Northern Ireland Assembly, 10 September 2013

447 contributions from 74 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Mr Frew has sought leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22. The Member will have up to three minutes to speak on the subject.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

In delivering this petition to you this morning, I speak on behalf of the residents, their family members and the population of north Antrim. At the outset, I want to say that I am not here in this place to fight for buildings, institutions or establishments; I am here in this place to fight for the people of north Antrim and the services that this Assembly, this Executive and this Government provide to them. I am here today to hand in a petition on behalf, and in support, of Pinewood Residential Care Home, which provides an excellent service to the people of north Antrim and further afield. It provides residential care, rehabilitation and respite care to the most needy and vulnerable.

I have heard nothing throughout the debates over the past number of months to suggest that Pinewood Residential Care Home should close. It is inevitable that residential care homes will close as buildings grow tired and old, but Pinewood Residential Care Home in Ballymena is not one of those homes. The excellent facility that it is and the service that it provides to the people of the area mean that it should not be closed in the near or distant future.

People will play politics with this issue, but I am very clear that I am here for the people of north Antrim and Pinewood. I am here to do what they will and to fight for this home.

Consultations are ongoing. I am certainly not of the mind that Pinewood should close. Pinewood should be enhanced. Shame on the trust, because, for the past five years, it has wound the facility down. It has prevented people from moving into Pinewood. It has wound it down deliberately so that it would be easier to close at a future date; that is totally and utterly unacceptable. I call on the trust to reverse that trend and open the doors of Pinewood to let people in for residential care, rehabilitation and respite. Pinewood can be a real value to the community as it is, and it could be an even greater facility to the people of north Antrim.

Mr Frew moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I will forward the petition to the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and send a copy to the Chair of the Health Committee.

Ministerial Statements

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement in compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 regarding a meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in tourism sectoral format. The meeting was held in Armagh on 26 June 2013. Minister John O’Dowd MLA and I represented the Northern Ireland Executive. The Irish Government were represented by Leo Varadkar, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, who chaired the meeting. This statement has been agreed with Minister O’Dowd, and I make it on behalf of both of us.

Tourism Ireland's chairperson, Mr Brian Ambrose, and its CEO, Mr Niall Gibbons, updated Ministers on the work of the Tourism Ireland board, including the implementation of the 2013 business plan and the development of the corporate plan 2014-16. Ministers noted the ongoing challenges and competitive environment for international tourism arising from global economic conditions. The CEO made a presentation to Ministers on market performance to date in 2013. The Council noted the marketing campaign highlights for 2013, in particular the worldwide campaigns for the UK City of Culture 2013, the Jump into Northern Ireland showcase at the European Parliament, and the global greening initiative around St Patrick’s Day.

Tourism Ireland is developing its corporate plan for 2014-16. Themes identified to date include enhancing brand knowledge and relevance; driving consumer engagement; capitalising and building on Northern Ireland’s strengths; building successful partnerships and alliances; focusing resources to compete and win; harnessing the power of digital marketing; and developing meaningful metrics to provide direction for investment. The Council noted Tourism Ireland’s annual report and accounts for 2012 and approved the body’s business plan and budget for 2013. Ministers also approved the Special EU Programmes Body's business plan for 2013.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a ráiteas. Thanks to the Minister for her statement. I want to ask her about the Tourism Ireland board and the development of its corporate plan. What targets are being put in place to measure the success of those corporate plan themes?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Chairman for his question. As he will know, the targets in the corporate plan reflect our Programme for Government tourism targets. I am pleased to say that we have met a number of those targets over the past year. We have exceeded the target for revenue spends. Take the GB market, for example. The 2012 visitor numbers target was 1·66 million, and we had 1·56 million, so that target was not achieved. However, the target for the amount of money spent by those visitors was achieved and, indeed, exceeded. That target was £390 million, and, in reality, £418 million was spent. In respect of the Republic of Ireland market, we had 0·43 million visitors against a target of 0·352 million and we had revenue well in excess of the target. The target was £44 million and the revenue was £70 million. So the Republic of Ireland market is a very good market for us at present.

What is pleasing about the GB market is that we have been able to grow our revenue. Though we would like to have seen more people visiting, I think that that is reflective of the GB market in general. Indeed, Visit Britain indicated that it had 1% downturn last year in respect of those visiting even within their own jurisdiction. So, the GB market has retracted significantly, and it will be a while before it comes up to where it was previously.

So, targets are being met, and we are pleased to see that, albeit the GB market remains a challenge.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her statement and, indeed, overall, the very good work that is being done in this area. I wonder whether the Minister could make some comment around:

"Harnessing the power of digital marketing".

Does she think that we are making as much use of that as we could? Are we realising the potential of that whole digital area?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am very pleased to tell the House that that is very much so with respect to Tourism Ireland. Among tourist bodies across the world — that is not a small area — we are number two in digital penetration. That is across a number of platforms: Twitter, Facebook, and all the newer platforms with which, it has to be said, I am not completely au fait.

I was with our chief executive officer (CEO) last week in New York and Canada, and he was very clear that we have really harnessed digital media in a very meaningful way. That has helped with our penetration into some of those markets in which, ordinarily, we would not have had a great presence. So, I am very pleased to report that, yes, we are very much enhancing the use of social media in respect of Tourism Ireland.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank you, Minister, for the statement, particularly for the identification of the themes of the corporate plan. In relation to visitors from the Twenty-six Counties, which was clearly identified as a key growth area, may I ask what is being done to market it? Do we have an actual number for the visitors to the North as a result of the ni2012 campaign?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Of course, you are right to mention ni2012 because it was a huge success for us in Northern Ireland. With respect to Republic of Ireland visitors, that is not the responsibility of Tourism Ireland but of the Northern Ireland Tourist Board. Visitors from the Republic of Ireland market in 2012 were up by 19 percentage points to 70,000. That is a very significant increase, and I think that it is down to the fact that we spent considerable time marketing the wide range of events that happened in 2012. We have seen the benefit of that, particularly in events such as the Irish Open and smaller events, perhaps, such as the Beckett Festival. As we all know, the Titanic centre has welcomed its millionth visitor. Of course, those visitors were not just from the Republic of Ireland, although there has been an increase in visitors from that area coming up to Belfast and indeed around. The Titanic visitor centre has had 145 countries represented in it over this past year. I think that that is a tremendous achievement for everybody down at Titanic Belfast, and we will of course work with them to grow that number in the future.

The Member herself, coming from the city of Londonderry, will know that events play a huge role in attracting people to particular parts of Northern Ireland. We have seen her city really rise to the challenge over this past year, with a number of events that have brought visitors to the city, including the fleadh and the Walled City Tattoo, and we look forward to the rest of the year, which includes hosting the Turner Prize and Lumiere. Those will be standout events for that city and region. We look forward to those as well.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for her statement and the information that she has presented to us this morning in answer to the other questions. I note with interest that Tourism Ireland is developing its corporate plan for 2014-16. I wonder whether the Minister could outline when she expects to have her Department's tourism strategy and action plan finalised and published.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As the Member knows, we have moved away from an actual tourism strategy and moved to priorities for action, and, indeed, she will know that that has been with the Executive for a considerable period. I very much look forward to receiving it out of the Executive. If she thinks that it is holding us back with regard to tourism, I can tell her that it is not. I said to her on many occasions that actions speak a lot louder than strategies, and I am very pleased that we have been able to roll out some significant events over the past couple of years, particularly this year. We look forward to huge events next year. The Giro d'Italia is going to be a marvellous spectacle of road racing in Belfast, Armagh and all around the country. I will be announcing the route for the Giro d'Italia in October. The Tall Ships race comes back to Belfast in 2015, and we look forward to that event as well.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her statement. It refers to the marketing campaign highlights, one of which was the Jump into Northern Ireland showcase. I hope that I am not the only one here who has no idea what that is. However, I particularly want to ask her about "The Gathering", which is perhaps the biggest marketing campaign of the year on an all-Ireland basis. Have we had any discernible spin-off from that campaign in the North so far?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am sorry that the Member is not aware of the Jump into Northern Ireland showcase; maybe that shows that there needs to be more communication. It was an event in Brussels that was hosted by Diane Dodds MEP. We were able to attract a huge number of people to have a look at and to experience what was happening in Northern Ireland. I cannot recall the date of it. I think it was in February/March; it was certainly before the G8 summit. Yes, it was in February, before the G8 summit, because part of the whole plan at that time was to put Northern Ireland out there as the home of the G8 summit, and we did that very effectively. So, the Jump into Northern Ireland event was very good.

As I said many times in the House, "The Gathering" is an initiative by the Republic of Ireland's Government around not only tourism but economic development. We wait to see how that has gone for them. I also said on many occasions that, if we were to gain any benefit from that initiative, we would, of course, welcome it.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her statement. Can she advise on what has been done to improve the uptake of more airlines operating into Northern Ireland in our three airports: the international, Belfast city and, indeed, Londonderry airport?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. I said many times in the House that our first priority must be to achieve a route back into Canada. We had two airlines into the Belfast International Airport until 2009 but, unfortunately, both pulled out. We really need to get that route back in place again. Perhaps we do not have the capacity to put it on every day of the week, but I think that there is certainly a very strong argument for putting it in place at least a couple of times a week. I had the opportunity to speak with a Canadian airline when I was in Canada on Friday. We will keep pushing at that particular door, because we believe that it is a very good prospect for us.

Of course, I was delighted yesterday to hear that easyJet has announced two new routes to Jersey and Bordeaux. We always welcome new connectivity, whether for tourism or for business links. We will keep working with all the airports to see whether there are any other opportunities for us, but, for me, the primary route at present is Canada. We would also very much like to see a route into Germany, and we are working on that.

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

I thank the Minister for her statement. The statement is, of course, self-explanatory regarding Tourism Ireland, but could the Minister give her assessment of where we are with regard to developing tourism in Northern Ireland and throughout Ireland, because Ireland really is a single destination in the minds of many international tourists? What is her view of that for the future?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

My view is predicated on the fact that, from a Northern Ireland perspective, we need more air access. There is no doubt about that, and that is why I have made it a priority in tourism policy. At present, we are trying to attract visitors either from the GB mainland, if they arrive as UK visitors, or those who arrive into Dublin so that we can attract them up to the wider Northern Ireland and make their visit very attractive.

The fact that some of the tour groups in the Republic of Ireland are putting Northern Ireland on the agenda has been of great benefit to us. We need to see more of that, and we need to see not just the Titanic centre being taken in by those tour operators but the wider Northern Ireland. That, of course, is a job of work for us to engage in.

The work that was mentioned in the economic pact about looking at a visa that works both ways — in other words, if people arrive into Ireland without a UK visa they can come into Northern Ireland — is an important piece of work. The Member will know that if you have a UK visa you can go into the Republic of Ireland, but it does not work in the other direction. We need to see that working its way through to make sure that as many visitors as possible come up here to Northern Ireland. We now have the product and the events in Northern Ireland. We have, as the Tourist Board's new strategy tells us, the experiences for people to come. Therefore, we really need to deal with that visa issue.

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

I welcome the statement and enthusiastically support the Minister in talking up our tourist industry. The corporate plan for 2014-16 makes interesting reading. I would like to ask the Minister in particular about:

"developing meaningful metrics to provide direction for investment."

