all sit down and try to identify how we can have more integration and coherence when it comes to road safety law and practice. There is the new Bill in the South, the forthcoming Bill in the North and the Green Paper in London, which will look at some of the proposals in our road traffic Bill over the next number of weeks. Is there not an opportunity to create coherence around all that legislation so that, on these islands, there is mutual legislation and a greater scale of common approach that ensures a greater opportunity for people to improve road safety?

The issue of speed limits and signage has not been discussed. You may have a point; it may be worth looking at. I will take further advice on that.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Minister's statement referred to a seat belt wearing campaign to be launched in the autumn. That surprised me somewhat because I thought that most people were already compliant. Does he have any evidence that cross-border traffic impacts considerably on that problem?

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

The main reasons for death or serious injury in road traffic collisions and crashes — they are not accidents because 95% of road crashes come down to human error, and only 5% are viewed as being due to circumstances beyond an individual driver or pedestrian's control — are using a phone, excess speed, drink-driving and carelessness. I will have to come back to the Member on seat belts. There are figures on the scale of that problem, but I cannot recall them now. Obviously, the problem is more acute in respect of the desirability of wearing seat belts in rear seats. The Irish Government have identified the wearing of seat belts as a road safety issue, and any campaign that addresses any of the threats or risk areas is welcome.

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

I share other Members' regret that road deaths are again on the increase. The Minister will recall that, in the distant past, many road deaths, particularly of young people, took place in border areas.

Can the Minister assure us that the co-operation between the RSA, the DOE, the gardaí and the PSNI is alive and well today? I believe that that co-operation made a very positive contribution to reducing deaths on both sides of the border.

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

I can certainly make a definitive comment about the co-operation between the RSA in the South and the DOE and its agencies in the North. That co-operation is very intense. In March, for example, the relevant authorities North and South met at a conference in Enniskillen to deal further with road safety issues. The fact that, from a standing start a year and a half ago, we have made such progress on the mutual recognition of penalty points is only representative of the fact that Mr Kennedy and I were at the EU conference on serious injuries. More and more on this issue, and on many transport and environment matters, there is better and greater communication and familiarity.

Mr Kennedy and I concur that, at the meetings that we attend in the sectoral formats, substantive, serious and ongoing relevant work is being undertaken and expanded. All the indications are that cross-border co-operation between the police agencies North and South — the Garda Síochána and the PSNI — has never been better than at the moment. I think that that also extends to these issues.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

In answer to a previous question, the Minister mentioned the five main reasons for road collisions, one of which is drink-driving. Were drink-driving strategies discussed at the meeting? Can he confirm that he has changed his mind and is now supporting the Committee's position, which is that repeat offenders for drink-driving offences should face an automatic three-year ban?

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

I thank the Member for his question. Yes, drink-driving was touched on in the overall conversation about road safety and the new legislation that is coming before the Assembly soon, subject to Executive agreement. So, drink-driving is always an issue that is discussed in and around the North/South Ministerial level conversations.

More than that, if the new law is adopted in Northern Ireland, we will be adopting a practice on drink-driving limits that has been in force since October 2011 in the South. As of the bank holiday at the end of October 2011, the Irish Government created a new regime for drink-driving levels. That regime means that there is essentially a de facto zero level for novice drivers and professional drivers and a reduced level of 50 mg in each 100 ml of blood for all others involved in driving offences.

I have no doubt that, when the Bill comes before the Assembly, there will be a lot of conversations on what the right penalty should be for drink-driving offences. The Member touched on that when he said that the Committee's position is that there should be a three-year ban for a repeat offender. My recollection tells me that that is the direction, if not already the practice, in the South. So, I look forward to the debate on that in the Chamber, and I have no doubt that amendments will be tabled on that matter.

You will not get any argument from me about the need to upgrade our law so that we have more deterrents for and greater enforcement in drink-driving. That is why I made the proposals that I did for alcohol limits in people's blood. Clearly, where the line is between where we should be now and where we might be, which was indicated in the Member's question, is the subject of some dispute.

I am in a settled place in what I think is the right approach at this stage, but I understand the argument that we should go further. For example, I have had representations that, if there is to be a zero limit for novice and professional drivers, there should be a zero level for all classes of drivers. I have no doubt that that matter will be further raised and discussed, perhaps by amendment, when we come to the Consideration Stage of the Bill. You will not get resistance from me to the idea that we should push on, even though, in my view, we should not push that far at this stage. However, that is an argument that we are going to have, and the will of the Assembly will prevail.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

On the issue of the mutual recognition of penalty points, does the Minister share the concern of many Northern Ireland drivers that, despite the complexity that he alluded to, it will be another 18 months before we see, hopefully, the issue resolved? In resolving it, has the Minister examined any possibility, given the complex nature of its resolution, that, post December 2014, there might be a role — I know that he is working at this — for the Driver and Vehicle Agency in County Hall in Coleraine?

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

I will not deny that the timeline is challenging and the complexity is great. Consequently, the risk cannot be diminished. Our ambition to have new law through the Dáil and the Assembly by that stage will certainly push us. On the other hand, the legal advice that I received on the matter when I became Minister is that, if this was to be done, it needed to be done as was done with mutual recognition of disqualification; namely, on an island-to-island basis between Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. That was the orthodox position. When we interrogated the legal options, we learned that, contrary to what we had previously understood, Northern Ireland could enter into that relationship with the Republic of Ireland even if the devolved Administrations and the London Government were not inclined to do so. I encouraged the London Government to do so, but they indicated that they were not minded to do it at this stage, although they would watch progress. So, although this was not even a goer legally 18 months ago, we now have the real potential of legislation by the end of 2014. There are risks in that challenging time frame, but we have made a lot of progress in the past 18 months and can do so over the next 18.

The Member makes a very good point, and it is a point that I made to Stephen Hammond and, before him, the junior Minister in DFT, Mike Penning: if there is to be a new regime of charging for heavy goods vehicles for foreign drivers in Britain and Northern Ireland, given that we are the only part of Britain and Northern Ireland that has a land border with another jurisdiction, the issue of enforcement will be much more complex than it would be for those who enter the ports in Britain. Given the multiple roads that criss-cross the border and given that the levy or charging regime will have to apply, is it not desirable to retain staff in DVA to assist with the management and enforcement of all that? It is a good argument, and it is one of a number of arguments that I made to DFT not only to retain the DVA jobs but to see how we can work through the problem in order to sustain the jobs and workforce in Coleraine. It is one of a number of options. The issue is this: is London listening?

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

In relation to the increase in road deaths, has the Minister had any discussions with the PSNI road policing unit about the changes that it has made, which seem simply not to be working?

The Minister also mentioned the Organised Crime Task Force when he was discussing illegal fuel issues. Is it not somewhat concerning that he and his party are not backing the National Crime Agency, which would also deal with similar matters?

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

I have not had any conversations with the PSNI about the changes that Mr Spratt referred to and that he claims are not working. There is a meeting next month, which is a regular meeting between Minister Ford, myself and the PSNI in a ministerial subgroup that looks at issues that are mutual to all of us and relate to all the Departments and the agencies. If something is not working, as Mr Spratt indicates, I would like to hear what that might be. If I then think that there is some weight in it, I will either discuss it with the PSNI directly or raise it at the ministerial meeting.

Mr Spratt makes an interesting point about the National Crime Agency. In my view, the Assets Recovery Agency should never have been closed down. The consequence is that the profile around going after the illegal gangs and individuals — for example those involved in fuel laundering — has collapsed. When do we now hear something coming out of the High Court about Mr Big being taken to court in respect of his illegal operations, having a criminal conviction and having his assets seized and all of that being publicised? It has collapsed. The strategic problem is that the Assets Recovery Agency, which was working in Northern Ireland, was, for some reason or other, closed down and replaced by the Serious Organised Crime Agency. The Serious Organised Crime Agency has virtually no profile, and, when it comes to illegality and criminality, it enters into private arrangements with the culprits around which there is a no-publicity requirement.

Where was the problem in respect of the threat of organised crime? The problem was that an agency that was working was closed down to be replaced by an agency that has no publicity around what it is doing. A senior person in the Serious Organised Crime Agency — remember that the chief executive of SOCA in its earlier life was none other than a previous director general of MI5 — told me that what they were really interested in was international organised crime, particularly the risk of Islamic crime influencing and conducting operations in Britain. That is where the problem arose, Mr Spratt, and you should be aware of that because of your background and your membership of the Policing Board.

