Northern Ireland Assembly, 24 September 2013

537 contributions from 75 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Let me deal with this issue first. I want to return to business from yesterday. I want to say very clearly that I will take no points of order on this issue or any other points of order that relate to this issue. I want to make it absolutely clear that I do not want bogus points of order on this particular issue.

Following remarks made during questions to the First Minister yesterday, I gave Mr Allister a commitment to review Hansard and to come back with a ruling on whether any further action was required, as is my common practice on these issues. I made that commitment to him in the House and in my office yesterday afternoon in what I had thought was a very amicable and good meeting. I have to say that I am slightly disappointed that, rather than awaiting the outcome of my considerations, the Member carried on his own commentary in the media to try to second-guess my ruling and drag the Chair into party politics. I have continually said to the whole House that when Members come to see me, those meetings are private and remain private. Unfortunately, that meeting certainly did not remain private. It was not a meeting to confront the Speaker by any means. I thought that the meeting I had with Mr Allister yesterday was a very good meeting, and I think that both of us felt that it cleared the air on a number of issues. I also think that there was a clear understanding when Mr Allister left.

The main reason I wanted to review Hansard was to judge whether the remarks that were made justified the granting of a further opportunity for Mr Allister to reply. The 'Northern Ireland Assembly Companion' is very clear on dealing with the provision for Members to reply to allegations that are made against them. Previous rulings are clear that an opportunity of reply is justified when accusations of a criminal nature have been made, but that opportunity will not be provided when accusations of a purely political nature have been made. That has been a very clear convention, both in the 'Northern Ireland Assembly Companion' and the House for some time. Having reviewed Hansard, I can say that the exchanges at Question Time yesterday were of a personal nature that fell far short of the standards of debate that I expect in the House. The standard of debate yesterday was below the standard that I expect.

However, it is clear to me that no allegations were made of unlawful behaviour; they were political points. I also note that Mr Allister clearly refuted the allegations on the official record and further did so outside the House. If Members want to debate the allegations elsewhere, that is an issue for them, but I allowed the issue to carry on for far too long yesterday. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I try to show as much lenience to Members as possible, but, I have to say, sometimes a good turn in this House really means nothing to some Members. There is no role for the Chair in the allegations, and I have no intention of being further involved. As far as I am concerned, the issue is closed.

Finally, after a number of incidents yesterday, let me remind the whole House of the need for good temper and moderation in the standards of debate and that all Members have to abide by the authority of the Chair.

There were a number of incidents around the Chamber yesterday. On occasions, a number of Members made very offensive remarks from a sedentary position. Unfortunately, neither I nor the Clerks at Table picked up those remarks. I heard about them from other Members, and such remarks have to stop. I will not allow Members to say what they are saying from a sedentary position. It ends up being offensive to other Members. That is not the good standard of debate that I expect in the House.

I will be keeping a watching brief on Members who continually say and do things from a sedentary position that they should not say or do. After all, we are a democratically elected political institution, and some Members fall far short of the standard that I expect in debates.

Let us move on.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

No, I am not allowing any points of order. I stated that at the start. The Member should take his seat, and we should move on.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Democracy.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order

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

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is a on different matter.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

A totally different matter? OK.

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

You will recall, Mr Speaker, that when the matter arose yesterday in respect of Mr Robinson, I also raised a matter in respect of the comments made by Mr Wilson. May I enquire as to whether you have a ruling at this time?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

We looked at Hansard yesterday and this morning. I intend to respond to the Member directly, and I will do that. I have already raised the issue in the House of Members saying and doing things from a sedentary position that are offensive to other Members.

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

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker, it was not made from a sedentary position. It was made when he was on his feet. It is on the record, and it is very clear what he said. Given what you said earlier about unlawful behaviour, I am very keen to hear, and hear early, your view on that matter.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Yes, and allow me, as I said, to come back to the Member directly. I will do that as soon as possible.

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

On a point of order on a different matter, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

A different matter? OK.

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

It is a different matter, in that it is a general comment under a point of order, Mr Speaker, and it is this: three times during the past seven sittings of the Assembly — yesterday on two occasions and during the meeting on 16 July — Members of one party raised issues that impugned the character of other Members. In my view, that is a pattern of behaviour. Three meetings out of seven. Our Whip will be seeking a meeting with you to discuss the conduct of that party, which is using the Chamber repeatedly to impugn the character of other Members.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

We have already dealt with the issue. A lot of these issues are in the cut and thrust of debate. I have continually said in the House that Members raise bogus points of order to score political points.

I am very conscious of that as well. However, I see a lot of these issues as the cut and thrust of debate, and we really should move on.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Is it on a different subject?