Would she agree that, although we have had our short-term gains, such as the Titanic centre, the Irish Open, the City of Culture and so on, we need to focus now very carefully on our long-term investment and persuade those people who have still got money to invest it in tourism and the development of the River Bann and many other aspects of tourism that have enormous potential?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I would not say that the Titanic centre is a short-term investment. The fact that we had the Irish Open here at Royal Portrush last year said an awful lot about our capacity to hold such events. Indeed, I hope that the golfing world was watching very carefully because it was a very successful event. That was true not just in terms of the enjoyment of those people who came to watch it but of the logistics of the event, which were second to none. I believe that it sent out a very positive message.

With all events, it is about the legacy that they leave behind. We have seen that right across Northern Ireland. The Titanic centre will be here for a long time to come, but if the Member is suggesting that we need to work harder in providing more regional product I would fully support him in that.

I very much want the Titanic centre to act as a catalyst to bring people to Northern Ireland. The important thing is that we get people out across Northern Ireland because tourism is an industry that operates right across Northern Ireland, and we need to build it up in areas that, perhaps, do not have as strong an infrastructure as that of some of our cities.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I note that one of the themes of the upcoming corporate plan is "enhancing brand knowledge and relevance." What assurance can the Minister give us that Northern Ireland will get a fairer crack of the whip when it comes to brand knowledge and relevance?

Very often — indeed, it was my experience this summer when visiting North America — I talk to people who say that they see lots of adverts about Connemara, Kinsale, Dublin and the west of Ireland but seldom see adverts about Northern Ireland. Are we going to continue to be sold short under the new branding in the new corporate plan?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I do not accept that we are being sold short. Indeed, part of the ni2012 campaign was to give us that particular standout, not just in our closest markets but right across the world. I pushed that very hard with Tourism Ireland, and it has delivered the numbers.

The Jump into Northern Ireland campaign was previously known as Jump into Ireland. We now have a Jump into Northern Ireland brand.

I was very pleased to see that being used at a play in New York last Thursday. The Lyric Theatre was putting on 'Brendan at the Chelsea', and the Jump into Northern Ireland brand was on the front of the programme. So the answer is yes: Northern Ireland is a very strong brand. I will continue to push it and to ensure that Tourism Ireland pushes it as well.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement in compliance with section 52 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 regarding a meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in trade and business development sectoral format. The meeting was held at the offices of the North/South Ministerial Council in Armagh on Wednesday 26 June 2013.

The Executive were represented by me, in my capacity as Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and by John O’Dowd MLA, Minister of Education. The Irish Government were represented by Richard Bruton TD, Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. This statement has been agreed with the Minister of Education, and I am making it on behalf of us both.

The Council received a presentation from Martin Cronin, the chairperson of InterTradeIreland and Thomas Hunter McGowan, its chief executive officer (CEO), on InterTradeIreland’s performance and business activities, including information on performance against its 2012 business plan targets, highlights from its trade and innovation programmes and business and economic research activities in 2012 and to date in 2013. The Council noted that, during 2012, InterTradeIreland had delivered a 13:1 return on investment; assisted 92 first-time innovators; assisted 67 first-time exporters; delivered 6% efficiency savings; and delivered a total business value of £92·1 million. The Council approved InterTradeIreland’s 2013 business plan and recommended that the 2013 budget provision for InterTradeIreland be £9,507,000.

Ministers noted InterTradeIreland’s cross-border study ‘Access to Finance for Growth in SMEs in Ireland and Northern Ireland’ and the emerging findings arising from the report. Those findings included that the state of the wider business environment in Ireland and Northern Ireland is closely linked to the issue of finance for growth in SMEs; demand for credit has fallen substantially since 2008, although a majority, 61%, were successful in applying for new credit in the third quarter of 2012; the percentage of businesses that cite lack of finance as a constraint on growth continues to increase; and businesses with distressed property debt are three times more likely to request working capital finance than their counterparts.

The Council noted InterTradeIreland’s update paper on the FP7 and Horizon 2020 programmes. Ministers noted that the total drawdown from FP7 projects to participants from both jurisdictions is valued at €60·7 million, distributed among 69 projects. It also noted that four new successful projects had recently been announced. They welcomed the measures aimed at facilitating collaboration on FP7 and Horizon 2020 between researchers, companies and relevant organisations from Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Ministers noted a presentation by officials from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation that reviewed the operation of the enterprise theme of the current INTERREG IVa programme. They welcomed the practical benefits and legacy of the programme and noted the likely shape of the successor to INTERREG IV, which is being developed. I commend the statement to the Assembly.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire chomh maith. The Minister will be aware that the Committee has taken a lot of interest in and placed a lot of emphasis on research, innovation and development. That is the case with FP7 but more so, potentially, with the Horizon 2020 project and the benefits that it could realise for innovation, research and development projects. As most people know, those projects, tailored with the proper skills, are the way forward for the development of new industry on the entire island of Ireland. Will the Minister give us some indication and maybe a wee bit of expansion as to what exactly are the measures that are "aimed at facilitating collaboration"? How will they lead to more outreach work with the SMEs, which are so crucial to the development of our local economy?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. I assure him that the first meeting that I had with the new CEO of InterTradeIreland, Thomas Hunter McGowan, was about just that: how we get more small and medium-sized enterprises across Northern Ireland involved in innovation and how we can facilitate them to do so, given the fact that they do not have the infrastructure of large firms to do any of that.

With regard to what InterTradeIreland has been engaged in, it had a successful 'Collaborate to Innovate' conference on 16 May, and feedback from that has been very positive. My Assembly Private Secretary (APS), Alastair Ross MLA, attended for me as I was unable to attend.

There is more structure now as regards cooperation between the higher education institutions in the Republic of Ireland and those in Northern Ireland, particularly the institutes of technologies in the Republic, to identify and build collaborations between them with regard to Horizon 2020.

To go back to the use of digital technology, InterTradeIreland is developing a Horizon 2020 app for mobile devices, and I look forward to seeing the finished product in the autumn, hopefully in October. That will try to increase awareness of Horizon 2020 and make it accessible for small firms so that it will give them all the information and have it readily available so that it can be accessed by small and medium-sized firms, rather than them having to go to look for the information.

We are taking very practical steps to try to work with small and medium-sized firms. We will, of course, look at holding events around Northern Ireland again as we have done in the past.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Minister for her statement, and I note that in it she referred to the work being done on the growth of SMEs. She will be well aware of the fact that Northern Ireland's economy is, essentially, an SME economy. Will the Minister expand a little bit on the work that InterTradeIreland is doing in the SME market, particularly in Northern Ireland?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As I indicated, when I spoke to the new CEO, Thomas Hunter McGowan, that was one of the focuses of our meeting, because I feel that InterTradeIreland can make a difference to small and medium-sized companies. However, we do not want to duplicate what Invest Northern Ireland is doing, and duplication is always one of the things that we talk about with InterTradeIreland. We need it to add value to what Invest Northern Ireland is engaged in. It provides help to small and medium-sized companies through a number of its programmes and initiatives.

Acumen, which is a trade programme designed to simulate cross-border businesses for SMEs, reported a total of 76 new projects. I do not have the target for how many it was to put in place, but the reported business value and jobs impact of that was 122 new jobs. Although InterTradeIreland is not a job creation body — it is a trade organisation — we asked it some time ago to put in a matrix so that we could measure the number of jobs that it was creating as a consequence of helping businesses to trade in a more effective way. The jobs impact of that single project was 122.

Go-2-Tender, which is another very good programme — one of my favourite programmes from InterTradeIreland — tries to help small companies to tender in the opposite jurisdiction and to get work from the public sector. Again, that was very successful and had a jobs impact of 63. Therefore, each of the programmes is having an impact in respect of jobs, and they are also having a good and positive impact on the small and medium-sized business sector.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh ráiteas an Aire. I thank the Minister for her statement. The Minister referred to InterTradeIreland's cross-border study on access to finance for growth in SMEs and talked about some of the findings arising from the report. Can she give us any more information on the report and whether there are any recommendations in it that might be taken forward in conjunction with the recommendation in the economic advisory group's recent report?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. We had only the emerging findings at our meeting in June, and we are hoping to have the final report with us in the very near future. The pleasing aspect is the fact that the InterTradeIreland report could use the data collected by the economic advisory group in relation to Northern Ireland and the access to finance study in relation to all of the island.

I thank InterTrade and the economic advisory group for their effective coordination. We look forward to receipt of the full report. I should say, however, that the business monitor from InterTradeIreland tentatively signalled that, for quarter 2, things in the economy were getting a little better, and they stated that over 64% of businesses maintained or increased their sales over the past quarter. That ties in with what we have been hearing from other indicators for Northern Ireland, including the Ulster Bank just yesterday.

So, although I do not want to overstate issues by talking perhaps about a turn in economic growth, I think that all the indicators seem to be pointing in the right direction for the first time.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I thank the Minister for her second statement. I just want to probe a wee bit more about access to finance. The cross-border study states:

"the state of the wider business environment in Ireland and Northern Ireland is closely linked to the issue of finance for growth for SMEs".

Does the Minister agree with that statement, and would she agree with me that many SMEs in Northern Ireland are still struggling to access finance?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I think that that is right. I also think that the telling part of the emerging findings was that those small and medium-sized businesses that had been exposed to property debt during the recession are those that are finding the greatest difficulty with working capital. I am sure that that is borne out by what Members are told by their constituents. I regularly come across people who purchased property for investment reasons and now find that it has become a real drag on the growth of their small business. They cannot get the working capital that they need from the banks because the security that they had has fallen away from them.

So, that continues to be an issue for us. The Finance Minister and I had a range of meetings with the banks, which we concluded during the summer months. I know that a ministerial advisory group has been set up in the economic pact to look at our national initiatives and at whether they are having an impact in Northern Ireland in the way that they are. The Finance Minister is having a meeting tomorrow with the Secretary of State and the British Bankers' Association to try to get the regional data so that we can really see what is happening here in Northern Ireland.

So, I welcome InterTrade's report and look forward to the final report. However, it is, of course, part of the wider issue of what is happening nationally with finance.

Trevor Lunn (Alliance, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her statement. One of the success stories in Northern Ireland over the past few years has been the performance of the film industry. Perhaps the biggest success story in that sector has been 'Game of Thrones', which, according to the Northern Ireland Screen report, has produced a return of 7:1, which is regarded as brilliant. InterTradeIreland, according to this report, has delivered a more stellar return of 13:1, which, as I understand it, is absolutely unheard of. I know that those are not the Minister's figures, so is she satisfied that they do not require a bit more investigation?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am satisfied, because we probed that very issue of whether they were real and meaningful figures. However, if you look at the budget that InterTradeIreland receives and then look at the return that has been delivered on that budget, you will see that it comes out at 13:1. I think that that is a very good investment. I have seen the investment through all its programmes and activities, and all that we can do is to encourage them to reach out and to try to get even more.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her statement. I think that we all welcome InterTradeIreland's increase in public awareness initiatives. It has been meeting elected representatives, MLAs and councillors, and that is to be welcomed. Will the Minister advise us of the work of InterTradeIreland's Fusion programme and how Northern Ireland businesses have benefited from it?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Fusion is another of InterTradeIreland's programmes. I have talked about Acumen and Go-2-Tender. Fusion is a technology transfer programme that provides companies with new product or process-development needs. The good thing about that programme is that it employs graduates from the other jurisdiction.Over 80% of those graduates are then offered jobs, which is a very good statistic. In 2012, companies reported a business development value of £31·2 million and a jobs impact, excluding graduate jobs, which is an important point, of 101 new jobs. So Fusion has worked very well. It is at the higher end of technology transfer, but I am very pleased that some of our companies are benefiting from the programme.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for her statement. In the report over the summer on the social enterprises and third sector, one issue was that companies and social enterprises here were not trading in the Twenty-six Counties. What is being done to address that? Equally, there are 470-plus social enterprises in the North. Does she intend to increase investment, particularly in the social economy sector?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Of course, we were not aware of the value of the social economy sector to the Northern Ireland economy. So my colleague from the Department for Social Development, Nelson McCausland, and I started a mapping process, and we now have a social economy map. We know the value of the social economy to Northern Ireland, and I will happily pass that information on to InterTradeIreland.