There are issues around the NCA, and, at the Executive, I took a view on some of the issues. However, let nobody pretend that my party and other parties are not trying to deal with the issue of organised crime. Let people also recognise that the problem arose when the ARA was closed down and when, wrongly, primacy for national security passed from domestic responsibility to London responsibility. Therein lies the problem around the NCA, and people should recognise and face up to it.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

The Minister has talked at length again about the scourge of illegal fuel on our haulage industry. Apart from talking again about the matter at this meeting of 17 April and lamenting about it again, what steps were actually taken to crush that cross-border assault on both economies? When the Minister tells us that, for example, there is a road where there have been 10 occasions of sludge deposit, it does not exactly create an atmosphere of confidence that, by modern surveillance means and everything else, everything that could be done is being done to crush these operations, about which we seem to have no prosecutions.

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

Although I do not necessarily agree with the extravagance of some of the language of Mr Allister, I do not differ with his sentiment. I have a map — I have shared it with Mr Kennedy — that shows that, in south Armagh, there is not one place where there has been dumping of sludge on 10 occasions but multiple locations where there have been multiple dumpings, on occasions, of sludge. The map brings home in stark terms the scale of the problem and the confidence of organised crime that it can dump the sludge in the same place as it did heretofore with confidence and, as it might see it, impunity. Let us not differ on the scale of the problem and the need for a scale of response. It is the case that there are virtually no prosecutions. The Member, with his legal background, should understand that there may be good reasons why, on occasions, there are no prosecutions and the evidence does not stand up. However, it is a fair question. If there are few or no prosecutions, that raises some challenging questions. I am sure that Mr Kennedy will touch on that in his comments on the statement.

I was on the Policing Board, and I sat on the advisory committee of the Organised Crime Task Force at one stage. Unfortunately, members of the Policing Board are not allowed to sit on that task force, because it was deemed — in my view, wrongly — an operational matter rather than an accountability mechanism. I did not agree with that approach at the time; I do not agree with it now. In fact, there were many people around the Policing Board between 2000 and 2007 who thought that the Policing Board should have been on the Organised Crime Task Force and there might have been more accountability for what is or is not happening.

I do not deny that there is work ongoing, and I know the scale of what the gardaí, the police and the South's Criminal Assets Bureau are doing about all this. However, let us be honest: there is a lack of public profile and a lack of prosecutions. My Department is now picking up the bill for the collection of all the sludge under a new fly-tipping protocol entered into with the councils, in particular the council that is responsible for south Armagh. Whatever good has been done is falling short of what needs to be done. If you want to hear that, speak to the hauliers, who are pulling out their hair as they see their businesses going under. There could be a number of reasons for that, but at the centre is illegal fuel and non-compliant hauliers being able to cut their costs to compete with and drive good businesses out of business. That is not a very healthy sign, so we clearly need to do more. That is why I have reconvened the meeting with them, which will take place in the next month.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I join others in extending my sympathy to the families and friends of all those who have lost their life as a result of road traffic accidents this year.

In compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, I wish to make the following statement on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in the transport sector held in Armagh on Wednesday 17 April 2013. As you have heard, the meeting was chaired by the Environment Minister, Alex Attwood, and attended by me and Minister Varadkar. We also met at an EU conference held in Dublin Castle on 28 March to facilitate the approval of an amendment to the rules of the North/South pension scheme. My statement will address the agenda items that relate to my Department, including the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport paper on EU matters.

The Council discussed the importance of the Narrow Water bridge and noted the timeline for drawdown of European funding. We further noted that the project had obtained planning permission and a marine licence and that the Department is publishing the necessary bridge orders for consultation this week. We looked forward to the project’s assessment process being completed as soon as is practicable.

We also discussed the negative impact of illegal fuel on the transport industry, revenue to the Exchequers and the environment.

In relation to major road projects, the Council noted that a court order had been sought by the Alternative A5 Alliance to quash my decision to proceed with the A5 scheme. On 12 March 2013, the High Court rejected the overwhelming majority of the applicants’ grounds of challenge. However, one of the applicants’ grounds relating to the habitats directive was upheld. At a further meeting on 8 April, the judge confirmed that he would quash the orders relating to the A5 scheme. I decided not to appeal. The non-appeal route offers the best opportunity to progress the scheme in a reasonable timescale. However, the decision of the court means that there will be a delay while further assessment work is completed. We noted that construction work on the A8 project is progressing well and is expected to be completed by early 2015.

The Council welcomed the ongoing positive co-operation between relevant Departments on EU-related transport issues. We also noted the current position and opportunities for further co-operative engagement on key EU dossiers of mutual interest, including the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) regulation, the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) regulation and the fourth railway, better airports, roadworthiness and clean power for transport packages.

On sustainable travel and transport, the Council noted the co-operation between the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Department for Regional Development on promoting walking, cycling and a shift in behaviour to more sustainable forms of transport throughout both jurisdictions. It also heard about the planning under way for the Walk to School Week 2013, the cross-border Schools’ Challenge event scheduled for the week commencing 8 May 2013 and the partnership arrangements being put in place for Bike Week 2013, including the cross-border Workplace Cycle Challenge. We also noted the ongoing co-operation between ecar in Northern Ireland and ESB e-cars on the installation of a common electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

The Council agreed to hold its next North/South Ministerial Council transport meeting on 28 November 2013.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his statement. With your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will ask him about a couple of areas.

The Minister has explained his logic for not appealing the court decision on the A5 project. Will he confirm, however, whether the £50 million due from the Irish Government in 2015-16 is still earmarked for the project? Will he also advise the House on his discussions with Executive colleagues on the £180 million budgeted for the project in this financial year? Has the Department sufficient shovel-ready projects to bring forward to boost the construction industry? Finally, will the Minister advise the House what the latest developments in the TEN-T will mean for Northern Ireland?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary questions.

As yet, there have been no discussions with the Irish Government about their contribution, which was to be made in the later years of the project anyway, so that discussion will be ongoing.

I think that the Member said "£180 million". I stand to be corrected, but my information is that £118 million was allocated this year. My officials are already in discussion with the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) on how money of that nature can be spent, particularly on structural maintenance. The Member will know that the winter conditions that we have endured, even latterly, had a huge adverse impact on all roads, particularly our minor roads. So I am very confident that we can spend most, if not all, of that allocation. Obviously, that will mean co-operation with DFP on the future financing of major road projects, and we will continue to engage in that.

We have had very positive engagement on the TEN-T proposals. We have been working hard. As the Member knows, the Department has a very good record of drawing down European moneys. We have been making further representations, particularly to the Irish Government, given their current presidency of the EU, on the inclusion of Londonderry in the core network. We will continue to do that.

All that work is ongoing, and we have had positive engagement through you and the Committee for Regional Development. You will recall the very successful visit last year of the chair of the EU Transport Committee, Mr Brian Simpson MEP, and we will continue to work closely and engage on those issues.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. I thank the Minister for his statement. With regard to sustainable travel and transport, the Minister will be aware of the hugely successful cycle hire scheme in Dublin. Have we learned anything from that, and when might we see it being rolled out here?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. He will know that, in January this year, I launched an active travel strategy, and that continues. It sets out targets to increase by 2020 the average distances walked and cycled and the percentage of total trips taken by cycling to be in line with levels to be experienced in the rest of the United Kingdom. I have seen at first hand the bike scheme in Dublin, and we are pursuing how that can be introduced, particularly here in Belfast through the council. I would be optimistic that, in conjunction with others, we will be able to bring forward schemes of that nature. They are positive, and they help with sustainable travel.

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

I welcome the statement, in particular the publication of the bridge order, which was placed in the press last week and this week. I have no doubt that the Minister will acknowledge to the House the importance of the Narrow Water bridge project, and I acknowledge his commitment to help to deliver it, including the assessment process and its timeline. Can the House take it as read that he will commit to look at the assessment process as a matter of urgency when the time frame is complete? Does he agree that the building of the bridge at Narrow Water will help complement what he talked about — Walk to School Week, cross-border schools and also the workplace cycle challenge —

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

The Member has asked a number of questions. I call the Minister.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for her question. I have to say that there is not a school within a hound's gowl of Narrow Water bridge, but anyway.