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Yes, Mr Speaker. It is to do with the Register of Members' Interests. If you own a property, obviously you have to register it in the Register of Members' Interests. Does that apply to immediate members of the family as well?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

First of all, the issue of Members' interests has been raised on several occasions in the House. Under Standing Order 69(4), Members have a responsibility to declare in the House or in Committee any interest that they may have. I continually say that because other Members raised the issue of Members' interests, especially during debates. So, it is really up to Members themselves, whether in the House or in Committee, to indicate clearly any Members' interest or financial interest that they may have in the debate.

I have said that continually in the House, so let us be absolutely clear. However, it is really up to Members themselves to police this issue and declare an interest. That is what it is about. It is not about the Speaker doing it but Members themselves, so let us move on.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Further to that point of order —

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Is it on this particular subject?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Yes.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

It is not about the subject that was already dealt with?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Mr Poots's point of order.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Yes.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Judging by Mr Poots's tweets, if his point of order was in some way meant to be directed at me and my wife then I make it abundantly clear that there is no interest to declare. My wife has no ownership of any land anywhere in County Fermanagh or elsewhere. This is but another attempt to continue the scurrilous attack on me and my family, and I really do resent it. I am fair game as a politician in the rough and tumble of politics, but my wife is not in politics, and Mr Poots should catch himself on.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

Sold and all, then.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Order, let us move on.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

What was the sedentary comment, Mr Speaker?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Pardon?

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Could I ask what the sedentary comment was?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I did not pick it up.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Maybe he will be man enough to repeat it.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I did not pick it up.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Maybe he will be man enough to repeat it.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Let us move on.

Executive Committee Business

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Health and Social Care (Amendment) Bill [NIA 27/11-15] be agreed.

The Bill seeks to make two main amendments to the Health and Social Care (Reform) Act (Northern Ireland) 2009. The first addresses the support services that the Business Services Organisation (BSO) can provide and the second deals with functions that can be delegated to the Business Services Organisation.

In the provision of support services, the Reform Act, as currently framed, does not enable the Department to secure support services from the Business Services Organisation. Furthermore, it does not provide the Department with the power to direct the Business Services Organisation to provide support services to the following departmental arm's-length bodies: the Northern Ireland Social Care Council; the Northern Ireland Practice and Education Council for Nursing and Midwifery, and the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service.

The Business Services Organisation was established to provide economical, efficient and effective support services to departmental arm’s-length bodies. Therefore, I propose to make an amendment to the Reform Act that will allow the Business Services Organisation to provide support services for the Department and the three bodies I mentioned.

Turning to the delegation of functions, section 26 of the Reform Act contains a provision that enables the Business Services Organisation to exercise the functions that the Central Services Agency exercised on behalf of the Department, health and social services boards and health and social services trusts, prior to its dissolution in April 2009. However, the Business Services Organisation cannot exercise any new functions relating to the administration of health and social care. For that reason, I propose to make an amendment to the Reform Act that will provide the Department with the power to delegate to the Business Services Organisation the exercise of any new function relating to the administration of health and social care.

The Bill also proposes to make some minor, technical amendments to the Reform Act. One will seek to provide greater clarity to the nature of the fraud prevention support service provided the by the Business Services Organisation. Another will reflect the correct title of the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) in other extant legislation, and a further seeks to amend references to "personal social service" in the Carers and Direct Payments Act (Northern Ireland) 2002 to "social care service".

The consultation on the draft Bill ran from 1 February 2013 until 29 March 2013 and attracted a total of three responses: one from the Northern Ireland Social Care Council; one from the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust; and one from the Business Services Organisation. All the responses were supportive of the proposed amendments.

During the consultation, the need for a small number of amendments was identified. Paragraph 3 of schedules 1, 2 and 3 to the Reform Act deals with membership of the Regional Health and Social Care Board, the Public Health Agency and the Business Services Organisation respectively and gives the Department a regulation-making power through which it can prescribe conditions that a person must satisfy or posts that a person must hold in order to be eligible for appointment by the Department. The reason why the Department has prescribed such disqualifications is to provide a robust legislative basis for ensuring that there are no conflicts of interest and members are suitable persons to manage large organisations such as the regional board.

As currently framed, the Reform Act allows the Department only to prescribe in respect of members of the regional board. However, it does not allow it to prescribe in a similar way in respect of the chair. A similar anomaly exists with regard to the Public Health Agency in schedule 2 to the Reform Act and the Business Services Organisation in schedule 3 to the Reform Act. The Health and Social Care (Amendment) Bill seeks to rectify that anomaly in all three schedules by providing the Department with the power to prescribe conditions for the appointment of the chair of each body in similar terms to those for members. The inclusion of the amendments reflects the Department’s public appointments policy, which is to ensure that, as far as possible, persons who are appointed to public bodies are suitable for the advertised posts.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

On behalf of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I welcome the Bill.