A lot of operators in the social economy are focused on the community that they work in, and there is nothing wrong with that, but if they want to grow, the natural progression is to our nearest neighbour, and I will certainly take on board what the Member has said about InterTradeIreland's engagement with the social economy. The social economy stretches from Bryson House, which is a hugely sophisticated organisation, right down to very small social economy companies in local communities that may not want to grow. We will look at that, and we will work with the social economy sector.

Just yesterday, at a meeting of the economic subgroup of the Executive, the value of the social economy and how we could use it to try to deal with the economically inactive in Northern Ireland came up. We certainly value the social economy and will work with it in the future.

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

I thank the Minister for her very thorough report and answers. I agree with the thrust of the report: an awful lot of work is being done by InterTradeIreland. There is, however, one area in which InterTradeIreland could involve itself, namely public procurement, to assist businesses, North and South, in accessing the various procurement capacities of both Governments, North and South. Is there any role, Minister, that InterTradeIreland could be involved in to assist firms in that public procurement process?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am very happy to tell the Member that InterTradeIreland is involved in that process through its Go-2-Tender programme, which is specifically designed to assist small and medium-sized companies in accessing public procurement in the other jurisdiction. I thank CPD in our Administration and its equivalent in the Dublin Government for working with InterTradeIreland and trying to make what is, let us face it, the maze of public procurement a little easier to understand.

In 2012, an independent evaluation of previous phases of Go-2-Tender reported a net business development value of £4·5 million and a job impact of 63. There have been eight workshops specifically on Go-2-Tender during this calendar year of 2013. So Go-2-Tender, as I said, is one of my favourite InterTradeIreland programmes because it really helps small and medium-sized companies get into the maze of public procurement, whether that is in Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland.

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

I also welcome the statement and treat it as a good-news story, which the Assembly badly needs. I am delighted that 61% of businesses that applied for credit in recent times were successful, but, without wishing to be pessimistic, that means that 39% were not successful. The cross-border study goes on to state that the percentage of businesses citing lack of finance as a constraint on growth continues to increase. I am sure that the Minister has been focusing on that. Will she expand on what is being done on both sides of the border to make the banks more accountable and useful to the people whom they are supposed to serve by making finance available?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his observation and question. Part of our difficulty with the banks is that they tell us that they want to lend and have money, and that there is no problem with the supply that they can give us. They tell us that not enough people are applying for loans. However, when I come here and meet colleagues, they tell me that people are applying for money but cannot get any. So, there is a disparity between the two stories. My colleagues the current Finance Minister and, indeed, the former Finance Minister have been engaged with the British Bankers' Association to try to get data at a regional level — a Northern Ireland level — so that we can see the reality of bank lending in Northern Ireland. As I say, the Minister has a meeting with the British Bankers' Association in London tomorrow, and hopefully we will get some clarity on the issue.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Time was spent at the meeting comparing the 2012 out-turn with the 2012 business plan targets. Unfortunately, we cannot read the business plan for 2012 on InterTradeIreland's website because it is not there. However, we know from the 2011-13 corporate plan that there was a target to increase the number of businesses involved in cross-border trade and innovation by 10,000 over that three-year period. We read in this report that, in 2012, there was assistance for 92 first-time innovators and 67 first-time exporters. So, how is the 10,000 target going if those are the figures for 2012?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am sorry: I cannot answer that. I do not know why that plan is not on the InterTradeIreland website. I will certainly investigate the issue for the Member and come back to him. I will also get back to him in writing about the other target and will put a note in the Library. I just do not have that information to hand.

Private Members' Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

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

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes with grave concern the violence and disorder over the summer months; deplores the activities of all those who engaged in acts of violence against local communities, elected representatives, and the PSNI; affirms the commitment of all elected representatives to promote a culture of tolerance and reconciliation and to act in a way which promotes mutual respect rather than division; and to work constructively to find long term and sustainable solutions to contentious political issues in the best interests of the communities we serve.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. This morning, there was a hoax bomb in my constituency of North Belfast. I want to start by condemning that. In a situation that is already very tense, there was no other intention in putting such a hoax bomb there than to increase tension in the area. There was disruption to many residents. I think that they are back in their homes now. It should be condemned.

By any reading of the motion, its purpose is to attempt to make a positive move forward as we move into the Haass talks and to have a collective, all-party view of where we are going. Of course, it now sits in the context of yesterday's debate.

Let me say what surprised me about the amendment, which we will vote against. First of all, I think that anybody — I am maybe going to contradict this — could agree with the motion, but the DUP has decided to change what is a positive motion into a negative and divisive debate, à la yesterday. What surprises me a wee bit about it is not that they have done that, because they are obviously in that form and mode, but what they have taken out, because that must be what they disagree with. They have put it in straight after "PSNI". So — if you read it — they are saying that they disagree with the Assembly reaffirming:

"the commitment of all elected representatives to promote a culture of tolerance and reconciliation and to act in a way which promotes mutual respect rather than division; and to work constructively to find long term and sustainable solutions to contentious political issues in the best interests of the communities we serve."

Gregory Campbell was up yesterday saying that he cannot understand republicans and nationalists. What a revelation — what a revelation. Everybody will be surprised at that.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Could you clarify if what Mr Kelly said is correct? Surely if the intent of the amendment is to exclude the words that he claims are to be excluded, the reading of the amendment would be to:

"Leave out all after ‘PSNI’ and insert".

Whereas, if I read the amendment correctly, I see that it is an insertion only, not an exclusion. So, perhaps Mr Kelly could be corrected.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I think that that may be correct; it is to "insert" rather than to leave out. The motion and the amendment are before the House here today, and it is really up to the House to decide on both. I think that we should leave it there.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

In fairness to the point of order, from rereading the amendment, I accept and presume that that is the intent.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Further to that point of order by my colleague from North Antrim, Mr Speaker. Surely the proposer of the motion is actually misleading the House in terms of the definition and how he has laid out his case. I think that that is possibly the point, although the Member who made the point of order did not actually use the word "misleading".

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order. Certainly, the Member has clarified his position, and I have hopefully clarified the position. Really, we should not turn this debate into being about whether the amendment or the motion is admissible. I think that we should try to move on. I will take Mr Kelly's point of order.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I think that you have dealt with it, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Let us move on.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

OK.

The one thing that I will not change about what I said earlier is that the DUP has taken a very positive motion, which I think that everybody could agree with, and turned it into a negative. In fact, it wanted a divisive argument instead of a positive move towards the Haass talks.

We have gone through a summer in which hundreds of police officers have been injured, and we have heard excuses around that from the unionist side of the Chamber. We have had sectarianism at places of worship — Catholic churches and chapels — and anti-Catholic songs sung, and we have heard excuses around that.

Over the weekend, 72 bands celebrated and commemorated Brian Robinson — a person who was involved in the killing of Paddy McKenna. Not only have we had excuses around that, or perhaps more accurately, mostly silence and then excuses, but we have also had elected reps of the House marching behind that band — not just once but year on year — past the place where Brian Robinson killed Paddy McKenna and, indeed, where Paddy lived.

We had elected reps on flag protests, and, if we go back far enough, we had elected reps of the Chamber standing shoulder to shoulder with protesters against a Catholic girls' primary school. When we had the recent threats to Holy Cross and other schools, believe me, I tried, as did many others, throughout the weekend to get some reaction and leadership from unionists, but it was not until the Monday that we got that. Just let me say that there is an exception to that in those connected to the Ulster Political Research Group (UPRG) and, indeed, Lee Reynolds, who represents the area. So, I suppose the question is this: where were the MLA voices, because there are plenty of voices about?

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Member give way?

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

No.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Mutual respect.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

We do not want you to get up yet again and insult people.

Where were the voices to settle parents? Whatever people think about the threats and wherever they might have emanated from, I can tell you that parents — I and other elected representatives got calls — were very fearful, as were teachers, and there was a period during the weekend before the schools started on Monday morning when they could have been settled, more so by unionists than ourselves.

Yesterday, we had a debate on Castlederg, and there was a lot of talk — I understand it — about hurt to victims. I will make a point today that I wanted to make yesterday: the difficulty is not that people are hurt by the actions of others, what people say and parades that take place; it is that there is no recognition by the far side of the House that people can be hurt on the republican side and that relatives of volunteers in the IRA, who lost their loved ones, are also hurt by what people say here and other words.

When we talk about the hierarchy of victims and inequality, that is what we are talking about. Indeed, Alban Maginness's solution was that the relatives of volunteers should hide in some hall and do their grieving and have their commemorations there. Ross Hussey quite proudly said that he was an ex-RUC reservist and that he was glad at the deaths — glad at the deaths —, yet the debate was about people's sensitivity to victims. It is this idea that there can only be one type of victim that most annoys others.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I thank the Member for giving way. He referred Mr Hussey's remarks from yesterday. For the official record, the context was that he was glad that, if anybody died that day, it was the people carrying the bomb, because the bomb was intended to kill others. So, if people were going to die, he would rather it was not the intended targets but the people carrying the bomb, who were the perpetrators.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

It was read into the record yesterday, Mr Nesbitt. You are an ex-victims' commissioner. His comment was added to, and when he said it, there were cries of "hear, hear" from about the place. [Interruption.] So it is a "hear, hear" from you as well. You are an ex-victims' commissioner, and you are nodding there. Let us put that on the record as well. Then, of course, it was added to by Jim Allister who was glad and thought that it was something that should be celebrated. In the middle of all this, when you are high on your pedestals and are so argumentative about people trying to remember their loved ones, remember that other people have suffered as well. That is the great difficulty with the type of debates that we are having.

Lord Morrow accused me of being ambivalent. I have been accused of many things, but I do not think that ambivalence is one of them. I was very straightforward. I was a combatant in a conflict situation, and I believe that I was right.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

I did make a choice. People need to realise that, if we are going into the Haass talks, open-mindedness needs to be part of it. That means listening to other people and understanding that other people suffer as much —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is up.

Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin, Belfast North)

— no matter where they come from in the community.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

On a point of order, Principal Deputy Speaker. A lot of us are finding it very hard to hear. Yesterday and today, I have found it particularly hard to hear Mr Kelly's contributions.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

It is not a point of order, but we have informed the Assembly management, and it is checking the sound system.

I encourage Members to speak out and for them to give Members who are speaking some order so that we all have the opportunity to hear what is being said.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

You did call me there, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I am sorry; I did not hear what you said.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I beg to move the following amendment: Insert after "PSNI"

"condemns those who damaged community relations by engaging in commemorations glorifying the acts of terrorists;".

I assure you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, that I am going to speak out on this matter.

I am not surprised at all that Mr Kelly is not accepting the insertion into the motion. The Sinn Féin motion as it stands is carefully crafted, but it is a two-faced motion that ignores the central issues around the problems of violence across our community.