I assure the Member and I assure the House that there has been no delay on the part of my Department. Every effort is being made to progress the necessary orders. I say to the Member and, perhaps, to some of her political colleagues and Members of other parties in the House that it seems to me that there is an ongoing battle — a type of turf war — between the SDLP and Sinn Féin for ownership of the project and who should celebrate and who can claim victory on it. I have no interest in that. That is not relevant to my work or the work of my Department. I am not going to get caught up in the crossfire between the two parties, and I have been careful about that. However, I should say that it is absolutely clear that there are processes that we cannot shortcut for political convenience or political expediency or for the benefit of waving manifestos in the air and saying, "We got it, and everybody else did not really want it".

I am not interested in the party politics of the scheme. I am dealing with the legal processes that I have to deal with. After the consultation period has ended, I am bound to consider whether it will be necessary to bring forward a public inquiry. I am aware that the Minister of Finance and Personnel has to consider the business case.

I have no doubt that he will consider that on its proper basis. However, I have to say that it is not helped by unnecessary political grandstanding, which the two nationalist parties in that area are engaging in as they attempt to claim ownership of the project. I say that in the spirit in which it is intended. It will not bring the bridge's overall prospects any closer.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for the statement. In the previous statement, we heard the Minister of the Environment indicate that some elements of fuel laundering were discussed. I wonder what the Minister for Regional Development can tell us about progress on cutting out fuel laundering. It is a scourge on this society, and the general public in Northern Ireland do not see any positive action with prosecutions coming forward.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for raising this very important subject not only because of my responsibilities as Minister for Regional Development but because of my constituency responsibilities in Newry and Armagh. The earlier statement and remarks from the Minister of the Environment confirmed the seriousness of the issue. I think that I recently described the situation as an epidemic in south Armagh, but that does not even do proper justice to the scale of things. There are multiple examples of where sludge is being dumped at the same locations in the same area. That is clearly having not only a very severe impact on the economy as a result of lost revenue, on the environment and in the costs that are entailed in cleaning up but, as far as I am aware, a very worrying and sinister impact on community relations in south Armagh.

I recently visited families who are part of the Protestant and unionist minority living in isolated border areas. They are law-abiding citizens and are entitled to the protection of this Executive, this Assembly and the neighbouring jurisdiction. However, they are living in fear. It was put to me frankly and starkly, and I shared this at the sectoral meeting with the other Ministers, that people are dumping diesel where once they dumped bodies.

That has very sinister implications for what is called a shared future and community relations. The law of the land has to extend to all areas, including to those areas of south Armagh, or wherever those actions are taken. It may be an unpalatable truth for some to come to terms with, but it is inescapable to me that moneys that are generated as a result of that black economy and that illegal activity will, ultimately, find their way back to republican paramilitaries. That cannot be overlooked and cannot be wished away.

I wish that, through the PSNI and HMRC, more examples were made public of people who are responsible for that activity being charged, brought through the courts and provided with adequate punishment through the law. Otherwise, we are sending a very bad signal to those law-abiding citizens from both communities in south Armagh who are absolutely disgusted and seriously worried about the lack of law and order and due process in that area.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Some latitude has been shown, but I ask all Members to relate their questions to the issues that are in the statement.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I welcome the Minister's statement, but I am somewhat disappointed by his response to Karen McKevitt about Narrow Water bridge. I am not a member of the SDLP or Sinn Féin, but I want to see that bridge go ahead as soon as possible. It is up to him and all Departments to ensure that it is not lost to Northern Ireland.

Under the heading "EU Matters", six issues of mutual interest were identified. The Minister will know of my concerns about roadworthiness around the Ards peninsula and the Strangford constituency. Is there anything from the EU roadworthiness packages that people in the Strangford constituency can expect in the near future?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary questions. I was putting accurately on the record the fact that my Department has not been in any way delaying the scheme that is known as the Narrow Water bridge project. I have grown tired in recent weeks of the toing and froing and political grandstanding that some parties have been engaging in. I absolve you of any of that blame, if that is comforting to you.

The Member knows about the road infrastructure network in his area because he continually raises the issue. As roads Minister, I want to see those improvements and structural maintenance brought forward as quickly as possible. Over the past couple of years, we enjoyed record levels of structural maintenance spend on roads. However, the road network, conditions and competing priorities are such that it is not possible to upgrade every road as quickly as we would like. However, we will continue to work at that and use whatever means, and drawdown whatever resources, even extra resources, that are available to us.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Minister rightly sounded a note of caution about Narrow Water bridge. It would behove the House to keep in mind what happened there at a worse time in the Province. There seems to be a race between the SDLP and Sinn Féin to see who can get over the bridge first. Will it be additional funding that will be poured into that project or has the Minister set aside funding from his own budget?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. This has never been a Department for Regional Development (DRD) sponsored project nor was it asked or invited to provide money for it. It is my understanding that the bulk of the money is being sought from Europe and the remaining money has to be provided through DFP and the Executive. That is why the business case is with DFP, which will give it due consideration. In truth, it has never been a Roads Service project, though assistance was given on bridge orders and some technical assessment. The co-sponsors of the project are Louth County Council in the Free State — sorry, the Republic of Ireland — and Newry and Mourne District Council. They are the prime promoters of the project. DRD is not involved.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I will switch it to the other side of the country. Did the western corridor come up for discussion? If not, why not? That is the corridor from Belfast through Enniskillen, where there is also a bridge, and on to Sligo.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

The western corridor as such was not raised. There was discussion about the A5, and if you want to include that part of the western corridor, I am sure that you can. I have outlined the discussion and the current position in relation to the A5.

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. I suppose that I should say at the outset that, as far as my party is concerned, there is no crossfire and there is no grandstanding when it comes to Narrow Water bridge. We are more than happy to work with any party, and all parties in south Down and outside, to guarantee that very important project. What we are seeing here is a very robust lobby from the business community, sports organisations and the community at large in south Down to see the project happen.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Can we have a question, please?

Christopher Hazzard (Sinn Féin, South Down)

That is what we are reflecting. Bearing in mind the words of the Environment Minister, who spoke earlier, does the Minister agree that if moneys from Europe are not utilised to deliver the project, it would be a serious setback for the business community in such towns as Kilkeel, Newcastle, Warrenpoint and Rostrevor?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. Finance is a matter for DFP, and, obviously, they are the people who will consider the issues that he raises. I cannot not make this political point: if this project was so important to the Member and his political party, why did my predecessor, his party colleague, not bring it forward years ago?

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

I thank the Minister for his statement and the answers that he has given to some of the questions. Can the Minister reconfirm that a full-steam-ahead approach is being taken to the A5 and that the moneys earmarked for the project will not be distracted away to the detriment of the project in the long term? There is a feeling that there is a very strong democratic will for the project from Donegal through Derry and Tyrone and into Monaghan. It is a flagship project, and any uncertainty must be ended.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I have set out the current situation; the statement does that accurately. However, I say to the Member, and he will know this: the A5 scheme is delayed, and we have to work through the various processes and abide by those processes to continue to make progress on it. We estimate the delay to be in the region of between a year and 18 months, but it may well be even longer than that. I think that the deputy First Minister made clear earlier that the Executive position on the A5 is unchanged.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I note from recent press that the Minister intends to come down to Omagh to meet some farmers and landowners who are affected by the scheme. I welcome that, because they deserve clarity. Has the Minister any plans to meet other stakeholders affected by the scheme, such as people from small businesses, the chamber, people concerned with road safety and even commuters, or would he be open to such a possibility?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. He may have misunderstood some of the arrangements for the intended meeting. He may be talking about the meeting in the Omagh area to be organised by the Ulster Farmers' Union for early May. I think that the intention is that a senior departmental official will attend that, because it will be dealing primarily with some of the concerns that landowners in the area will have in the situation in which they find themselves. Although I might have a decorative value for such a meeting, I think that the detail would, perhaps, be better explained by senior departmental officials.

My door is open on the issue. I have already met the farmers' union and representatives from the contracting firms involved. We should not forget the impact on the road construction industry at this time. I think that we all share concerns for that. It is important and incumbent on me, as roads Minister, to begin to look at other potential schemes whereby we can give relief and opportunities to the road construction industry. I have also met members of Londonderry Chamber of Commerce. As I said, my door is open. I am, of course, willing to engage with those who are interested as long as it is done on a productive basis.