The Committee supports the overall aim of the Bill, which, as the Minister said, will make technical amendments to the Health and Social Care (Reform) Act 2009. The amendments will allow the Business Services Organisation to provide support services to all the Department's arm's-length bodies. They will also allow BSO to administer any new health and social care functions on behalf of the Department as required. In addition, the Bill makes minor amendments to existing legislation that will enable the Department to prescribe the conditions with regard to the appointment of the chairpersons of the Health and Social Care Board, the Public Health Agency and BSO. The Committee took evidence from departmental officials on two occasions — 15 May and 12 June — before the Bill was introduced.

During our prelegislative scrutiny on 15 May, one issue arose on which we, as a Committee, sought clarification from the Department. The Bill seeks to amend schedules 1, 2 and 3 to the Health and Social Care (Reform) Act 2009 with regard to the appointment of chairpersons of the Health and Social Care Board, the Public Health Agency and BSO. Members wanted an assurance that there was a uniform approach to the appointment criteria for chairpersons across all the Department's arm's-length bodies. The Department explained that there was an inconsistency in the Health and Social Care (Reform) Act 2009 that allowed the Department to prescribe conditions for the chairpersons of some of the arm's-length bodies but not for others. Clause 3 seeks to correct that anomaly by providing the Department with the power to prescribe conditions for the appointment of chairpersons of all its arm's-length bodies. The Department also provided assurance that all appointments to arm's-length bodies were made in accordance with the principles and practices set out in the code of practice for ministerial public appointments. At its meeting on 12 June 2013, the Committee took evidence from departmental officials on the issue and was content with the explanation provided.

The Committee welcomes the Bill's intention to provide a consistent system for the appointment of members and chairpersons of the Department's arm's-length bodies. We look forward to our detailed scrutiny of the Bill at Committee Stage. Go raibh maith agat.

It is apparent, since RPA, that the roles of the chairs of the various arm's-length bodies are becoming more and more important. Therefore, it is vital that there is public confidence in how they are appointed. We need to attract and, indeed, have attracted some top people to act as a watchdog, as it were, over the boards of the various arm's-length bodies. I must say that we as a society have benefited greatly from people giving their time to do that. However, there were one or two issues about appointments, and I, therefore, believe that it is right that the chairs are brought within the terms of the code of practice, as that will instil more public confidence in those important roles.

RPA in health has, generally, worked well. It has streamlined various tiers of administration, but, inevitably, one or two little tweaks were required, and we are at that stage today. The Committee has considered this twice. There is now unanimity among all the parties, and we support the Bill entirely.

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

From the outset, I declare that a close relative works in the Business Services Organisation.

On behalf of the SDLP, I support the Bill and the amendments therein. The amendments are, in the main, technical and, as Mr Wells pointed out, non-contentious. They provide for the provision of support services by the Regional Business Services Organisation and clarify the functions that can be delegated to it. As outlined, the amendments will allow the Regional Business Services Organisation to move towards greater flexibility, and that is to be welcomed. Of course, the Minister indicated that in his opening speech. It is important that the Business Services Organisation be given that flexibility in order to operate in a more business-like fashion.

By way of caution, I would say that all the changes must be viewed in the context of Transforming Your Care and we should not in any way dilute the import of that. We must be careful not to create a situation where we are chipping away at the National Health Service as we know it. That institution, which, I believe, most Members of the House support, has provided an invaluable service to our community over a number of years. Of all the institutions we have in public life, the National Health Service is valued very deeply indeed. I, therefore, ask the Minister to reassure the House that the amendments do not indicate in any way a process of increased privatisation in the National Health Service. The SDLP believes that this opportunity calls on the Department to produce a specific piece of comprehensive legislation in relation to Transforming Your Care, providing a strategy for the future of the National Health Service for the next 20 years.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

I, too, support the Bill and look forward to further discussions at the Committee Stage. As others have said, the main purpose of the Bill is to address omissions that occurred when the major reforms went through.

It seems strange that the Health Department does not have the powers to enable the Business Services Organisation to widen its remit to cover organisations that have somehow been excluded. I would have thought that there is potential for savings in widening that scope and enabling the BSO to exercise functions that are currently undertaken separately by organisations such as the Northern Ireland Social Care Council, the Northern Ireland Practice and Education Council for Nursing and Midwifery and the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board.