The motion is constructed to appear to be forward-looking, but in reality it is an avoidance of the problems caused by Sinn Féin's backward-looking attitude and history in its content and approach. It expertly avoids the solid and essential base on which equality and reconciliation is built. It is typical Connolly House propaganda, Connolly House misinformation, Connolly House half-truths, Connolly House cant and Connolly House hypocrisy. That is where it is coming from. As always, the Sinn Féin party line is there no matter whom it offends. It is typical Gerry Adams-speak.

The motion:

"notes with grave concern ... over the summer".

It:

"deplores the activities of ... those ... engaged in acts of violence against local communities, elected representatives, and the PSNI".

It seeks:

"to promote a culture of tolerance and reconciliation"

and to promote "mutual respect rather than division".

However, it falls short.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Member give way?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Let me just make this point. The motion falls short. It does not condemn those who damage community relations by engaging in commemorations that glorify acts of terrorism or the heinous history of terrorists who have caused such grievous injury across Northern Ireland, such as the Castlederg two.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I do not want to interrupt the flow of the Member's argument, but does he agree that we have heard from Sinn Féin an attempt to indicate that there has not been condemnation of illegal activities over the summer, when, in fact, our amendment to the motion would condemn all those acts of violence and would add the condemnation of the glorification of terror, such as that which we saw in Castlederg? Therefore, the amendment does both, rather than what Mr Kelly implied it would do.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

The Member is quite right. The composite motion would be as he has outlined — right across the board. The Members' code of conduct —

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for giving way. Will he clarify and confirm that the condemnation extends to a commemoration of violence by all groups, whether republican, loyalist or other?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

The Member really ought to read the amendment before he gets to his feet to try to make such a petty political point.

The Members' code of conduct indicates that we have to:

"Ensure public confidence and trust in the integrity of Members by establishing openness and accountability as the key elements of the Code".

Sinn Féin has an opportunity today to openly and transparently be accountable and to condemn the cowards who murdered the workmen in the Teebane crossroads massacre; the sectarian murderers who in cold blood shot down workers in the Kingsmills massacre; the cowards who planted the bomb in the Enniskillen Remembrance Day massacre; the vile thugs who planned and planted the bombs in the La Mon House massacre; the evil gunmen who so callously carried out the Darkley gospel hall massacre; and the vicious brutes who bombed and murdered in Claudy.

Sinn Féin continues to eulogise those who, on a Saturday morning, carried out the Shankill Road bomb massacre.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

Will the Member give way?

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I will give way in just a moment. Sinn Féin displays double standards by attending services for the innocent victims of the Omagh bombing while giving high praise to the Provo terrorists who murdered other innocent victims. What duplicity. We also need to remember all those who were murdered and maimed by the Provisional IRA across the mainland. The IRA has created a wasteland of atrocities that Sinn Féin refuses to condemn. I give way to the Member.

Ross Hussey (UUP, West Tyrone)

Unfortunately, I was not here for the start of the debate, but I heard my name mentioned. The Member is quite correct: Sinn Féin will not condemn those attacks. In August 1973, two men set out from County Donegal with a car bomb. In August 1998, two men set out to Omagh with a car bomb. However, I have been criticised for saying that it was right that those who were in that car did not get their car bomb into Castlederg and died in the execution of that bomb attempt. I do not apologise for those remarks; I stand by them. I am sure that we would all rather see people alive than a fifty-first car bomb brought into Castlederg.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his intervention. Those who were involved in the list of horrific crimes that I have read out are heroes to Sinn Féin and are treated in the same manner in which they treated their Castlederg two. In the mindset of Sinn Féin, there is a need to continue their conflict by revelling and taking pleasure in celebrating terrorist atrocities through near-religious devout remembrance of those who murdered and maimed. Such activities do not rest within the honeyed words of the motion. Those who pay tribute to the terrorists cannot be seen as genuinely interested in or concerned about peace. Their words are false and phoney, and there is no truth in them. They are dishonest. They are words without any substance.

The Member who proposed the motion referred to the Richard Haass talks. The DUP is intent on entering into those talks in a positive manner. We are committed to finding a way forward on all the contentious issues, whether they be parades, flags or the past. Northern Ireland needs to move forward for the sake of our citizens, our children, the economy and the whole of our society. However, Sinn Féin needs to recognise that it cannot continue its campaign of paying tribute to those who butchered innocent men, women and children.

We are seeking a shared future. If that is to mean anything, it has to include shared space. If we have situations in Northern Ireland where there are no-go areas, where Orangemen and Orangewomen are not welcome, and where cultural apartheid is the order of the day, we are going nowhere. How can there be trust between communities when atrocities remain unsolved, when players in the Provisional IRA remain silent about their long list of atrocities and then there is the glorification of those atrocities?

Northern Ireland needs to move forward, but Sinn Féin needs to recognise that it cannot continue this campaign of creating saint-like heroes out of those who have murdered and maimed our citizens.

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

The SDLP will be supporting the motion and amendment. Yesterday, I commented that there was a sense of detachment about what people were saying in here from what people were experiencing outside of here. What I have heard this morning only corroborates that assessment of things. Indeed, what we heard from New York overnight corroborates the fact that there are people in America at the moment, just as there are people in the Chamber at the moment, who are detached from the loss of hope that people are experiencing about the frustration of the ambition of the Good Friday Agreement and the subsequent agreements and the values of agreement politics. If people do not recognise how detached they are becoming from the broader human and community experience, the next three months will not fulfil the ambition that many of us hope for.

Mr Kelly's speech was like a postscript to yesterday's debate rather than actually addressing the content of the motion. From my perspective and the SDLP perspective, the loss to a family, a movement and a community of those who value those individuals, of an IRA volunteer is no less in human, family and community terms than the loss of any other person during the years of terror and state violence. But Mr Kelly repeatedly refuses to recognise that those who he represents do not recognise the hurt that was caused to democracy by the IRA campaign, when the sovereign will of the people of Ireland was repeatedly usurped by a small group of people. When he talks about taking a war, as he calls it, to the British, what actually happened was that terror was inflicted upon civilian people here, in Britain and in other places. Until and unless that is acknowledged by the republican movement, just as I acknowledge its sense of loss, things will not move forward.

The DUP commentary on yesterday was touched on by Robin Newton. He, again, had a list of atrocities that the IRA was responsible for. However, he was silent once again, as always, on state atrocity. Today in London, MPs, including Alasdair McDonnell, are sponsoring an event for the Ballymurphy massacre families. Until Mr Newton can stand on his feet in the Chamber and talk about that state atrocity, your words sound very hollow. Until you get to that place, the ambition of the Haass process will be frustrated.

The motion touches on:

"long term and sustainable solutions to contentious political issues".

I agree. However, unless we are to have sustainable solutions to contentious issues, we have to recognise, as I said yesterday, that politics is degrading before our very eyes, that the pattern in recent times of short-term fixes to long-term problems by Sinn Féin and the DUP will not work, and that the Haass process is about long-term and genuinely sustainable solutions. If we are to have that outcome, I will outline in broad terms what that might look like.

The solution to the issue of flags is not agreement on the flying or otherwise of any national flag; it is much broader than that. It is a comprehensive agreement that touches on flags, emblems, symbols and memorabilia. That is the ambition of the Haass process as we should see it, and that is what we should work for. In that space, the issue of flags will be resolved.

Secondly, when it comes to dealing with the past, until we acknowledge that what victims and survivors want is a truth and accountability process that touches on all the atrocities that remain unresolved, Mr Newton — not the ones that were the responsibility solely of the terror organisations, but also the state — and until we have that mechanism in place, truth and accountability and victims and survivors will be frustrated.

Finally, when it comes to parades, let us recognise that we need a parades commission and that it is better that that is outwith —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

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

— the institutions of government than within.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Before I call the next Member, I remind Members that all remarks should be made through the Chair. I know that, in any debate, there will be the need to cross-reference comments that Members who spoke previously made. However, all remarks should be addressed through the Chair.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

We will support the amendment. When I first saw the motion, it seemed to me that, in trying to take a generic view of it, there was perhaps some fear from the proposers that there is some hint in the violence of some unravelling going on in our political process and that perhaps what was motivating some of those who were responsible for the violence of the summer was a political ambition to return to majority rule. Let me say to Sinn Féin that the Ulster Unionist Party is not proposing a return to majority rule. It is gone. Move on. We are moving on from that. We want consensual government. However, let me also make it clear that what happened last 3 December at Belfast City Hall was not consensual government. Once Sinn Féin saw a majority with the Alliance and the SDLP, it went for it. No unionist bought in. We will not go forward with mutual respect and tolerance and everything else that you want if you are going to behave in that manner. It has to be properly consensual if we are really to get anywhere.

Is the violence wrong? Yes, and I have been saying so for many, many months. The violence is wrong. It is wrong legally, it is wrong morally, and, in so far as it comes from people who consider themselves to be pro-union, it is also wrong politically and even tactically, because it takes a focus off where it is supposed to be. I am thinking of Castlederg, where unionism was getting up a good head of steam to complain about what was being proposed. Only one thing took a focus off that, and that was Ruth Patterson's very ill-judged remarks on social media. That is regrettable. Let us ask the unionist community to keep focused on what is important. Condemning violence is important. No matter where it comes from or who is responsible for it, it is wrong. That is a different analysis from that of Sinn Féin, which argued for many years that violence was justified because of the conditions. However, I will not rehearse what I said yesterday on that particular issue.

The motion asks us to note:

"with grave concern the violence and disorder over the summer months".

I do that, but I also note with grave concern that, underpinning that, is a perception by some that where we are going politically is a one-way street. There is a perception that republicans have lost the battle for a united Ireland. If you do not agree with me, look at the census, where you will see that only one in four people in this country said that they wanted to be called Irish. Republicans have lost the battle for a united Ireland and have conceded that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and will stay so for as long as the majority vote that way. There is every indication that we will all be long gone before there will be any likelihood of people voting for change. With all that done, republicans now want to say, "OK, Northern Ireland may be part of the United Kingdom, but we wish to remove every single vestige that would say that Northern Ireland is British." That is a perception that is a challenge for the republican movement.

You ask for "tolerance and for reconciliation" in your motion. In principle, of course we stand for tolerance and reconciliation, but what do you want us to be tolerant of? Is it what happened in Castlederg? If it is, I cannot satisfy you. I can have a conversation with you. Your national chairperson, when he launched your so-called reconciliation drive, talked about having difficult conversations. We will have to have difficult conversations, and it will be difficult for you if you cannot understand that what happened in Castlederg is something that I cannot be tolerant of.

You ask for mutual respect, and, yes, I have mutual respect for your political aspiration for a united Ireland.

Fill your boots, peacefully and democratically, to try to persuade me that my future is in a united Ireland. However, to your saying that there is equivalence — that a man who chose to join an illegal organisation set up specifically to undermine and destroy the state with bombs and bullets is the same as somebody who joined the security forces to defend the state — I say no and, to coin a phrase, never. However, let us have those difficult conversations —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

— whether it is with Haass, whether it is here or whether it is privately. Let us have those difficult conversations because we owe it to the next generations.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Alliance Party will support the motion and the amendment as, regrettably, violence and community relations remain issues that we have to work wholeheartedly to address, but I will challenge the commitment of the proposer of each in my response. In May this year, Members of the Assembly took part in talks in advance of a potentially very difficult summer that concluded with very clear commitments on behalf of their parties to support the rule of law and the PSNI obligation to uphold the rule of law. They also committed to using stabilising rather than inflammatory language at all times. That included DUP Ministers and senior Sinn Féin representatives as well as other party representatives.