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

The Minister has breathed new life into the renaissance of the railways since he took over. Has there been any discussion at the cross-border meetings on renewal of the Belfast-Dublin Enterprise service? Have there been exploratory talks on European funding for the reopening of the Knockmore line, which would allow Derry and Dublin to be connected?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his question and, indeed, his ongoing interest, particularly his praise for me for the Coleraine-Londonderry line. The issue did not emerge at the last sectoral meeting, but I will attempt to provide an update to the Member.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Was there any discussion of viable alternatives to the grandiose new A5 road scheme or, most particularly, the very viable and affordable alternative of upgrading sections of the existing road? Does the Minister agree that that is the sensible way forward in these circumstances?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

The Member will know that the judge's ruling has quashed all the statutory orders for the proposed A5 dual carriageway. Effectively, that brings the process back one step to a point at which a public inquiry has been carried out, and I am in receipt of the inspector's report. Any alternative sections or new proposals would, therefore, have to be the subject of a new decision by me and the appropriate making of orders, which would involve significant delay. The Member will also be aware that the A5 scheme is an Executive priority scheme, so it would require acceptance by the Executive. That is the situation in which we find ourselves.

The sitting was suspended at 12.27 pm.

On resuming (Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Mitchel McLaughlin] in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Before I call Mr George Robinson, I inform Members that questions 13 and 15 have been withdrawn and require written answers.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what action his Department is taking to maximise the uptake of the blue badge scheme by eligible drivers. (AQO 3909/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

My Department’s blue badge scheme is available for people with significant mobility difficulties who travel either as drivers or passengers. The scheme provides an extremely valuable service to blue badge holders, who can park on-street close to the facilities and services that they need, thereby improving their lifestyle, independence and freedom of choice.

Information about the scheme is displayed on the NI Direct website. Application forms for and information leaflets on the scheme are available in many public buildings, including doctors' surgeries, libraries, disability organisations, Citizens Advice and Roads Service offices, including the blue badge unit in Enniskillen.

Once issued, a blue badge is normally valid for three years. Over the past 12 years, there has been a large increase in the number issued each year. In 1999, approximately 17,000 badges were issued compared with over 36,000 during 2012. The current number issued to people with disabilities in Northern Ireland is nearly 106,000.

My Department will shortly commence a public consultation about a number of planned and potential administrative and operational changes to the blue badge scheme in Northern Ireland. Proposals are intended to contribute to the more effective prevention of misuse and fraud and improved enforcement. I encourage all Members to contribute views on these important changes during the consultation period.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

Is the Minister confident that all people entitled to a blue badge have applied under the current scheme?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. Given the increase since 1999 and the total number issued, which we estimate to be in and around 106,000, I think that a significant percentage of our population has applied. Of course, the opportunity is there, and we encourage those who may benefit from and genuinely need a blue badge to apply.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

How does the cost of a blue badge in Northern Ireland compare with the cost elsewhere in the United Kingdom or the Irish Republic?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary. The current legislation for blue badges in Northern Ireland, which has been in place since the early 1980s, sets a fee of £2. I fully acknowledge that it is difficult to put a monetary value on a blue badge. The main purpose of the badge is to make a valuable contribution to the lives of many people with a disability who have a mobility problem.

I will give you the range of costs across the rest of the United Kingdom and — I nearly said the "Free State"— the Republic of Ireland. Authorities in Scotland can charge up to £20. Authorities in England can charge up to £10. At present, there is no fee in Wales. In the Republic of Ireland, a disabled parking permit costs €35. My Department is taking the opportunity of the consultation to seek views on the cost of a blue badge in Northern Ireland.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

2. asked the Minister for Regional Development, following recent developments in relation to the A5, whether other road building schemes will now be progressed. (AQO 3910/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

My Department has received funding for the A5 dual carriageway project as the result of an Executive decision. I recognise that it is important that other schemes in a position to be progressed ahead of the A5 are given full consideration by the Executive. I intend to bring to the Executive proposals detailing other options, such as moving forward with procurement on other possible schemes. That approach provides the best possible support for the construction industry. In the meantime, my Department continues to develop a number of schemes to a procurement-ready position, should additional funding become available.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his response. Will he provide information on the readiness — he mentioned that schemes needed to be ready — of the Craigantlet project? I know that he recognises the value of that scheme.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his ingenious supplementary question on his constituency interests. He will remember that we were at the site meeting looking at the difficulties being encountered there. I will update him, because I had a sense that he might raise the issue.

A planning application was submitted in January 2012, and, following discussions with local residents and elected representatives, Roads Service engaged consultants to undertake a review of the proposed scheme. It will compare the Department's preferred layout with alternative proposals that have been put forward by local residents. Work on the review has taken longer than expected due to the large number of alternative proposals that have been received.

Although the review should be completed within the coming weeks, the various statutory processes are still at an early stage. Further public consultation will be needed so that the planning process can be concluded. Design work needs to be finalised, necessary land will need to be vested and contract documents need to be prepared so that the scheme can proceed to tender. The timescale for this work will depend on a number of factors. There is a prospect that the scheme will proceed to the construction stage within two years, but it may take longer.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. Will he end the long delay in the provision of the A26 by bringing forward a paper to the Executive? That project is continually being put on the long finger. Will he give the House an assurance that he will make it a priority and deliver the A26 once and for all, now that funds are available and he is the Minister?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. He will know that, since I took charge of regional development, we have carried forward a number of schemes through the various stages, including the A26. I await receipt of the public inquiry details, which will hopefully come later in the year. I am aware of the Member's interest in that scheme, as well as that of other Members. My party colleague Robin Swann continually makes representations to me on the merits of the A26 scheme.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Where is he?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

He does not have to be here for you to know that. [Laughter.] He has been very active in that, as, indeed, have other local representatives. I recognise the benefits that would accrue from a scheme such as the A26. I tactfully say to the Member that I would be pleased to have the support of his party colleagues at Executive level as we seek to bring forward schemes such as the A26 and others.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I would like Members to stick to the original question, if possible, and it would be helpful if the Minister did likewise.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Thank you, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Earlier today, the deputy First Minister outlined the Executive's commitment to the A5 project. Will the Minister tell us whether the assessment on the EU habitats directive has commenced? Does he have any indication of when that will conclude so that the project can move ahead?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. He is presumably aware of Lord Justice Stephens's judgement and the ramifications of that. We are seeking to work through that consultation, so we are not in a position to pre-empt or predetermine any outcome. The work on the habitats directive and the necessary consultation has already begun, and we will continue to make progress as that process evolves. I very much hope that the Member understands the need to be cautious and not to arrive at predetermined outcomes. It is enough to say that the Department is working at addressing the issues that were raised.

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

The Minister, as a man with his ear to the ground, will, I am sure, accept that transport infrastructure is absolutely critical to attracting inward investment. He may also know that, in the past three years, of 519 potential inward investors, fewer than 8% visited the north-west. Does the Minister agree that it is absolutely critical that the A5 is on track again as quickly as possible? Will he give us an indication of when that will happen?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his supplementary. Of course, the Member will know that. as roads Minister, I am keen to see the upgrading and improvement of the entire strategic network. I have no difficulty with restating that today. As we have clearly outlined, the A5 project is delayed. We will work through the processes that are necessary. We estimate that that delay will be somewhere in the region of a year to 18 months, but it could be longer. That is why it is necessary and incumbent on me, as roads Minister, to look at possible alternatives and bring them from being perhaps procurement-ready to more shovel-ready.

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

3. asked the Minister for Regional Development what steps his Department can take to minimise traffic noise from the M1 affecting residents in the Ardmore area of Finaghy. (AQO 3911/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

When my Department builds a new road through a residential area or widens a section of road that brings it closer to existing properties, it must comply with the Noise Insulation Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1995. The part of the M1 adjacent to Ardmore Park between Stockmans Lane and Blacks Road was widened in 2004. As part of the preparation for those works, during the legal planning process for the road improvement and, in particular, the preparation of the environmental statement, full consideration was given to the issue of noise, along with all other environmental issues. Mitigation measures were provided in the form of a new road surface. It was considered that the provision of noise barriers was not necessary.

Recent noise modelling work completed as a review of the M1 widening scheme from Stockmans Lane to Blacks Road concluded that none of the properties modelled was assessed as qualifying for insulation under the Noise Insulation Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1995. My Department, therefore, does not intend to provide further noise mitigation measures at that location.

Roads Service, along with other competent authorities, including major airports, railways and industry, are working towards the development of a noise action plan for Northern Ireland, in line with the requirements of the Environmental Noise Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006. In that context, I can advise that Ardmore has not been identified as a candidate noise management area. It is anticipated that the work will be completed later this year.