When concentrating services in a new organisation, there should be efficiencies, but that does not always happen. It is important that there are savings, and there was an expectation that considerable savings would result from the establishment of the Business Services Organisation. It would be useful if the Minister could reassure us that the savings that were predicted on the establishment of the Business Services Organisation are being made and that efficiencies are being delivered so that, ultimately, more funds go to the front line. In concept, it is right that the enabling power should rest with the Minister, but it is important that savings are, ultimately, delivered and a better service delivered for everyone who is dependent on our health service.

There is also the issue, as others have said, of widening the scope of the Business Services Organisation. It seems strange that there are some limitations in that there are restrictions on functions that were previously exercised by the Central Services Agency prior to its dissolution under the 2009 Act. It seems perfectly reasonable that this technical adjustment should be made. Other areas of saving could result, because we want to end up with more funds being moved towards our front line services to address the considerable pressures. In general, I am comfortable with the concept behind the Bill and the technical amendments that are proposed.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

This is a short Bill, and, hopefully, it should be fairly straightforward. The Chair and the Deputy Chair have said that it has gone through the Committee without any real opposition. I noted that the consultation did not attract a critical mass of responses, and the Minister said that there were three responses. Although three is not very many, they were very important.

The Bill seems to address matters that were not properly addressed in 2009, and that rather raises this question: what went wrong back then? The main purpose of the Bill, as I understand it, is to amend the Health and Social Care (Reform) Act (Northern Ireland) 2009 to enable the Business Services Organisation to provide support services to all the Department's arm's-length bodies and to administer health and social care functions on behalf of the Department. On the surface, that seems benign, and there is no reason to object to that. Nevertheless, these changes in governance cannot be entirely separated from the reforms under Transforming Your Care, as other Members have pointed out. Although my party continues to support the broad thrust of the reforms, like many others, we retain considerable concerns about their implementation and, in particular, the resources that will be allocated to new measures, including, most critically, services delivered in the community. I think particularly of domiciliary care and community meals, along with other services.

It has been highlighted that, at present, the BSO cannot exercise any new functions relating to the administration of health and social care. That will be addressed by the Bill. Although policy and practice need to be separated somewhat from the main delivery mechanisms, the Minister will well know the concerns that exist in the community at present, particularly about the future of residential homes and how wider policy discussions on the future of adult social care will develop. I am happy to see the BSO conduct functions in relation to the Healthy Start and Day Care Food schemes. It is important to provide support on nutritional issues to low-income families. On that basis, the Alliance Party is happy to support the motion.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I support the Bill. As I listened to the Minister and the Chair, I thought that this seemed to be fairly straightforward, simple legislation. The more I listened to Members, the more complicated the Bill seems to have become. Technical amendments were required, and they give more power to the agencies that were mentioned; I will not repeat what Members said. The Committee had a consensus on the Bill, which will go back to the Committee for scrutiny.

Edwin Poots (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank all the Members who participated in the debate. I thank the Committee for its work in allowing the Bill to come forward. I thank Members for their supportive comments, which were the general thrust of the debate this morning.

Mr Maginness made some comments, and I commend him for his openness and transparency in declaring that his wife works in the BSO. He raised the question of a threat to the NHS. I assure him that there is no threat to the National Health Service. We wish to retain it as a service that is free to all at the point of need. As we identify new means of providing care, new drugs and new specialist treatments, there are pressures on it, and we will respond to and attempt to fulfil all those needs as far as possible within the budget that we have. We will sometimes do things differently, but there is no threat to the National Health Service.

Mr Beggs raised the issue of savings. For a number of years, we have had year-on-year efficiency savings in the Business Services Organisation. That is well known, and the public are well aware of it.

Without further ado, as I see no point in prolonging the debate, I ask the Assembly to support the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That the Second Stage of the Health and Social Care (Amendment) Bill [NIA 27/11-15] be agreed.

Committee Business

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

I beg to move

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 29 November 2013, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Public Service Pensions Bill.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. The Public Service Pensions Bill was introduced to the House on 17 June and received its Second Reading on 25 June. The Bill, which was referred to the Committee for its Committee Stage, has 37 clauses and nine schedules.

The purpose of the Bill is to introduce major changes to public service pensions, including the policy for a new career average revalued earnings (CARE) scheme model, with pension age linked to state pension age. The reforms will affect the pension schemes for a wide range of public service employees including civil servants; the devolved judiciary; local government workers; teachers; health service workers; Fire and Rescue Service workers; and members of the PSNI.

The Committee has been proactively gathering evidence on the policy aims of the reforms over recent months in advance of the Bill being introduced to the Assembly to gain a full understanding of its proposals. To date, the Committee has taken oral evidence from a range of key stakeholders including the Department, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU), the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO), NIPSA; the First Division Association, UNISON and the Fire Brigades Union (FBU). In addition, the Committee has received written submissions following its call for evidence, which issued just before the summer recess. Members will need to take further oral evidence from various stakeholders, including the British Medical Association (BMA), the Fire Brigades Union, the Human Rights Commission, the Equality Commission, ICTU, NIPSA, the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) and NILGA. In a number of the stakeholder submissions received, additional issues were identified for clarification. In some instances, specific amendments were proposed. In addition, the views of the other applicable Committees were sought, given that the Bill will have an impact on pension schemes in Departments within their remit and the remit of other public bodies.