So what actually happened? We saw the best and the worst of Northern Ireland all in one. On one hand, we had the success of the World Police and Fire Games, allowing us to showcase all that is good about our small part of the world. Some 6,700 athletes from 67 countries came to compete in what were branded the friendliest games ever. On the other hand, we had some elected representatives displaying a total lack of leadership when we needed it most, flouting the rule of law and making comments suggesting the inevitability of violence as the consequence of certain decisions. What message does that send out to people who have violence in mind as an appropriate response to certain decisions? It is not a very good one, and it does not show strong leadership.

Some elected representatives also demonstrated a lack of respect for victims in commemorative events, while other elected representatives selectively condemned such insensitive commemoration and, it seems, continue to turn a blind eye when it happens in other areas. That tit-for-tat "whataboutery" has to stop. It is damaging the credibility of elected representatives, whether they recognise that or not, and the credibility of the Assembly. I agree with Alex Attwood that it makes the Assembly appear even more detached and disengaged from the reality on the ground.

The focus of political parties in Northern Ireland has to be to condemn all violence and damage to community relations, without selection or equivocation, and, most importantly, to work together for the common good of everyone in the community who is finding times very difficult across the board. The motion sets out some of the key aspects of the way forward — tolerance, mutual respect, reconciliation and a long-term sustainable solution to improve community relations — but why, in 2013, are we still grappling with those issues? The shared future strategy set out the key issues and an action plan to deal with them in 2005. Approximately 180 responses to the cohesion, sharing and integration strategy consultation told OFMDFM in 2010 that it needed to integrate education, share space and create frameworks for dealing with flags, parades and the past. Alliance worked to have those proposals put into action but withdrew from the talks that followed because the DUP and Sinn Féin refused to do the very thing that the motion calls for: to agree long-term solutions to the fundamental issues that we are dealing with.

The consequences of the failure of OFMDFM to face up to the issues have been stark and have been well rehearsed over the past two days in the Assembly. They have been felt by every member of the community, businesses and families alike. In response to that inadequate approach, Alliance proposed a more open and transparent talks process that, in addition to the work of political parties, would create an opportunity for the wider community to make its voice heard on the key issues under the stewardship of an independent chairperson. I welcome the fact that OFMDFM has invited Richard Haass to initiate this process. I encourage the silent majority in our society to respond to the call for submissions and make their views known. However, for the process to deliver long-term sustainable solutions, political parties must be willing to think outside their perceived communal identity, or we will rerun these contested issues, over and over, with increasingly serious human and financial consequences.

Alliance has a vision for this community of children being educated together, mixed neighbourhoods, support for the rule of law and the balanced and dignified expression of identity. I believe that that is the hope and aspiration of the vast majority of people in this community, and I believe that it is in our gift to achieve it. It will, however, require political parties to work together and to show the courage to lead change —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

— beyond their own interest and for the common good.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I support the amendment.

Over the past number of years, we have heard much of the concept of shared space and a shared future. As a unionist who opposed the Belfast Agreement, I have to say that I am quite prepared to buy into the concept of a shared future and shared space, but only if that shared future and shared space includes my community and the culture of that community, including that of the Orange Institution. The motion calls for the promotion of equality and reconciliation. Quite frankly, that is rich coming from the party from which the motion emanates. Sinn Féin's actions in removing the nation's flag from City Hall in December, supported, regrettably, by the SDLP and Alliance, created a huge fissure in community relations not just in the city but throughout Northern Ireland. What was the response to that by Sinn Féin, the party that is so interested in community relations and building a shared future? That night, Sinn Féin members had a party in their room in City Hall to celebrate this victory for the republican movement. No consensus at all. I see that they smile on their Benches. One has to conclude that they must have known the outcome of that vote in City Hall.

The Tour of the North sets the tone for the parading season in Northern Ireland. Look what happened that night. Mr Kelly impaled himself on a Land Rover at Carrick Hill, protesting that a young man who had been inciting hatred should be released. That night, Sinn Féin TV put it out that Catholic homes in Carrick Hill had been attacked. When my colleagues and I visited the police only days later we were told that that did not happen. That was propaganda and lies from Sinn Féin TV.

Decisions by Sinn Féin and, regrettably, the SDLP to name play parks after terrorists and to campaign for Marian Price and Gerry McGeough to be removed from jail are not understood by the unionist community. They simply do not understand them and see them as gross acts of provocation. Opposition to all Orange parades, including Orange church parades, is also not understood by the wider unionist community. Campaigning through residents' groups — indeed, Sinn Féin has been involved in setting up new residents' groups in north Belfast — completely flies in the face of the motion. Lobbying by Sinn Féin, the SDLP and, indeed, the Irish Government against Orange parades is simply seen as gross intolerance and anti-Orange by the community that I represent.

The Parades Commission's decision this year about Ardoyne has to be examined. The commission, which Mr Attwood wants to keep in place, rewarded violence. On 12 July last year, thousands of people came onto the streets, attacked the police, attacked Twaddell Avenue, set fire to a car and pushed it into police ranks and then used automatic gunfire from Brompton Park to try to murder police officers. Of course, the most recent commemoration with Sinn Féin involvement was in Omagh. That is another example of how it sees community relations in 2013. The commemoration and celebration of murder and violence and the oration by one of the leading members of Sinn Féin make a laughing stock of and completely undermines the motion. As a unionist and an Orangeman, I believe that the Parades Commission must now look at itself and its determination. The commission is not part of the solution but is increasingly part of the problem. The interference by the Irish Government in internal affairs by lobbying the Parades Commission must be examined and exposed by unionists.

Sinn Féin's street politics are because it has failed to deliver politically. Sinn Féin knows that a united Ireland is not going to happen. Adams promised a united, free, independent Ireland by 2016; it will not be realised, so the whole shift of emphasis has moved to the cultural war. Let me tell you this: if that is the road that you want to go down, it is a road that you will perish upon. You cannot win the cultural war any more than you won the military war.

Northern Ireland needs to move forward. Northern Ireland needs peace, stability and real reconciliation —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Could the Member bring his remarks to a close?

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

— and it cannot be delivered by the street politics of the absolute zero-sum cultural annihilation that Sinn Féin is involved in.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I speak in support of the motion and in opposition to the amendment. I listened carefully to the accusation from the DUP that, somehow, we stand to be blamed for giving the motion careful consideration. Then, we all stand accused of that because dealing with such a contentious issue requires that determination, consideration and focus, and I suggest that Members on the opposite Bench do likewise.

As the motion says, it is important that we act in a way which promotes mutual respect and that we work constructively to find a long-term solution to contentious political issues. It is important, too, that we reflect on the social and economic cost of the last number of months. Last week, we heard from the PSNI that a total of £28 million has been spent since December. Therefore, it is critical that, as the motion calls for, we send out a message to US envoy Richard Haass as he prepares to come here to chair all-party talks. We must create the best possible environment for those talks to take place. As the motion states, all the violence and disorder must be condemned by everyone, including the DUP. Political unionism needs to realise that nothing can be gained by continually feeding the insatiable appetite of those who see their life through a red, white and blue prism.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

Will the Member give way?

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

No, I will not. You had your say.

The reality is that the vast majority of unionists want to see the process succeed. They are embarrassed by the antics of the thugs who attacked the police in recent weeks and months while wrapped in a Union flag. So, let us not be equivocal about the condemnation of violence. Of course, the Orange Order has refused to talk to some, yet their members talk to us in here all the time.

In my constituency, we have very much the experience of 'A Tale of Two Cities'. Why is that? As someone who was directly involved in processes of dialogue —

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Will the Member give way?

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

No, I will not.

— around these issues, I know that this came about as a result of a recognition by many and by all the stakeholders in the city, including the loyal orders and political unionism, of the importance of resolving the contention around parades. I would like to acknowledge the role that the Speaker of the House played in that many years ago alongside the Apprentice Boys. The result of that has been a trouble-free city over many years. So, in Derry, we have an example of negotiation and leadership from all sections of the community, including political unionism. Therefore, it can be and has been proven that it can work in Derry, so there is absolutely no reason why it should not work in north or east Belfast. The people of the North and across this island deserve that we address these issues. However, the majority of people want us to debate in the Chamber the economy, jobs, health, investment, infrastructure and education. Therein lies the answer. Belfast can learn from Derry.

Failure to learn and engage resulted in the mess that we saw over the summer months. The big question for unionism is this: who leads unionism? I am entirely comfortable with unionists seeking to express their British identity, provided that it is done in a sensible and non-threatening way. I expect unionism to acknowledge and recognise my Irishness in the same manner. I do not think that that is too much to expect.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I support the amendment in my colleagues' names. Having read the motion and listened to the Member who spoke previously, I am puzzled at how Sinn Féin even got the motion constructed. The tone of sectarianism of the previous Member to speak knows no bounds. She talked about the red, white and blue and about looking through a prism. Look at the violence that has been on our streets for many years. They have looked at people with green-tinted glasses and those who have been the leaders of violence for many years and said, "It has worked for them. Maybe it will work for us". Her remarks have added to the problems as opposed to helping.

The motion affirms:

"the commitment of all elected representatives to promote a culture of tolerance and reconciliation".

It goes on to talk about "mutual respect". There was an attack on the Orange culture. I am glad to read into the record that I am proud to be a member of the Orange, and I am proud of the tradition that it has led. I cannot see how anyone can take offence at a parade.

The Member who spoke previously drew a parallel with Londonderry. She talked about health, the economy and jobs. That is the only aspect of what she said that I agree with. However, listen to what the Belfast Chamber of Trade and Commerce said after the decision that her party made along with the SDLP and Alliance. The effect on the economy and jobs of the decision that they made in Belfast City Council brought Belfast to its knees at the busiest trading time of the year: the lead-up to Christmas. Those were hollow words again from the Member about what she wants to do for the economy, jobs and the other points that she made. If someone just turned this debate on and listened to her, they would think, "She has nailed it; she is right", but we have to remember what actions her party colleagues took.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Maybe she is right.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

No, I do not think that she is right.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member must be allowed to continue.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I am grateful to the Member for giving way. The Member who spoke previously, who represents the city of Londonderry in this place, made reference to the fact that it is 'A Tale of Two Cities'. I have heard that from a number of people this year. However, does he agree that absolutely no recognition is given to the fact that, over the last 30 to 40 years, the Protestant and unionist community has been systematically driven out of the city side of Londonderry and that is why there is 'A Tale of Two Cities'?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Thank you. I agree entirely with my colleague on that.

I want to look at something else that the Member who spoke previously said. I did not write down exactly how she framed it, but the point was that she would accept our culture, provided that we expressed it in such a way as it pleased her. That is basically what she said. It is a case of "You can have your culture and celebrate your culture, provided that you do it in the way that we want you do it".

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Will the Member give way?

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I will indeed.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

For the record, what I said was that I am entirely comfortable with unionists seeking to assert their British identity, provided that it is done in a non-threatening and sensible way.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I am happy to give way again to the Member, but how do you define "non-threatening"? Members walk behind a band from one point to their place of worship. What is threatening about that? Music will be played, and, as it is normally on a Sunday, that music will be hymns. If you want to tell me how that is threatening to anyone from your community, I am happy to give way. I think that that silence answers it. We have hollow words from Sinn Féin again today. It says that it accepts that culture if it is expressed in a non-threatening way, and I have given the Member an opportunity to suggest how it is threatening for someone to express their culture and go to a place of worship.