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

I think that residents in the Ardmore area of Finaghy will be disappointed to hear that the Minister does not seem to think that the noise inflicted by the M1 on their properties is worthy of further investigation. Following the recent upgrade of the M1, with the consequence of extra traffic going on to the M1 as a result of Belfast on the Move and the works being done in the city centre, when will be the earliest point at which he could give me some sense that a review might be possible for those residents?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. He is being slightly unfair: he implies that I am somehow opposed to the residents of Ardmore benefiting from noise insulation assistance. In my constituency, albeit in a different context, I had to lobby hard during the Troubles to get noise insulation packages for the residents of my home village of Bessbrook because of helicopter noise.

My point is that there are levels of noise that meet the requirement that assistance should and would be given. As a result of the measurements taken and verified, the area in question does not qualify for the scheme. Of course, if additional or new evidence is provided in assistance to that case, I will certainly look at the detail. Representatives from the general area have made similar representations, but that is the current situation with the detailed noise assessments that have been carried out in the area.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister alluded to the considerable traffic noise in the Ardmore area of Finaghy. He will also be aware that there is considerable traffic noise in the town of Dungiven, which would be considerably alleviated if the A6 between Dungiven and Londonderry were to proceed. I am happy to lobby the Finance Minister. Is he happy to co-operate?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am not going to say anything about a marriage of convenience or anything like that. The Member has skillfully moved from the M1 motorway to Dungiven, where, as yet, there is no bypass. He will know that that is still under consideration. The argument for the Dungiven bypass has been a compelling one for many years, and the assistance that it would bring in reducing environmental damage would be considerable. So, I am very happy to consider it, and I welcome his offer to lobby the Finance Minister. I hope that he has more joy than I have sometimes had.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I welcome the flexibility of the supplementary question and the Minister's reply.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

4. asked the Minister for Regional Development for an update on progress on the Castledawson to Randalstown section of the A6. (AQO 3912/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

The direction order and environmental notice to proceed for the Randalstown to Castledawson scheme were confirmed in March 2011. The vesting orders remain in draft and will be made after funding for the scheme has been confirmed.

The inspector’s report on the November 2007 public inquiries into the Toome to Castledawson part of the scheme recommended that detailed plans for the construction of the dual carriageway, as designed, should be progressed, and that the recommended changes to the published proposal to connect the dual carriageway to Annaghmore Road and Bellshill Road at Castledawson be considered as a separate issue. My officials are examining a further junction layout following the inspector’s rejection of the alternative, which was examined at a public inquiry in February 2012. Officials intend to submit a planning application within the next month. The Castledawson junction would not delay progression of the main scheme.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Thanks very much for your answer, Minister. Will you give us an update on the Cookstown and Magherafelt bypasses?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Minister can regard that as a bypass if he wishes.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

Everybody has been terribly ingenious. If only you would ask questions that were in any way relevant to the ones that were tabled.

The Magherafelt bypass scheme is, potentially, procurement ready. Should finance be made available by the Executive in the current situation the scheme would be considered. Considerable representations have been made to me about that scheme from local MLAs, such as Sandra Overend, council colleagues, such as Councillor George Shiels from Magherafelt, and representatives from other political parties.

Having been in Magherafelt and taken the opportunity to witness some of the traffic delays and difficulties, I understand the importance of a bypass to the town and the local economy. You will not find me opposed to bringing forward a scheme like the Magherafelt bypass. I look forward to you encouraging your Executive colleagues to make additional moneys available so that a scheme of that nature can be brought forward as quickly as possible.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

Will the Minister ensure that every area of the A6 project is covered — habitats and whatever — so that we do not find ourselves in a court situation that is similar to that of the A5? Will he ensure that his Department looks at all of that properly this time, before any of the schemes go into operation?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member and Chair of the Regional Development Committee for his supplementary question. He raises an important point, to which I am alert, which is absolutely vital as we move forward with all schemes. I draw to the Member's attention the number of legal difficulties that are encountered in other places, such as the Republic of Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, where objections are lodged on various issues, such as environmental and planning issues. We live in a democratic society, so processes are in place whereby people who have concerns have the opportunity to raise those issues.

I am happy to confirm that, even at this stage, a habitats directive assessment has been carried out for the A6 scheme. That was a key feature of the stage three assessment of the Toome to Castledawson part of the scheme because the preferred route lies adjacent to Ramsar and special environmental sites in the area. The test of likely significance concluded that, although it is highly unlikely that there would be a significant impact, an appropriate assessment should be carried out. A report to inform an appropriate assessment has been prepared, and it concludes that, after inclusion of the proposed mitigation measures, there would be no residual adverse impacts to the integrity of the site. That will be reviewed.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí. My thanks to the Minister for his responses. Given that he has taken us down that route, may I mention the Magherafelt and Cookstown bypasses? Will he clarify whether his Department has made specific financial bids for those two proposals?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary questions and for his interest in local schemes. I can confirm that we have brought forward those schemes and will continue to do so. As for the financial position on road schemes generally, I intend to bring a paper to a forthcoming Executive meeting for consideration by colleagues to ensure that we support the road construction industry, which is in dire need of such support. That is a recognised fact, so a scheme in any part of Northern Ireland would be a welcome asset to the construction industry. I am mindful of the Member's points about Magherafelt and Cookstown.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

5. asked the Minister for Regional Development for an update on the A6 scheme. (AQO 3913/11-15)

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am pleased to advise the Member that I recently received the inspector’s report on the proposed A6 Londonderry to Dungiven dualling scheme. I intend to publish a statement on the way forward in due course after issues arising from the report have been fully examined and resolved.

With regard to the Randalstown to Castledawson scheme, I can advise the Member that, following last year's public inquiry into an alternative junction arrangement at Castledawson, I published my response in the form of a departmental statement in January this year. My officials in Roads Service are now taking forward the inspector’s recommendations for that junction. The remainder of the scheme is already through the planning process, and its progression should not be delayed by issues with the Castledawson junction.

The Member may be aware that the investment strategy for Northern Ireland 2011-2021 includes the construction of a number of high-priority schemes on the M2, A6 and A26 as part of a £390 million package funded through alternative finance in the period 2015-16 to 2020-21. However, a commitment to fund the revenue consequences of that roads package will be required. Therefore, the timing will depend on future resource budget settlements. In the event of alternative finance not being available, the scheme could be included, together with other priority schemes, in the bidding process for conventional funds in the next Budget period.

In my response to the Member for North Down Mr Cree, I outlined my intentions to engage with Executive colleagues in considering options for advancing other possible schemes in conjunction with a delayed A5. Those include improvements to the A6, which is a scheme that, it is fair to say, would make a great deal of difference to the many people who use that stretch of road on a daily basis as well as providing much-needed support to the construction industry.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. After earlier questions, it feels like we have been up and down this road a few times this afternoon. I look forward to the publication of the report he mentioned and welcome the fact that the A6 remains a high priority. However, given the slippage of this project under the Minister's predecessor, is he confident that it can and will be delivered on time?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I remind him of what I have tried to outline in my answers, which is that we are seeking to bring the project forward. The delays involved in the A5 scheme have meant that it is incumbent on me to look at other options, including schemes such as the A6, the A55 and the Magherafelt bypass.

We are exploring those options; the public inquiry is, of course, part of that process, as is the inspector's report that arises from it. We will give consideration to that, but I will not be shy in bringing forward schemes to Executive colleagues so that the overall infrastructure, which benefits the economy and the road construction industry, can be brought forward at the earliest possible dates.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Will the Minister acknowledge that he and his Department have a credibility problem in relation to the A5? Does he agree that he should come to the House with a statement on the A5 and the A6 to try to close that credibility gap? Undoubtedly, the taxpaying public are very concerned about the shambolic state of the A5. Normally, the Executive are the whipping boys, but there is no doubt that, in this instance, the Department for Regional Development's Roads Service needs to stand up.

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I am grateful to the Member for his supplementary question. I do not accept the implications or the thrust of his remarks. I hope that he has taken time to study seriously the judgement delivered by Mr Justice Stephens. I hope that he has taken time not only to read it but to understand it. That would be a very good starting point for everyone in this debate.

My door is open. I have issued statements, made comments and made myself available for questions in the House on the situation. I have also taken the opportunity to meet the contractors involved, who are obviously concerned. I have met representatives of the Ulster Farmers' Union and Londonderry Chamber of Commerce. I would prefer that the Member came to see me to discuss the issues in some detail rather than politically grandstanding in the Chamber.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I welcome the Minister's statement earlier when he said that the argument for the Dungiven bypass was compelling. That being the case, can he outline any progress that may have been made to date in decoupling the Dungiven bypass from the rest of the A6? If so, is there a timeline for procurement and tendering?