I place on record my appreciation to all those who have taken time to provide input to the Committee deliberations to date. That will help to establish a comprehensive evidence base. Given the important evidence that remains to be collected, the Committee seeks an extension to ensure that it can conduct the appropriate scrutiny. That said, the Committee has committed to prioritising the Bill in its work programme, and I should point out that the proposed extension date is consistent with the Department of Finance and Personnel's timetable. Therefore, I seek an extension to the deadline for the Committee Stage to 29 November 2013 to allow the Committee sufficient time to reach a considered position and report on the Bill to the Assembly. I ask Members to support the motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That, in accordance with Standing Order 33(4), the period referred to in Standing Order 33(2) be extended to 29 November 2013, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Public Service Pensions Bill.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

The Business Committee has agreed to allow up to 30 minutes for the debate. The proposer of the motion will have 10 minutes to propose and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. All other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes that the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards is unable to act in relation to any complaint arising from the public assemblies in Castlederg on 11 August 2013; appoints Mr Stuart Allan as an acting commissioner, in accordance with section 23(1) of the Assembly Members (Independent Financial Review and Standards) Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, to investigate all such complaints; directs that this appointment shall cease when Mr Allan has reported on all such complaints; and that the terms of his appointment, in particular his remuneration, will, subject to any necessary modification, be the same as those of the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards.

On 22 August, Douglas Bain, the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards, wrote to inform the Committee on Standards and Privileges that he had received three complaints that he was unable to investigate. The three complaints relate to a Member's alleged conduct at a parade and commemoration in Castlederg on 11 August 2013. Mr Bain informed the Committee that, as a member of the Parades Commission, he was one of those who had decided to issue the determination on the parade in question. He went on to say that, in those circumstances, he believed that it could be perceived that he had a conflict of interest. Although he emphasised that the perception would have no foundation in fact, he decided that he was unable to act on these three complaints or any others arising from the same event.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for taking the intervention. The Member will be aware of the media attention following a Member's claim that Mr Bain was possibly not suitable for the role because of a conflict of interest. Have there been any previous complaints of this nature that would have led to a conflict of interest?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

We are all aware that Northern Ireland is a fairly small country, and, therefore, conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts of interest will come up from time to time. It is interesting that, only last year, the previous interim Commissioner for Standards, Mr Tom Frawley, recused himself from a particular investigation because he believed that there would have been a perceived conflict of interest. What we are doing today is not novel; previous commissioners have indicated that there may have been conflicts of interest. In this specific case, it is important to point out that Mr Bain was not prevented from taking up his post because of his membership of the Parades Commission. Indeed, under the Assembly Members (Independent Financial Review and Standards) Act 2011, many were disqualified from applying for that role, but he was not one of them. I also point out to the House that, throughout all the time that we have had the devolved institution of the Northern Ireland Assembly, there has been no previous complaint about a Member's conduct at a parade. That is worth keeping in mind as well.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

Yes.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I should declare the interest of being a complainant in respect of the matters before the House. Does the Member agree that it was entirely predictable from the moment that a member of the Parades Commission was appointed as Standards Commissioner that, given the society in which we live, issues such as this would inevitably arise? Why has the commission not called in this motion and elsewhere for Mr Bain to address the conflict of interest, which was predictably there, so that the House could be saved the cost and the expense of appointing someone else to do his job? Is it not time that Mr Bain addressed his conflict of interest?

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for his intervention. He raised two specific points that I want to deal with. The Member used two words: "inevitable" and "predictable". To make projections on the future, we generally look at what has happened in the past, and, as I said, since 1999, not a single complaint has been made in which a Member has had their conduct investigated because of what they have done at a parade. Therefore, there is no evidence that this would have been predictable or inevitable. In fact, the important point is that, where there is a perceived conflict of interest, the Assembly Commissioner for Standards has taken the appropriate action. That is what the Assembly would want to see, and that is what we have seen today. However, I give Mr Allister the assurance that, if this were to come up more than once, the Assembly Standards and Privileges Committee would seek to have a conversation with the commissioner to see whether it is appropriate that he continues in his post. As I have said, this is one occurrence since 1999, so I hardly think that it was inevitable or predictable.