I listened to a party colleague yesterday in a private meeting at which he talked about the parade in Dunloy, where members can only walk a distance the length of this Chamber and are then blocked from going to their place of worship on a Sunday. Can anyone in the Chamber explain — I am happy to give way — how it is threatening to anyone for a member of the Orange Order to walk to his place of worship and express himself in that religious ceremony?

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I will.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I take what the Member is saying. Does he accept that the conduct of everyone participating in such events is not always of the standard that those organisations expect?

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Yes, I have absolutely no problem with that if we are talking about the wider context. However, I have a problem accepting that with respect to church parades, where people want to go to church and take part in a religious service. Unfortunately, I have to say — I am happy to read it into the record — that there are some people who would tag along with parades who can cause a problem. However, that problem has arisen through the interference of Sinn Féin in trying to block legitimate parades. We cannot talk about mutual respect and tolerance if we cannot tolerate one of the largest organisations in this part of Ireland — if they want to call it Ireland. In this part of Ireland, which is Northern Ireland, we cannot prevent people expressing their culture.

We cannot say in one part of the motion that we want to work for mutual respect and yet not tolerate it unless it suits Sinn Féin. People should be allowed to go about their business and express their culture, and that goes for both sides of the community.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Will the Member give way?

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

I will indeed.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

Will the Member agree that, following the same point, there was indeed a strategy —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I am sorry. The Member's time is now exhausted.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

— developed by Sinn Féin to prevent Orange parades across Northern Ireland?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member please resume his seat?

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

The Assembly has had many successes, but, thus far, it has failed to address the central issue in our politics, and that is the disease of sectarianism, which has polluted and poisoned our politics for many generations, not just since partition but prior to it. In the middle of the 19th century, there were many periods of sectarian violence and unrest, particularly in the city of Belfast. If anyone reads Andy Boyd's book 'Holy War in Belfast', they can see there the corrosive and poisonous nature of sectarianism. Whether it be violent or non-violent, sectarianism eats into the very bones, health and welfare of all our citizens. We are not addressing sectarianism as an Assembly. This debate is symptomatic of that. Coat-trailing by republicans in Castlederg is as unacceptable as coat-trailing by the Orange and Black institutions on the Crumlin Road or Donegall Street in Belfast.

On 31 August this year, I witnessed a most offensive, insulting, insensitive and disrespectful display by the Black Institution and its bands, who were returning up Donegall Street outside St Patrick's Church while Mass was being celebrated. They knew that Mass was being celebrated, and, despite that, they played loud music and behaved, I believe, in a most offensive and insulting fashion. Anybody passing a church where a service is ongoing should respect those worshippers and that service. That was not done, and that is symptomatic of the indifference and insensitivity of the Orange Order and the loyal orders here in Northern Ireland, in Belfast in particular. Until they realise the offence that they give to ordinary people, there will be no solution.

It is up to us, as leaders, to try to highlight those problems and to try to educate those who continue to carry out such sectarian behaviour. Sectarianism is not confined to the Orange Order, nor is it confined to unionism. Sectarianism eats into the body politic and into all our communities. It is up to us to address that. Disputes over flags, parading and other issues are symptomatic of the sectarian differences that exist in our community. We have to tackle those, and we are not tackling them. We have the means to tackle them: we have established a power-sharing Executive, and we have established this institution — the Assembly — in which all people can participate and where all are represented in a proportionate fashion. It is up to us, now, to grasp that nettle. We have an opportunity in the Haass talks to do that, but we cannot deposit everything into Haass and hope that there will be some sort of solution to these issues.

I must say, leading into the Haass process, that the ill will and the lack of understanding expressed across the Chamber in the past two days does not augur well for the success of Haass. Dr Haass can come here and help us, but it is up to us, finally, to find our own solutions and to help ourselves. I do not think that we are doing that very well at the moment. I appeal to all Members to renew their efforts to create goodwill and to achieve an end to the sectarian politics that have continued to blight us.

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

Will the Member give way?

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

Yes, indeed.

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

Does the Member agree that the First Minister and deputy First Minister have a serious role to play in overcoming the problems that he has just outlined?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member will be glad to hear that he has an extra minute.

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

Thank you very much. I agree with what Mr Dallat has just said. It is very important that those who hold high office in the Assembly exercise leadership not only of their own party and what they perceive to be their own community but for everyone. That is the essence of real leadership. I believe that this community as a whole will respond if that leadership is, in fact, shown. Unfortunately, however, that leadership has been very much lacking to date. I hope that the First Minister and deputy First Minister can come to an agreement and an accommodation. We in the SDLP will be very supportive of that, but we will continue —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is up.

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

— properly so — to criticise where it is necessary to criticise.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member will resume his seat, please. I call Mr Tom Elliott.

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

I believe that we will continue to show leadership as a political party. Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Well, thank you.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

When I read the motion and particularly some aspects of it, I ask this: who in the Chamber could not deplore those engaged in acts of violence against local communities, local representatives and the PSNI? I do not think that anyone here could support violence against those people. However, I also ask whether those who tabled the motion deplore the violence against the RUC, the army and prison officers in this society? Therein lies a challenge. I hope that those people will make it clear at the end of the debate that they are willing to oppose the violence that went on for years against those groups of people and continues against some of them.

I would also like to accept some of Mr Attwood's arguments, indeed all or most of them. He said that we should look at all Troubles-related killings equally; that is right. However, when the starting point is that 90% of the killings and murders in the Province were caused by the terrorist movements here and 60% by republican terrorists, then, yes, let us look at them with equal value. Let us ensure —

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will give way in a moment. Let us ensure that 90% of the Coroners' Court inquests are to do with people who were murdered by terrorists. Let us ensure that 90% of HET hearings, or whatever else it may be, are to do with people who were murdered by terrorists.

I will give way to Mr Humphrey.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for giving way. I, too, agree with Mr Attwood's assertion about the investigations of murders, wherever they came from. The difficulty for my community and for the people whom we on these Benches represent is about your party's bona fides on this issue. When you campaign for some of the people who were perpetrators of some of those murders to be released from prison, we have great difficulty with that.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute. I remind Members to speak through the Chair at all times.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

OK, thank you very much Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank Mr Humphrey for that, but I will move on to the aspect of equality.

The fact is that we must recall where our starting point is. Whether you bought into any of the agreements — the Belfast Agreement, the St Andrews Agreement or the Hillsborough agreement — the starting point for all those is that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom. That is a fact that some people in this community and in this Chamber have trouble accepting.

I am willing to accept that people on the opposite Benches have different traditions from me — some different cultures and traditions. I am willing to accept that and their right to have them, but they do not appear to be willing to accept where our starting point is; that we are part of the United Kingdom and that the United Kingdom flag is the Union flag. Until we have that honesty and realisation from those on the opposite Benches, how are we going to progress? How are we going to accept each other's culture? I am telling you from here that I accept that those people have different cultures and traditions and that I am willing to accept their right to go out and practice them — not in my face, perhaps — but they have a right to do so. Sometimes it is in my face, but that is life.

When I witness that people in this Chamber will not even accept that the National Crime Agency should be part of Northern Ireland — something that should not have any political connotations at all, something that is for the best for everybody in this society — where is the equality and reconciliation in that?

Where is the equality and reconciliation when some people in this Chamber, giving a lead to those people who are their supporters, do not accept the armed services covenant in Northern Ireland? It represents people who have fought not only for my community but for us all; people who have given up their lives and their service to help this community in totality.

Why will those people not accept the rights of people in the military? Why will they not accept that the National Crime Agency should be extended to Northern Ireland? Is it just because they are so blinkered in their opposition to Britishness and unionist culture? Is it, I ask? If not, then I am willing to listen to the argument that says it is not, but until they provide me with that evidence I do not see where their argument is coming from.

There is hypocrisy from the party that proposed the motion. Given that there are some among them sitting in this Chamber who created many victims in this society, it is rank hypocrisy.

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

Let us think of the different message that would have come from the Chamber had this been a Government motion that had been laid by one of either of our First Ministers and been responded to by one of either of the First Ministers. Let us think of the powerful message that that would have sent out to our communities. Let us think of this Chamber, this Government and this Assembly speaking as one collective voice, sending out a message that there is leadership, that the Government are going to do something here and that they are going to address some of the issues that we have struggled with all year, and how that would have set a better context for the start of the Haass talks.

When we look at the motion and at the amendment, we think, "That is all reasonable." However, the debate then descended into all the "whataboutery", with one side saying "Ballymurphy" and somebody else saying "La Mon", and we went through all the atrocities that the community has suffered.

I thought that it was interesting that the two Members who opened the debate both served as junior Ministers in the previous Government. Both served alongside each other. One proposed the motion and one proposed the amendment, but they came from different spectrums in the tone that was set for the debate.

This year has been a disaster for Northern Ireland. The summer saw violence and political dispute. We had Ministers and MLAs questioning the rule of law, criticising one side but not the other and condemning this but not that. You lose credibility when you do that, because you are not condemning violence across the board. Violence is violence, and it is wrong.

Robin Newton (DUP, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for giving way. I listened intently to what he said for nearly two and a half minutes. Will he confirm whether he is going to support the motion or the amendment, or whether, as he did yesterday, he is going to opt out of making a decision?

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

Earlier, Mr Newton told Mr Lyttle to read, but he should listen more intently. At the outset, I said that the motion and the amendment were perfectly reasonable. The difficulty is the tone and nature of the debate. We have completely entered into the "whataboutery". As we head into the Haass talks, that background does not send any great signal that anything is going to change.

We have skyrocketing policing costs for dealing with this. What are the solutions? What is anybody finding? We are going to have the Haass talks. The parties of government are holding the Haass talks, but you keep distancing yourselves from your partners in government. You keep acting as though you are not responsible and are not part of the process. You are all in the Government together. Why are you not thrashing this out around the Executive table? Why are the First Minister, the deputy First Minister or the junior Ministers not responding to the debate? Why have they not tabled this motion, given the message that that would have sent out? Instead, we have everyone just condemning the bits that suit them.

Mr Newton condemned the Castlederg parade, and rightly so, and Mr Kelly condemned the Brian Robinson parade last week, and rightly so. That condemning of one or the other is all that we have managed to achieve in, literally, two days of debate. It is a zero-sum game of politics, and it is not helpful to the situation that we face in Northern Ireland.

I agree with the other Members who said that what the people really want us to talk about are jobs, the economy, the state of our hospitals and our schools and all the investment that we should be putting into those areas. They also want us talk about all the things that our police force should be investigating and doing, whether that is urban crime, rural crime, traffic offences or whatever it happens to be. Instead, we are spending £28 million on literally holding and policing the divide in our society. Real politics would be our debating those other issues.

I want to turn to some of the points that came out during the debate. On the radio this morning, we had a Government Minister, in the form of Mrs Foster, who could not bring herself to condemn the parade last weekend. The flags debate was thrown into this debate again today, with the DUP and the UUP saying that the decision was wrong, even though UUP policy at the time was designated days. That was thrown in and has now changed. There was the leafleting carried out last autumn and during the early winter, but with no ability to say that maybe you were slightly responsible —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

— or that it maybe ratcheted up tensions. That was wrong.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Member give way?

John McCallister (UUP, South Down)

You will need to be desperately quick because I am out of time.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Your time has gone.