Danny Kennedy (UUP, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. He has, of course, lobbied strongly for the Dungiven bypass and has raised the issue of decoupling.

Again, I am pleased to confirm that the design of the scheme allows for the Dungiven bypass to be taken forward and completed as the first phase of the scheme. It will provide 4·8 kilometres of dual carriageway bypassing Dungiven to the south at a total cost in the range of £60 million to £80 million. The construction of this element of the scheme would be dependent — and this is the key thing — on the availability of finance in subsequent periods.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Members should note that question 3 has been withdrawn and a written answer is required.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

1. asked the Minister for Social Development how many applications have been received and successfully processed for the boiler replacement scheme since its commencement. (AQO 3924/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Since the launch of the boiler replacement scheme in September 2012, 14,184 application forms have been received. The Housing Executive has processed 14,084 of those applications. That has resulted in boiler installer forms being issued to all those applicants; 8,771 applicants have completed and returned their installer forms, and 7,884 approvals have been issued to have boiler replacement works completed. Of those, 4,271 applicants have already carried out the works. Sampling of applicants has shown that 90% of people who get formal approvals will go on to complete the works.

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Príomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Given those figures, which do appear to have improved dramatically over the past month or so, does the Minister believe that the scheme could be made more effective? How does he intend to make it so?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I notice that the Member says that there has been a dramatic improvement. We should welcome that, as I am sure he does; indeed, he indicated that he does. The improvement indicates that the scheme is actually now working really well. It only started back in the autumn. We are a limited period of time into it. There is a lead-in time. It is now delivering well, and we are well ahead of target at this point.

Alex Maskey (Sinn Féin, Belfast South)

Go raibh maith agat, a Príomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for the positive information in his response. Will he confirm whether the initiative is effectively tackling fuel poverty? If so, can it be extended further?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

It is one of a number of initiatives that we need to take forward to address fuel poverty. Addressing fuel poverty can be taken through in a number of ways, but one in particular is energy efficiency. Alongside that is the energy efficiency of homes, including insulation and double glazing. There are a number of initiatives that we are working on and taking forward. With regard to this particular scheme, we have the budget for each of the years and, in addition to that, the extra £6 million that we were able to draw in for the last two years. So, we will actually have a larger amount of money in the last two years — the extra £6 million — to deliver on the programme. I think that it will be extremely successful.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister said that about 4,000 people seem to have availed themselves of and benefited from the boiler replacement scheme. Can he also outline the beneficial effect that I presume would have followed from local installers engaging in the work?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

We estimate that almost 800 local installers have had installation work from the scheme to date. Those tend to be smaller firms, and they are spread across Northern Ireland. The work that is coming from this has been of great benefit, therefore, to local businesses.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

The Minister has certainly brought some very interesting statistics to light. I wonder whether he can detail the average time from submitting an application to the actual project being completed, if he has that?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

When approval is given, it is anticipated that someone will get the work commissioned and completed within a period of about three months. Sometimes, it is much quicker than that. For some folk, it may take a little bit longer. Once the work has been completed and the bill submitted, the payment time is around three weeks, which is in advance of the normal payment time of four weeks.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

2. asked the Minister for Social Development for an update on the future restructuring of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the role of housing associations. (AQO 3925/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Since my statement to the Assembly on 26 February, the exploration of the proposals by my officials and me has begun in earnest. The programme team, encompassing staff from my Department, the Housing Executive and the Strategic Investment Board, has begun work on the proposals. I met the programme board on 18 April. Programme planning is under way, and governance structures are in place.

A series of meetings has taken place with key stakeholders, including the Northern Ireland Federation of Housing Associations, the Housing Executive and NIPSA. Other meetings are imminent, such as one with the tenants' representatives, the central housing community network. On 17 January, my officials and I also briefed the Social Development Committee, which will be fully engaged in the exploration and further development of proposals.

Work is ongoing, including on these consultations, with the aim of developing and firming up the restructuring of housing functions and their delivery mechanisms. I envisage that, at a later stage, when the process has progressed and there is something more substantive to report, I will come to the Chamber with a further, fuller statement.

Sammy Douglas (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for that full response. In a recent statement following a BBC interview with the new chairman of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, NIPSA spoke of the unnecessary break-up of the Housing Executive at a time when other areas of the public service are being amalgamated to save money. Will the Minister respond to that statement, please?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I think that NIPSA is not entirely clear on the fact that the economics involved are more complex than they first appear. The focus should be on the longer-term economic benefits that can be realised through the introduction of landlords in a housing association model that is free to obtain to funding from a variety of sources. Benefits include local landlords working from within communities and giving back to communities via social enterprise development.

Housing Executive staff and tenants are key stakeholders in this programme. Immediately following my statement on the proposals in February, I met the Housing Executive's board and chief executive to agree how we can work together to allay staff anxieties throughout the process. My officials have met, and will continue to meet, trade unions to ensure that staff concerns are raised and to keep staff up to date.

I have a meeting scheduled with the central housing community network, which was established as an innovative structure to ensure that residents have meaningful involvement with the Housing Executive. It has agreed to act as a conduit between my Department, the Housing Executive and tenants.

There was some speculation on the number of housing associations to be created and at what cost — that is just speculation. Viable options will come to light only once economic considerations have been fully taken into account and political agreement has been reached.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a fhreagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for his answers up to now. Will the Minister please reaffirm his stated commitment that there will be no predetermined outcome of the discussions on the future of the Housing Executive?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I set out a general direction of travel in my original statement. The details of all of this have still to be worked through. There is a lot of work to be done to prepare business cases that look at various options. There will have to be detailed discussions with potential funders to see what is the best model. So nothing is predetermined. We are looking at a direction of travel but nothing other than that. It is the detail that now has to be worked out.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Will the Minister guarantee a clear focus on the delivery of shared housing under whatever new structure there may be in future?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

This is an issue that members of the Alliance Party bring up again and again and again. There is merit in looking at such options, but I point out, as I have done on previous occasions, that segregated housing is not unique to the social housing sector. The Member may shake her head, but the reality, if one is honest and looks across the entire Province, is that there are many, many private estates that are segregated. Segregation goes wider than social housing; it impacts on education, sporting facilities and a whole range of other areas. Therefore, the issue of segregation and a shared future needs to be looked at in a wider context.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

4. asked the Minister for Social Development when the last glass-fronted fires will be removed from Northern Ireland Housing Executive properties. (AQO 3927/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Housing Executive has advised that only 1,777 glass-fronted fires remain in its stock. In all cases, that is due to a tenant’s refusal to allow the Housing Executive to complete works. Replacement of those 1,777 glass-fronted fires will be undertaken at change of tenancy or when parts are no longer available for the fires. The glass-fronted fires are currently safe, although the Housing Executive expects that they will be replaced in the forthcoming 12 to 18 months.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his answer. Can he guarantee that future budgetary restrictions will not impact on the Housing Executive's ability to replace that form of heating?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Housing Executive is doing some work on its policy on heating. That work is being taken forward and will come to the Executive's board and to the Social Development Committee in the near future. I do not see finance being in any way an issue with taking this work forward. It is something that is obviously necessary, and I do not see there being a financial problem there.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. He just mentioned the Housing Executive's policy. Will he give us an update on what that is?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Housing Executive is reviewing its heating policy. The basis of that review is to maximise the opportunity for tenants to benefit from a clean, efficient, safe and affordable heating system that will provide thermal comfort in their homes.

The policy was subject to formal consultation for eight weeks and was circulated widely. In addition, presentations were made to housing community network forums and to other groups, including a number of councils. Responses have been received from a wide-ranging group of councils, councillors, statutory bodies and others. The comments that were received raise a number of issues, which the Housing Executive will consider, but they do not fundamentally challenge the policy's proposals.

Gas will remain the only option that is offered in a gas area. Tenant choice outside the gas area will increase to include wood pellet boilers. A number of those ideas are being taken forward. For example, in an oil boiler replacement scheme, tenants may opt to retain an oil system and so on. There are a number of elements to that, and there is also an emphasis on ensuring that insulation is upgraded where you have heating replacement schemes.

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

5. asked the Minister for Social Development what action his Department plans to take to enhance the regeneration of Strabane. (AQO 3928/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

My Department is working with Strabane District Council to bring forward a public-realm scheme for Abercorn Square, Market Street, Castle Street and Railway Street. We aim to appoint a consultant later this year to design the scheme, with a view to starting construction work in late 2014. We are also working in parallel with Roads Service to deliver a smaller public-realm scheme in the town centre later this year.