The Member also talked about the cost to the Assembly. I remind the Member that, under the terms of employment for the Commissioner for Standards, the commissioner does not receive a paid salary. Therefore, the commissioner gets paid for the work that he does, and, if he is not doing this piece of work, he does not get paid for it. As I will say later in my speech, the acting commissioner will get paid on the same terms and conditions, so there will not be an additional cost to the public taxpayer. It would have been appropriate if the Member had sought clarification on that before he ran to the press to make the statements that he did.

I want to make some progress, Mr Speaker. As I said, it is entirely appropriate that the commissioner, given that he felt that there was a potential conflict of interests, drew this to the Committee’s attention. Under the agreed 'Direction by the Committee on Standards and Privileges on a Code of Conduct and Requirement to Register Interests', the commissioner shall:

"promptly declare to the Committee in an appropriate manner any private or outside interests which might reasonably be thought by others to influence or impact upon the Commissioner in the exercise of his or her functions. The Commissioner shall take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest."

The Assembly has always recognised that there may be circumstances where the commissioner is unable to act. I have previously mentioned that this is not unique to the current Commissioner for Standards. That is exactly why, in section 23(1) of the Assembly Members (Independent Financial Review and Standards) Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, it is stated:

"When the office of the Commissioner is vacant or the Commissioner is, for any reason, unable to act, the Assembly may appoint a person to discharge any function of that office until such time as may be specified by the terms and conditions of such appointment; and a person so appointed is referred to in this section as an “Acting Commissioner".

Today, we are seeking to do exactly that: to appoint an acting commissioner in relation to a particular series of complaints because the commissioner has told us that he feels that he is unable to act.

The question of how the Assembly might use this power was considered earlier this year when the Standards Network conference was held here in Parliament Buildings. That conference brought together the commissioners and standards officials from across the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic. It was recognised at that time that there was statutory provision to appoint an acting commissioner not only here at the Assembly but at the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales. It was acknowledged that the respective commissioners would be well placed to carry out the role of acting commissioner in the other jurisdictions, should the need ever arise.

I am very pleased that the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, Mr Stuart Allan, has indicated that he is willing to carry out the role of acting commissioner in this instance, should the Assembly wish him to do so. Mr Allan is a highly qualified and experienced public office holder with considerable experience in the investigation of complaints made against elected representatives. In 2001, he was appointed Scotland’s first Chief Investigating Officer, and, in 2009, he was appointed by the Scottish Parliament to be the Scottish Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. In 2011, he was appointed as the first Public Standards Commissioner for Scotland, and then, in June 2012, he was appointed as the acting Public Appointments Commissioner for Scotland. The Commission for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland had brought the public standards and public appointment functions together. Mr Allan was also a member and chair of the commission.

In 2013, he was appointed as the first Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, which took over the functions of the Commission for Ethical Standards, the Public Standards Commissioner and the Public Appointments Commissioner. His period of office runs to 31 March 2014.

His biography was circulated to Members yesterday. I will just add that I have worked closely with him in the past, and I believe him to be a man of great integrity and professionalism. It is also important to point out that Mr Allan has confirmed that he is not disqualified from being appointed as the acting commissioner.

The motion provides for Mr Allan to be able to investigate:

"any complaint arising from the public assemblies in Castlederg on 11th August 2013".

That means that, should any further related complaints be submitted, Mr Allan would be able to investigate them without our needing to bring a further motion to the House. The motion directs that the appointment shall cease when Mr Allan has reported on all such complaints.

The motion also directs that, as I pointed out to Mr Allister, the terms of Mr Allan's appointment and particularly his remuneration will, subject to any necessary modification, be the same as those of the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards. That is an important point, particularly for those who may have had concerns about the cost of appointing an acting commissioner. Under the terms of employment, as I said, the commissioner is not paid a salary. Rather, he is paid only for those pieces of work that he undertakes. If he does not undertake a particular piece of work, he does not get paid. Of course, that means that, where an acting commissioner investigates a complaint instead of the commissioner and where his remuneration is the same as the commissioner's, there is no additional cost to the public purse for the time that is taken to carry out that investigation. I emphasise that point. Save perhaps for some travel costs, there is no additional cost to the Assembly as a result of his appointment.

I will bring my remarks to a close, and I look forward to hearing what other Members have to say.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Ba mhaith liom labhairt i bhfabhar an rúin seo. I will speak in favour of the motion, but before I do so, I have to recognise the comments that have been made. I welcome the Chair's comments. This is something that we need to keep an eye on, and, hopefully, those situations are not going to arise again in Committee. However, if they are, we as a Committee need to recognise them.