William Humphrey (DUP, Belfast North)

It is just —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The time has gone.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Ms McLaughlin of Sinn Féin bemoaned the fact that we were not debating jobs, the economy and matters of more pertinence to the community, but whose motion is this? Why is it on the Order Paper? The motion is on the Order Paper because Sinn Féin chose it as its debate for this week. Sinn Féin could have told the Business Committee that it wanted to debate the economy. No, it wanted to debate the very issue that Ms McLaughlin then bemoans that we are debating at all. It is little wonder that Mr Newton talked about cant and hypocrisy. Indeed, there is much of that order in the wording of the motion. The message reads very well if you could just forget who the messenger is.

On the subject of cant and hypocrisy, I agreed with virtually everything that Mr Newton said. He berated Mr Kelly for his many, many failings and for his past and present stance. However, as Mr McCallister pointed out, Mr Kelly is the very man whom Mr Newton sat as partner with when junior Minister, and Sinn Féin is the very party that the DUP sustains in the Government day and daily. Gerry Kelly has not changed. He is the same Gerry Kelly who bombed the Old Bailey and shot a prison officer in the head, and he was that same person when Mr Newton was his partner. He has not changed one iota in that regard. Therefore, it is no surprise to me that although Gerry Kelly tries to excuse the fact that he will not support the amendment by initially suggesting that it is because it will exclude other necessary words, when it is exposed that no other words are being excluded, he still opposes the amendment. Why? Sinn Féin wants a motion that condemns violence, but not the violence of the IRA. It wants a motion that condemns disorder and street rioting, but it does not want to touch at all by way of adverse comment anything that the IRA of Sinn Féin implemented and brought to the Province. Indeed, far from wanting to condemn it, Sinn Féin wants to glorify it. That is why it recoils from the idea that, hand in glove with condemning violence, we should equally condemn the glorification of violence. It is indisputable that, if you want to be credible and taken seriously in condemning violence, you have to condemn violence — period. You have to condemn the violence that includes the violence of terrorism. You have also to desist from glorifying — all of that — that same violence. Of course, it is because Sinn Féin is the willing prisoner of the IRA that it is unwilling to condemn the violence of the IRA. Rather, it rather wishes to glorify it in all its bloodiness and hideous components. We saw that in Castlederg, and we saw it in many other places.

So I identify with the cant and hypocrisy that lies within the motion and in the refusal to accept the amendment, but I am not blind to other cant and hypocrisy as well.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.36 pm.

On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

It is time for questions to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development. We will begin, as we did yesterday, with topical questions. Those will last for up to 15 minutes, and we will then move on to deal with questions that appear on the questions for oral answer list.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. What is the Minister's Department doing to try to increase drawdown of EU funds, particularly from the Horizon 2020 programme? (AQT 21/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Horizon 2020 will be a significant funding stream for R&D, with an estimated budget in excess of £70 billion. I am very keen that the agrifood sector maximises the drawdown and achieves the full benefit of that. That is in line with the aspirations that have been set out in the Going for Growth strategy.

The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) has provided three years of funding for a contact point post, which will be based at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI). The purpose of that post is to provide the agrifood sector with relevant information to allow it to maximise the drawdown that the North receives from the new Horizon 2020 research budget. That new appointee will take up their post at the end of this month.

In addition, my officials will work closely with officials in other Departments, as part of the Executive's cross-departmental subgroup of the Barroso task force working group. The IT subgroup has produced a communications strategy, which clearly sets out the structures in place to help sectors obtain the relevant information to ensure that we maximise the opportunities available under Horizon 2020. That will be of benefit to the agrifood sector.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. In maximising the drawdown, what targets is the Department setting?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

My target is to increase our drawdown of funding by at least 20%. We are about to put in place our AFBI contact point, which will play a significant role in enabling us to do that. Last year, AFBI drew down about £1·3 million in R&D funding, and we are working very closely with it to make sure that we increase that.

Just last week — last Wednesday and Thursday — I was in Brussels, and Martina Anderson MEP facilitated a number of meetings with the Commission, the Parliament and the Council. We met a range of people to promote the work that AFBI is involved in, particularly around research and development, and to make sure that AFBI is known in Brussels so that, whenever it comes to drawing down the Horizon 2020 funding, we are at the table, people know who we are and people know what we have to offer. AFBI has done significant work on research and development, particularly by working in partnership with other research agencies.

We also had a key meeting last week with Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn, who will be responsible for rolling out Horizon 2020. Again, that was very fruitful. She gave us very useful information on looking towards the new programme and how we bid into it. That will be a major piece of work. Obviously, we have Executive targets and individual DARD targets to make sure that we draw down as much money as we possibly can for research and development funding.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

With reference to the performance of the local action groups (LAGs) in the distribution of funding from the rural development programme, can you detail whether you feel that the delivery model has been a success and outline what performance indicators have been used to assess the LAGs? (AQT 22/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

There are obviously lessons to be learned. We inherited this programme and the mechanism by which things were rolled out. We are now out to consultation, so we are going to gather up all the issues on the new rural development programme. We will be able to gather up all the issues that there are in looking to the new programme and at how we can do things better. There will always be ways to do things better. There are simple things that could be done better. For example, no matter if you want £1,000 or £100,000 of funding from the rural development programme, the application process is the same. So, there are a lot of quick and positive changes that we can make in the new programme.

We launched the consultation during the summer, and that will roll out for another wee while. There is a consultation event tonight, and I will be going to one on Thursday night. That is an opportunity to listen at first hand to those who have been involved in the LAGs and the joint council committees (JCCs) and have been delivering the programmes on the ground. That will make the programme successful in that there should be that bottom-up approach to delivering local projects in local areas and meeting the needs of those local areas. So, I very much want to listen to the views of stakeholders, and I will shape the new rural development programme based on the consultation exercise. I have no doubt that my door will be knocked constantly over the next wee while by people who have very strong views about how we deliver the new rural development programme.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for that response. LAGs do have a role to play, but Minister, would you consider using DARD staff and services to deliver more rural development schemes under the new common agricultural policy compared with that current model? Would that not ensure that more money reaches the intended beneficiaries?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I think that the way that we do things with the bottom-up LEADER approach is very positive. It is how I envisage that we will continue to do things in the future. There are lessons to be learned. I do not think that we will necessarily need all the structures that we have at the moment, but there may be ways that we can improve things, particularly around the current structure of JCCs and LAGs. Do we need that in the future? Again, that is all part of the ongoing consultation exercise. I hope to be able to announce a position on the way forward later in the year or, certainly, in the early part of next year.

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

Bearing in mind, Minister, the recent meeting between DARD officials and oyster farmers, what steps are you taking to provide support for them at Carlingford lough and Lough Foyle after stocks were decimated by the recent virus in July? (AQT 23/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As Mr Rogers rightly points out, officials met the oyster farmers who are affected and local representatives on Monday 2 September. I am told that it was a very useful meeting. Officials assured the industry that I am committed to assisting it where possible.

I suppose that the position remains that there is no legislative provision to pay compensation for losses that were caused by fish disease, and the fact is that it was not an unusual event. Over the past number of years, we have seen it happen not only in Ireland, obviously, but in other areas. There have been reported mortalities in France going back as far as 2009, I think. So, it is not an unusual event, but, that having been said, it has obviously had a very negative impact on the people who have been affected. I am committed to working with the industry to see whether we can look at research possibilities because, obviously, we have to tackle that disease. We have to be able to find a way to help the industry because we do not want the situation to continue. This is something that could possibly happen to their crop, year on year.

We will work with Sea Fish, which is the industry representative body, and the cross-border Aquaculture Initiative team, because this is something that has impacted in Carlingford lough, Lough Foyle and some of the bays that come under the jurisdiction of the Twenty-six Counties. There are a number of key areas of work that we need to get involved with, particularly with regard to research and being able to tackle the disease.

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

Thank you, Minister. You mentioned that no legislation exists locally. Have you any plans to bring forward local legislation in order to provide a much-needed hardship package for those farmers?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, I am very sympathetic to their plight, what has happened to them and the fact that they have had such major, substantial losses. It is not just down to legislation; it is the fact that it is not an unusual event that is the problem. Where I think I can assist those oyster farmers most effectively is in looking towards research, science and evidence and to why that problem is occurring and try to get to a stage where it is not a major factor. I am aware of substantial losses to some of those people and that it is a very distressing time. So, I want to make the commitment that we will work with them to provide advice and support and to look at how we eradicate that disease, which has obviously been a problem since 2009.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Can the Minister give the House an update on the specific effort she is making to ensure that the allocation key that is used to calculate the regional CAP envelope remains the same, so that Northern Ireland's allocation of the UK's envelope is not reduced? (AQT 24/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, absolutely. Over the past number of years, we have had very hefty debate in Brussels and have argued for regional flexibility, which I am very glad that we have been able to achieve. Although we have had all those high-level discussions and we have the broad framework, decisions now have to be taken locally on how we best use the funds that are available to us and ensure that we design a programme that is fit for purpose and fit for the local industry.

As regards our allocation and share, we have seen Scotland coming out arguing for additional funding. Unfortunately, we are starting with a base of a reduced budget overall. I will certainly ensure that I engage with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) — as I have to date and will continue to do — to ensure that we get our fair share and are not disadvantaged compared with other areas such as Scotland, Wales and England. I will continue to do that, and that discussion is ongoing.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she inform us, in a bit more detail than she gave in her answer, what information she has received on the issue from the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and whether she has sought or, indeed, received an assurance from him that things will not change for us here in Northern Ireland?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We are in the middle of a negotiation and that will go on until we reach a final conclusion. I have engaged with DEFRA personally as have my officials, and that is ongoing. As I said, I will fight the corner for our local industry to make sure that we get a fair allocation. As I said, I am disappointed that we are starting off from a lower budget overall, but that is the case. I will continue to negotiate strongly, and I expect that that will intensify over the next wee while. I am happy to inform the House when we have a final settlement on the deal. I am not engaging in the negotiation to come out with a poor deal for the Six Counties.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Minister, will you outline what your Department is doing to improve relations between the agrifood sector producers — the farmers — and the agrifood sector retailers? There are big issues between the two. (AQT 25/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Absolutely; I totally agree with you. I think that if you cast your mind back over the past year to 18 months, you will recall that we had the debate around farmgate prices and the campaign from the farming unions, highlighting the prices that farmers had been paid.

Obviously, one of the areas that we — me and Arlene Foster, the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment — strongly work together on and are engaged with is the whole agrifood strategy. We now have that piece of work in place, and she and I are working our way through it in order to present an action plan to the Executive later in the year.

One of the key messages to come out of that is that there needs to be fairness in the supply chain and that they are equal partners in the supply chain — the farmers should not be the ones who are continually squeezed — and that if we want to continue to grow our agrifood industry successfully, we need to work with all sectors and to make sure that the whole supply chain is appreciated and valued in equal measure. A key area of work for me is making sure that those two key players work together.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her answer. She pointed out a big issue: how the profit margins of farmers are squeezed. A lot of farmers fall into the small or medium-sized enterprise category — in fact, some of them are very small — and they really struggle with very small profit levels. What can your Department do to aid small farmers on that issue?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, we have continual support in place by way of single farm payments for farmers. We also look to offer support through the rural development programme. Again, we will have a new opportunity to look at new ways of working and new opportunities for farmers. We have had some excellent successes through the current rural development programme in assisting farmers, particularly around diversification, food production and improvements to premises — all those positive areas of work — and I look forward to doing more of that in the new programme.