Officials from my Department have also been working with Strabane District Council to develop a revitalisation scheme to improve the external appearance of shop fronts, signage and building facades. My Department is also in the process of appointing a team of professional advisers to take forward a market-testing exercise for the SCORE site in the centre of the town. Subject to that exercise demonstrating sufficient demand, we will move to prepare and issue a development brief, inviting prospective developers to submit their proposals for the site.

Outside the town centre, my Department continues to deliver a range of projects in the Strabane neighbourhood renewal area.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer, which was quite comprehensive and encouraging for Strabane. Given that the SCORE site has been on the cards for nine or 10 years, is he committed to making sure that the time frame is realisable and that we can have a meaningful project there? Secondly, has he had any indication of what sort of moneys are being earmarked for the scheme that he just outlined?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member focused particularly on the SCORE site, which the Department for Social Development (DSD) owns. It was identified in the master plan as a key redevelopment site and was regarded as suitable for either leisure use or mixed-use development, namely commercial, retail, car parking and leisure.

The master plan also recognises that a larger site may be required to make any project viable, and the Department has subsequently reached agreement with Roads Service to include the adjacent Dock Street car park in the overall site that will be offered for development.

Work is being taken forward on the next stages, but I could not go into any more detail on that at this point. I hope that the Member finds that helpful in outlining the line of travel.

Sue Ramsey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

6. asked the Minister for Social Development for an update on the registration of landlords. (AQO 3929/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

First, let me emphasise the importance of having a landlord registration system to assist with the regulation of an ever-growing private rented sector. I remain committed to driving up standards in that sector. I informed the Assembly on 15 January 2013 that it was intended that a landlord registration system would be ready by the summer. Although there may be some slippage, I am pressing my officials to work to that date. Work is well under way on the design of the system, and a final decision on who will act as the registrar should be made very soon.

Sue Ramsey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. It is important that we get the registration scheme up and running. I do not need to remind the Minister that that sector is the biggest provider in the social rented scheme and costs and gets tens of millions of pounds. I am concerned when you say, Minister, that there is slippage, even though you say that the summer is still your target. Can you give us an idea of what you mean by that type of slippage?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I will indicate my intention —

Sue Ramsey (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Is it an Indian summer?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I will indicate my intention to ensure that the officials who are taking that forward do it with the maximum alacrity, and I can you assure that, when we talk about the summer, it is definitely the summer of 2013 and not any other. It will be done as quickly as possible.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, in the past, you have said that councils would be best placed to administer such a scheme. Is that still your opinion, or has anything changed?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

No final decision has been made on who the registrar will be, and it is possible that the matter may be tied to the direct payment of housing costs to landlords under welfare reform. My Department is considering whether we can make use of the information collected for the landlord register to facilitate the direct payment of universal credit housing components to landlords. Work is ongoing with the Social Security Agency, policy and legislation colleagues and NI Direct to ensure that the IT solution will provide that capability. If we can use the system to help to offer better services for tenants and benefit claimants, we will do so.

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

What specifically is the cause of the delay?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The issues that are being taken forward are complex. The civil servants who are working on the issues are working hard, but, as with most things in life, it is always difficult to predict exactly, down to the weeks or days, how long it will take to complete a piece of work. I am sure that the Member, in all his years in business and other areas of life, will have his own experience of that. Therefore, the work is taking a fraction longer than may have been originally intended, but, as I said clearly, it is a priority, and the Department and I intend to take it forward to completion as soon as possible. As has been indicated, the private rented sector is a very important sector for the provision of housing in Northern Ireland, and we want to make sure that we get the best outcome possible for tenants.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

7. asked the Minister for Social Development for an update on the empty homes strategy. (AQO 3930/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

It is my intention to publish the empty homes strategy and action plan in the coming weeks and to be in a position to give details on the steps that will be taken to bring empty homes back into use. I am determined to maximise all opportunities to meet housing need, reduce blight and tackle antisocial behaviour. Therefore, I want to pursue a comprehensive approach to tackling empty homes not only to provide much needed housing but to transform streets and areas right across Northern Ireland. The strategy seeks to consider and address why homes become empty; the profile of empty homes in Northern Ireland; the benefits of bringing empty homes back into use; and how to assist and who can assist in the process. The success of the strategy will require a considerable investment of money and other resources.

The work that we are taking forward on the empty homes strategy, together with the work that we are taking forward on the previous issue of landlord registration, the development of a housing strategy and the review of housing structures, alongside welfare reform and all the other things, indicates the scale and scope of work being taken forward in the Department and our commitment to ensuring the best possible outcome for taxpayers and for tenants and the general community.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Minister for his answer. As he is aware, a number of these empty houses are derelict and are often a blight on their area. Will the Minister accept that, if this strategy is expedited, these houses could go some way towards alleviating the housing waiting list, particularly for social housing?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Tackling the issue of empty homes has a number of benefits. Clearly, it has the benefit of providing another home for an individual or for a family. Often, it removes blight, blight that can often attract antisocial behaviour, and there is a cost associated with dealing with that. It may be that a garden becomes littered, and people have to come in and clear it out. With all of the costs associated with the issue on one side and the benefits to be gained on the other side in getting an extra home into use, this is one of those things that is rightly described as a no-brainer. It makes really good sense, and that is why we have been focusing on this.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

To extend that question into further detail, can the Minister detail whether he will consider using existing powers to vest long-term empty homes so that they can be brought back into public use?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

A range of approaches are being looked at. Last year, we carried out a pilot exercise in Fortwilliam in north Belfast and on the Upper Newtownards Road in east Belfast. It had limited success, but it did provide a number of lessons that have been invaluable in trying to shape the strategy and the action plan. In some circumstances, it turned out that properties that were thought to be empty were not actually empty at all but were occupied. It is a more complex issue than you sometimes imagine. When you look at a street, you imagine that there are an awful lot of empty homes, but that may not necessarily be the case. There are lessons to be learned from that pilot.

The main reason for lack of success was lack of information on the owners of properties. That is the most difficult thing. We were able to contact the owners in some cases, but some of them were reluctant to engage because there were no incentives to assist them to bring the property back into use. Owners preferred to wait to see whether the housing market picked up. The main lessons learned were the importance of having accurate data at the outset and ensuring that measures are in place to assist owners to bring properties back into use. On that basis, the Housing Executive and the Department have been looking at this, and the new action plan is being developed.

Pam Brown (DUP, South Antrim)

How many empty homes are there throughout Northern Ireland, and where is the highest concentration of those empty homes?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

One of the major challenges in all of this remains the issue of reliable data about the location and ownership of empty homes. The Department is working with Land and Property Services, and data received to date on the number of vacant properties in each council area is being analysed. Officials are in the process of preparing a business case so that Land and Property Services is able to share the names and addresses of the owners of empty homes with us. This information will hopefully be made available before the end of June, and it will be published in future.

There was a previous empty homes strategy in 2007, but, because of the lack of information on addresses and contact details of owners and the lack of a proactive approach at the time, the strategy did not result in any homes being brought back into use. My officials are now driving the issue forward, and I hope to publish the new empty homes strategy very shortly. We will then seek to take it forward.

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

Will the Minister give us the detail on the scheme where empty houses are given to housing associations to renovate and sell on?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

In my constituency at the moment, eight empty homes that belonged to the Housing Executive are being handed over to a housing association to redevelop with new homes. There is a range of approaches in the action plan that I will be happy to share with the Member in the near future.

The necessary steps to fix empty homes are these: we need reliable data; we have to raise awareness; we have to bring forward proposals for legislative change, as there are issues that need to be tackled; we need to identify funding streams; and we need to implement initiatives used in other jurisdictions, which could include partner landlord grants, loan schemes or sweat equity. A range of options will be teased out. In due course, we will require proposals for legislative change so that we have all the necessary tools — the most appropriate and most effective — at our disposal.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

8. asked the Minister for Social Development for an update on the acquisition of the Queen's Parade site in Bangor. (AQO 3931/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

My Department has agreed to purchase landholdings at Queen’s Parade assembled by the developer, Karl Greenfarm Properties Ltd. The contract of sale was signed on 25 March 2013 and is due to complete in May. Following completion of the sale, my Department will commence the process of drawing up detailed plans, securing planning permission and assembling the remaining properties to be included within the development boundary. The Department’s intervention to acquire this key regeneration site is in keeping with the town centre master plan. It is a major regeneration project, and it will take in the region of 24 months to assemble all the land needed, take forward a planning application and bring on board a developer.