The Assembly Commissioner for Standards informed the Committee that, given particular complaints made to his office over the past number of weeks, he would be unable to act on them because he believed that there was a perceived conflict of interest. The Committee, using the relevant legislation, which the Chairperson mentioned, is proposing that the Assembly supports the appointment of Mr Stuart Allan as acting commissioner to consider complaints in the interests of transparency and public confidence and to support the Committee in its work. Mr Allan is highly experienced and respected in his field of expertise, and I have no hesitation in supporting his appointment.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I think that the Members who spoke previously outlined the case very well. I do not intend to take up too much of the House's time. It is a rather simple matter. From time to time, these things happen. As the Chairman said, this is a very small place. People serve on a number of different boards and associations. Whatever people think about the Parades Commission or any other organisations, these things can happen. The commissioner was very up front with us on his appointment. He met all the criteria, and I think that he is doing an excellent job so far. I think that it was a good move on his part to understand that there may be a perceived conflict of interest. That is a prudent way to go forward.

I obviously support the motion. I also want to say that the reason that we are here today is to approve another person, Mr Allan, who is obviously someone with great experience and someone that we can have confidence in to carry out the role on an interim basis. On that basis, I support the motion.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

The Committee on Standards and Privileges has considered the motion and broadly agrees that it is appropriate in this instance to appoint an acting commissioner. It has agreed today that Mr Stuart Allan will take up his post solely for the purposes of investigating any complaint arising from the public assemblies in Castlederg on 11 August. I will not go into the details of that parade or the associated difficulties, suffice to say that there are serious allegations and issues to be addressed by the acting commissioner as he carries out his duty. I wait with interest his findings on the speech that Gerry Kelly delivered that day.

It is not an ideal situation that we are in today. Although legislation is passing through Westminster to deal with politicians double-jobbing, we effectively have a situation whereby we have to deal with a similar issue in government appointments. Taking that into consideration, surely it is inappropriate for Mr Bain to be a member of the Parades Commission and also be the Commissioner for Standards investigating a case relating to a matter on which he presumably took a position in the context of his Parades Commission role. Perhaps Mr Bain will have some difficult choices to make as time goes on and will consider his suitability to hold multiple positions.

I welcome the Chairman's comments that he will continue to review the situation. Although he states that there will be no difference in the costs of employment, perhaps he will confirm whether travel costs will be incurred and detail any increase in such costs. However, to ensure that Mr Kelly is fully investigated, the Ulster Unionist Party supports the motion. I wish Mr Stuart Allan well in his investigations.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Our Chairman, Alastair Ross, has fully provided the Assembly with the information that brought us as a Committee to the decision to appoint an acting Commissioner for Standards. On behalf of the Alliance Party, I give our full support to the appointment of Mr Stuart Allan, whose credentials are second to none. I join others in wishing Mr Allan every success in the task that he is about to commence.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I will not take too long to wrap up the comments that have been made. It is a relatively straightforward matter, as other Members have already indicated.

As we heard, the Assembly Commissioner for Standards is unable to act on a number of complaints as there would be a perceived conflict of interest. As has been said, the relevant legislation includes provision for appointing an acting commissioner when that occurs. We therefore propose that we appoint the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, Mr Stuart Allan, as acting commissioner to consider those and any other related complaints. As we said, the motion indicates that Mr Allan's remuneration will be the same as that paid to the commissioner. That will ensure that there is no additional cost to the public purse.

I will briefly touch on some of the comments made by those who contributed to the debate. Mr Boylan mentioned that the Committee will always be watchful when it comes to potential conflicts of interest. That is right. The Committee has acted as a single unit when it has done that. If a potential conflict of interest comes up again in future, the Committee will consider and determine on it. Mr Eastwood said that from time to time it will happen, which is exactly right. Everybody would acknowledge that we are a small place and that some of the public appointments made tend to be from a fairly small pool. Importantly, Mr Eastwood also said that, in this instance, where there was a perceived conflict of interest, the commissioner took the appropriate course of action. I agree with that.

Mrs Overend said that she broadly agrees with the position that the Committee has taken but that it is not ideal. She talked about double-jobbing. Most people would recognise that the Commissioner for Standards is not a job that an individual would have as his or her sole job. Therefore, I suppose an element of double-jobbing is inevitable in that position. Indeed, it was the case with the previous interim Commissioner for Standards. That was not an issue that she or her colleagues brought up at that point.

To reiterate, there will be some additional travel costs because Mr Allan lives in Scotland. However, I believe that, in the overall scheme of events, those will be fairly minimal. Hopefully he will not be travelling to and fro between Northern Ireland and Scotland regularly. That is something that the Assembly Commission will look at when it determines his terms and conditions of employment. I am glad that Mrs Overend is generally supportive of the motion. Mr McCarthy also gave support to it.