I am very keen to hear the views of stakeholders, including farmers, on how we shape the new rural development programme and on the types of support that they would like to see in place, because, obviously, we want them to remain competitive and sustainable into the future.

Barry McElduff (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. What is the Minister's Department doing to improve access to high-quality facilities in rural communities? I ask that in light of some recent criticism, which I feel is unjustified, about the way in which rural development programme money is being spent. (AQT 26/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I agree that the criticism is unwarranted. I am thinking of some of the projects that I visited, particularly over the past couple of months. Over the summer recess, I took the opportunity to get out and about to see for myself how the rural development programme money is being spent in rural areas, and I saw some very worthy projects. We have to ensure that we support rural communities to be sustainable and to thrive into the future. For me, that is very much the focus of the rural development programme, particularly axis 3 and some of the projects that we have been involved with.

There have been a number of smaller projects on the ground, but some of the bigger strategic projects would really make a difference to rural people's lives. Quite often, people are isolated due to geography and where they live, so they have no access to services and have issues with transport — there is a whole gamut of issues. For me, the rural development programme has been very successful in making sure that we assist rural communities to thrive and to be sustainable.

There have also been a lot of positive measures to try to encourage young people to stay in rural communities. As the Member will be very aware, many young people are now travelling abroad for work, and unless we are creative in working with communities to address what they need, I think that we will be failing those communities.

Those programmes are excellent and very worthy. I look forward to the new rural development programme and to making sure that we can have more of those in the future.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

That ends the period for topical questions. We now move to the oral questions on the Order Paper to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for her assessment of the progress of the Strangford Lough restoration plan. (AQO 4502/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. In October 2012, my Department and the Department of the Environment (DOE) agreed a revised restoration plan with the Ulster Wildlife Trust and forwarded it to the European Commission. The plan reflects the recommendations contained in the 2011 Queen's University report for, first, protection, through the introduction of a large non-disturbance zone; secondly, intervention, through the appointment of a postdoctoral research fellow, experimentation with translocation of horse mussels and the creation of artificial reefs; and, finally, the monitoring of horse mussels to indicate whether recovery is taking place.

The revised restoration plan has been with the Commission since October last year. Although the Commission has yet to formally comment on the proposals, we understand informally that it and the Ulster Wildlife Trust are broadly content with it. In the meantime, both Departments have pressed ahead with the establishment of the large non-disturbance zone that was identified in the plan. My Department has prohibited sea fishing in the area, and the Department of the Environment has introduced by-laws to restrict anchoring, mooring and diving in it. Enforcement has been strengthened with the deployment of a full-time fishery officer for Strangford lough, and there has been a similar commitment from the Department of the Environment through the introduction of a Strangford lough ranger.

All of those are critical actions to deliver the protection required by the revised plan. Furthermore, I understand that a postdoctoral research fellow has been appointed to undertake pilot studies on restoration prior to full-scale restoration in the medium to long term. My Department and AFBI carried out the first ever survey of the seabed, and that will result in a complete habitat map. Progress towards recovery will be monitored.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Question 10 has been withdrawn.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for a very comprehensive answer. I am delighted that there is now cooperation between the two Departments. Is the Minister confident that the whole plan will go ahead, will be adequate in addressing the restoration and that we will not face infraction fines?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is fair to say that we have carried out some very positive partnership work with the Department of the Environment. As I said, we have not had formal confirmation from Europe, but it has indicated that it is broadly content with the approach that we have taken. I think that the measures that we have set out are dealing with the issue, but we also want to create a sustainable fishery and must look towards the livelihood of the people who fish on the lough. We must get a balance between the environmental concerns and the needs of people who depend on the lough. I feel that the measures adequately address that. We will keep this under review, and I am happy to keep the Member up to date, in her position as Committee Chair, as we move forward.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Are the mussel levels recovering?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is early days, but there are indications that horse mussels survive and clump when they are provided with a suitable habitat and are protected. There is no indication at this stage of a significant increase in numbers, but it is early days. It will take a bit of time before we will see progress, given that mussels are a very slow-growing and long-lived species.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Progress appears to have been made on this sorry tale at last, and we are no longer faced with the threat of another infraction fine. My colleague in the European Parliament Jim Nicholson received correspondence during the summer from Karl Falkenberg, director general of the environment for the Commission, in which he states that the file will be closed on the understanding that the actions that are proposed will be implemented. Can the Minister detail what lessons she has learned from the whole saga?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I assure the Member that I take my role very seriously, and I think that we have been very positively engaged with DOE. However, we must always get a balance between environmental concerns and people's livelihoods, because some people advocate that we should stop fishing completely, but where would that leave the people who depend on the lough?

I think that what we have here is a very balanced approach. We are very aware of the environmental concerns and are now very much engaged with the Ulster Wildlife Trust, and it is content with the approach that we have taken. In the round, it has been a very positive engagement. The Ulster Wildlife Trust had an issue, it raised it, and we addressed it. It is as simple as that.

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

2. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to outline the steps her Department has taken to avert a situation similar to the fodder crisis during the winter of 2012-13. (AQO 4503/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I believe that a joint approach by both government and the agrifood industry is the most effective one to take to ensure that another fodder crisis is averted in the coming winter.

To that end, I established the Fodder Task Force, bringing together representatives of and stakeholders in the agrifood industry, along with DARD, to consider the issues facing the livestock industry in the ensuing year and to produce an action plan to mitigate the effects of any potential problems.

To date, the task force has met on four occasions, and in July it agreed the action plan, which is available on the DARD website. I plan to meet the task force representatives in the near future for an update, and although they do not intend to meet as a group until midwinter, they will get together in the interim if a situation develops and new actions are required.

There is much that farmers can do to plan for the winter ahead, and DARD has been very active in providing advice and support to ensure that they are well prepared. The College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) has embarked on a comprehensive programme of workshops, advisory events and publications, helping farmers to maximise fodder production, to stocktake their individual fodder supply and to manage their stock to make most efficient use of the available fodder.

The task force also brought together representatives of ancillary agrifood industries, with a focus on both the practical and emotional difficulties faced by the farming community. Feed suppliers, banks and food processors recognised that it is in the interests of the whole agrifood industry to work together to help farmers through the challenging winter months.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a cuid freagraí. Tá ceist agam uirthi i dtaobh lucht iompair fodair. Creidim nár díoladh cuid acu go fóill, agus ba mhaith liom fiafraí den Aire cén uair a thig leo bheith ag súil —

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

Come on, Dominic.

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

— lena gcuid íocaíochtaí?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

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

Is it all right for me to continue, Mr Speaker?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Yes.

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you, Minister.

My question for the Minister concerns those who transport fodder. My understanding is that some of them have not yet been paid. When can they hope to receive their payment?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I will not get into individual situations, but the majority of transporters have been paid. There may be a few outstanding issues that the Department is working with, but I am assured that it is a minute number. If the Member wants to pick up on a particular company outside of Question Time, I am happy for him to call into the private office.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Minister, you outlined the steps that your Department has taken to prepare farmers for the future. Can you outline what steps it has taken, and is taking, to support the mental well-being of those farmers and their families who were affected during the crisis and to make sure that there is ongoing support for them?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely agree with you. Given the difficult year that we have had in the farming industry — the prolonged winter last year; the snow; horse meat; all the issues that have been coming thick and fast at the industry; and, I suppose, the general economic climate — it has been a very difficult time for farmers.

I was delighted, therefore, that the task force took those issues on board, and it invited in people such as those from Rural Connect and the rural support network, which provide fantastic services to the rural community. That work has continued. We have also continued to work through CAFRE with Rural Support, and we are making sure that we take forward a number of workshops for CAFRE advisers so that they are well equipped to deal with people, because, as you said, mental well-being is something about which we all should be concerned Everybody's mental well-being is a key concern, and it has to be a factor in any situations that cause financial or general stress to anybody.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. What is the current assessment of fodder stocks?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We have had a good summer, particularly the start of it, and the good weather has assisted growth recovery. The final yield will not be known until such times as the growing season ends, which is upcoming. I think that it is fair to say that the grass utilisation has been better than last year. I also think that we are in a more positive situation. However, as I said, the task force is happy to come back together and to keep the situation under review if we feel that, come the end of the growing season, there will be particular issues. So, at this stage, the weather has been kind to us, but I suppose that it will depend on how we end up at the end of the growing season.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for her assessment of the problem of metal theft in rural areas. (AQO 4504/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Responsibility for tackling rural crime rests primarily with the PSNI and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Theft of any kind has an emotional and financial impact on the lives and fortunes of rural communities. I am very aware of the worry that the level of rural crime causes among the farming community, and I have met with the Chief Constable, and with Minister Ford, on a number of occasions to make him aware of my concerns.

One of the actions emanating from the rural White Paper action plan, which I launched in June 2012, was the Department of Justice's establishment of a rural crime unit. That unit was launched in May this year and will use all available data sources to help to identify trends and patterns that will assist with preventative action, help to improve community confidence and, ultimately, reduce rural crime.

Helping to build safer rural communities is also important for my Department. My Department’s local CAFRE advisers are supporting the PSNI and farming organisations in raising awareness of measures that farmers can take to reduce incidences of crime on their farms. In particular, they are briefing farmers on local initiatives and distributing information. CAFRE, through its participation in the Farmwatch scheme at its Enniskillen, Loughry and Greenmount campuses, is encouraging local farmers to use this scheme as an important means to prevent rural crime. The scheme is designed to help to reduce rural crime, and it uses technological tools to provide vital evidence in criminal investigations.

So, I will continue to work closely with all relevant stakeholders to ensure that the specific needs of rural dwellers are taken into account when developing community safety initiatives.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Stolen metal items can range from lead on roofs to redundant equipment, tractors or machinery that cost five- and six-figure sums. Have the Minister and her officials attempted to quantify that cost in terms of repairs, replacement, disruption to business and any additional cost to insurance premiums? That is a major cost to the industry in Northern Ireland, so has her Department attempted to quantify it?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is not an area of work that we have been involved with. I have been vocal in my role in making sure that we have raised the issues with the DOJ and the PSNI. I welcome that the unit is now in place.

The responsibility for gathering statistics of rural crime rests solely with PSNI. In looking at some of the statistics that the PSNI has produced, I welcome that we have seen a slight reduction. There is a difference between rural crime and agricrime, which the Member will be aware of, and the statistics that the PSNI has produced have shown a fall in rural crime and agricrime of 11·2% and 1·9% respectively when compared with last year. Although that is positive, it is not enough. We still want to do everything that we can to try to eradicate it. Although those statistics are positive, I am aware of certain areas — Clogher Valley, for example — where there are particular problems with cattle theft.

So, we need to keep our finger on the pulse and to continue to work together. I am always willing to play my role in working with the PSNI and the Department of Justice when it comes to tackling and raising the profile of rural crime so that it is continually on their agenda.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the business case for the proposed move of her departmental headquarters to the site at Shackleton Barracks. (AQO 4505/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I directed my officials to carry out a business case addressing only the options for a new headquarters for my Department at Ballykelly. The work to identify, cost and analyse the options to accommodate our headquarters on the Ballykelly site is complete. It was informed by input from the accommodation options study produced by Central Procurement Directorate (CPD), the quality impact assessment and the staff surveys. So, I expect the process to be completed by the end of October.

George Robinson (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Is the Minister confident that any outstanding staff transfer issues will be resolved?