The Department will work in partnership with the council and all other stakeholders to gain agreement to ensure that the development plans for Queen’s Parade are right for Bangor. In time, delivery of the Queen’s Parade development will require a significant commitment by the private sector.

In advance of the main scheme proceeding, work was completed earlier this month on a revitalisation project to develop new activities and facilities to encourage people back into the area.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answer and for his keen interest to date in the project. I also record my thanks to DSD officials for the work done to date at Queen's Parade, with the recent investment in the art and craft pods. It makes Bangor a very acceptable place to visit this summer.

Can the Minister give expected timescales for the long-awaited Queen's Parade development? In writing would be good. [Laughter.]

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I can see the writing appearing in due course in a local publication.

The Bangor town centre master plan proposed that a major development scheme in the Queen's Parade area was needed to regenerate Bangor town centre. Schemes of that size and ambition are complex and challenging to deliver. A number of key steps need to be taken, the first of which is to assemble the site. My Department has completed the first major step by agreeing to purchase the developer's land. Following completion of the sale, my officials will speak to the remaining property owners within the proposed boundary to discuss our plans for the area and to negotiate the purchase of those properties. My Department will also commence work on the planning application, which will take in the region of two years. Following planning approval, it will take the developer a further two to three years to complete the detailed design and bring on board a contractor to construct the scheme. If all progresses smoothly, construction will commence in 2018.

I appreciate very much the recommendation of staff and officials in DSD. I will certainly pass those comments on to them.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answers. I concur with Mr Dunne and thank the Department for the recent work on the art pods.

As well as seeking planning permission and then seeking to purchase the remaining properties, the Department will ultimately require a private developer. Is there any more security in the new plan than there was in previous proposals that fell?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Department has put its full weight behind this. There is a real commitment to see the project through to completion because this has been a blight on the front of Bangor. As the Member will know, it is now a much more attractive location with the new pods are in place. I had the opportunity to go down there the other day to meet some of the artists who are in residence, and it is beneficial to the community, to us and the artists. I was impressed by the number of people who stopped to look at the artists at work. The people who were quite negative about it all at the start have been shown to be wrong. It is a good short-term initiative. There is a real commitment from the Department, and, as we see this through, there will be interest from the private sector in due course, when we get the whole site assembled.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Members may take their ease while we change the top table.

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

Executive Committee Business

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I call the Minister of the Environment, Mr Alex Attwood, to move the Consideration Stage of the Marine Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Attwood (The Minister of the Environment).]

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There are three groups of amendments, and we will debate the amendments in each group in turn. The first debate will be on amendment Nos 1, 2 and 3, which deal with the duty to contribute to sustainable development, the creation of a marine management organisation and arrangements to promote the co-ordination of marine functions between public authorities. The second debate will be on amendment Nos 4 to 6, 9 to 14 and 19, which deal with marine planning and marine protection and enforcement, together with Mr Steven Agnew's opposition to clause 8. The third debate will be on amendment Nos 7, 8, 15 to 18 and 20, which deal with the commencement and technical amendments.

Once the debate on each group is completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill, and the Question on each will be put without further debate. The Question on stand part will be taken at the appropriate points of the Bill. If that is clear, we will proceed.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

We now come to the first group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 2 and 3. Members will note amendment No 2 is mutually exclusive with amendment No 3.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I beg to move amendment No 1:

Before clause 1 insert

"PART A1

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

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

Will the Member give way?

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Yes, Minister. Delighted.

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

I think that it was an excellent report. [Laughter.]

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Thank you. According to the report:

"an MMO could deliver improved co-ordination of information and data, and so reduce the administrative burden."

It is my belief that the Marine Bill would be greatly strengthened by a streamlined management model that had the authority to properly oversee all our marine activities from the application process and bringing together marine expertise and information to managing the impact of commercial activities in the marine environment in a sustainable, equitable and long-lasting way.

Simon Hamilton (DUP, Strangford)

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will speak initially in my capacity as Deputy Chair of the Committee before, with your indulgence, making personal comments on the amendments in this group.

I welcome the Consideration Stage of the Marine Bill. Some of us on the Committee wondered whether this day would ever come. The Bill was referred to the Committee on 6 March last year, and the Assembly agreed to extend the Committee Stage to allow us to enough time to scrutinise it fully.

We gave the Bill careful consideration. There were 31 written submissions in response to the Committee's call for evidence, and we took oral evidence from 16 organisations, including key stakeholders such as the Northern Ireland Marine Task Force and the Anglo North Irish Fish Producers' Organisation. On behalf of the Committee, I place on the record our gratitude to all those who gave evidence. That evidence was crucial in enabling us to make our recommendations.

The Committee agreed its report on the Bill on 5 July 2012, so we have had to wait 10 months since then to get to Consideration Stage. Members of the Committee did not think that such a delay was appropriate. I am in no doubt that the Minister will tell us that the delay was unavoidable, that there were good reasons for it and that he needs to take as much time as necessary to get the Bill right. I accept that we legislate in haste and repent at leisure, but that does not mean pausing for nearly a year between stages of a Bill. I hope there shall not be any similar delay with some of the Minister’s other Bills that are coming our way. Nevertheless, we are at Consideration Stage now, and the Committee supports the Bill and the amendments in the name of the Minister.

I begin, however, by addressing amendment No 1, which has been tabled by Ms Lo, the Chair of the Committee, although not tabled in that capacity. The Committee considered whether it was necessary to include within the Bill an overarching aim or general duty outlining the responsibilities of the Department around sustainable development. However, the Department told us that existing legislation places an obligation on all public authorities to consider sustainable development and to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. We accepted that it would be inconsistent with current legislative practice to reiterate any such existing duties in the Bill. In doing so, we also agreed that, during Consideration Stage, it was important for the Minister to remove any lingering doubt there may be about the impact of the Bill on existing duties. I, therefore, ask the Minister to place on record the fact that the duties placed on all public authorities around sustainable development and climate change by the Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006 and the UK Climate Change Act 2008 apply to the implementation of this Bill. If he does so, we can be satisfied that amendment No 1 is unnecessary.

I turn now to amendment Nos 2 and 3. Almost all those who spoke to the Committee drew attention to the need for greater co-ordination of marine functions, which are currently spread across six Departments. Many suggested that that could be achieved through the introduction of a marine management organisation, as is the case in England and Wales, but that view was by no means unanimous. There is no question about the need for better co-ordination of marine functions across Departments, but the Committee agreed that, in the absence of any change to the management of marine functions by central government, the most effective approach in the short term would be to strengthen and enhance the co-operation of Departments and other public authorities that have responsibility for marine functions.

Consequently, the Committee agreed that an amendment should be made to the Bill that would require agreement between the relevant Departments and other public authorities. That position is reflected by amendment No 3. Therefore, on behalf of the Committee, I oppose amendment No 2 and ask the House to support amendment No 3, which will ensure greater co-operation, without the additional cost and bureaucracy which would come with the creation of another quango.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will speak now in a personal or party capacity, and I will take the amendments in order. I will look first at amendment No 1 and amendment No 2, which I will be arguing against and opposing in a personal capacity. It is a bit odd in some ways: when opposing, you are objecting to things that you agree with. I do not disagree with the need for better consideration of sustainable development. I am not arguing against sustainable development; in fact, I am very much in favour of sustainable development. Equally, when I get to amendment No 2, I am not against better marine management. I am against the format of marine management that is proposed in Ms Lo's amendment.

With regard to amendment No 1, I have no objection to the principles of sustainable development, but, as I mentioned in my comments in my capacity as Deputy Chair, there are duties and responsibilities on Departments and all public authorities via the Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006. It sets out the duties on all public bodies to deliver all their functions and sets out the attention that they have to have to sustainable development. There is no need to double up and legislate again to reiterate those duties and responsibilities. They are catered for in legislation that is on the statute book.

I know that, sometimes, it appears that it is sitting in a law that was passed in 2006, which is some seven years ago, and that, therefore, you have to read this legislation in conjunction with that other legislation, and that it is maybe not as user-friendly or as obvious as we would like it to be. However, that is the way legislation in this part of the world develops. It has to be viewed in conjunction with other legislation that is not mentioned in the Bill that is before us.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree with me that one of the rationales for having that specific statement in the Bill, and the reason why we are still pushing for sustainable development, is that we do not actually see it in the actions of public authorities? As it has been pointed out, we have had legislation since 2006, but we still fail to see action.