I think that it is entirely sensible, Mr Speaker, that, in the given circumstances, the Assembly should appoint Mr Allan as the acting commissioner. I commend the motion to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly notes that the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards is unable to act in relation to any complaint arising from the public assemblies in Castlederg on 11 August 2013; appoints Mr Stuart Allan as an acting commissioner, in accordance with section 23(1) of the Assembly Members (Independent Financial Review and Standards) Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, to investigate all such complaints; directs that this appointment shall cease when Mr Allan has reported on all such complaints; and that the terms of his appointment, in particular his remuneration, will, subject to any necessary modification, be the same as those of the Northern Ireland Assembly Commissioner for Standards.

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 the motion and 10 minutes in which to make a winding-up speech. One amendment has been selected and published on the Marshalled List. The proposer of the amendment 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 are called to speak will have five minutes.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I beg to move

That this Assembly notes that the procurement of goods, services and infrastructure projects is a key driver of the economy; further notes the ongoing work in other devolved regions in this area; and calls on the Minister of Finance and Personnel to take action to address the criticisms of the current system and to ensure that there is sufficient access for small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as the social economy, to public procurement opportunities.

This the first debate on the economy in this Assembly term, and I am very pleased to propose it on behalf of the Ulster Unionist Party. However, I would have preferred that it had not taken three weeks to get to the point where we are debating what is meant to be the number one priority of the Programme for Government.

This is also the first debate that the new Finance Minister will respond to, and I am sure that we are all looking forward to hearing Mr Hamilton in his new role today, and I congratulate him again on his appointment. He has outlined public sector reform as being a key policy area that he wishes to address. This debate is therefore particularly relevant to him, and it is an opportunity to add some detail to his initial public statements thus far.

Motions on public procurement have been debated in the Chamber a number of times. Members will also know that the Finance Committee completed a comprehensive inquiry in February 2010. That inquiry highlighted a number of pertinent issues, including the extent of access to public procurement for our local indigenous businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the need to reduce red tape in procurement processes and the importance of using procurement to deliver social benefits such as employment and training opportunities.

The previous Minister of Finance and Personnel made a statement to the House in October 2012. He outlined some of the work that the Department has been getting on with, and, no doubt, Mr Hamilton will do likewise later. I caution that the realities in procurement for our small businesses are perhaps very different to the processes set out by the Department as being the norm. In that regard, the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) is taking forward important research on procurement, and I believe that the results will lead to a significantly more informed debate as we identify how best to reform our practices. I call on the Minister to give serious consideration to this piece of work when it is published.

Public procurement plays a crucial role in the Northern Ireland economy. In 2010-11, it amounted to £2·7 billion, which is the equivalent of 26% of departmental budgets. I am sure that Members agree that that is a sizeable sum. At a time when budget reductions are a reality across the board, it is more important than ever that this significant public procurement spend is maximised. The difficulties that continue to face the construction sector should also bring its importance into sharp focus.

We must bear in mind that much of our public procurement policies stem from the European Union. Members of the Finance Committee will be aware of that as they are updated from time to time on new directives. The one major point that I will make on the European aspect is that we must endeavour not to gold-plate legislation. I know that it is the intention of the Cabinet Office not to do so, however, sometimes, those good intentions are not carried through. Perhaps the Minister will update the House on the recent review of EU guidelines taken forward by the Cabinet Office and any moves towards deregulation secured as a result.

I want to move on to talk about small business, which is the life blood of our economy. I think of some of the thriving small businesses in my constituency of Mid Ulster, such as the small building contractor who carries out repairs in schools across the country or the subcontractor who builds roofs on new hospitals: all of them are experiencing difficulties accessing public procurement or other related challenges.

Access to public procurement for SMEs remains a central issue three years after the Committee report was published. The latest statistics by the Department are that 77% of contracts awarded by government went to businesses based in Northern Ireland. Further to that, 67% of contracts in 2010-11 were awarded to SMEs. In the same year, 51% of all government contracts were awarded to microbusinesses with fewer than 50 employees. On the face of it, there is some encouragement to be had from that. However, I ask the Minister for some specific clarification. First, how that 77%, 67% and 51% is broken down as regards the number of firms is important. Is it concentrated among a small number of firms? If so, we need to widen the opportunity to other businesses as well.

Secondly, what is the value of contracts that are awarded to local firms? That is a key question, as the answer will give a more accurate reflection of how we are using government procurement to boost our local small and medium-sized enterprises.

Thirdly, we know that it makes sense for local money to go back into the local economy. I would, therefore, be grateful for an estimate of the percentage of our procurement spend that remains in Northern Ireland. I would like that estimate because I believe that the best way to ensure that procurement spend stays in our local economy is by directing it to small business. I challenge the Minister to use this opportunity to bring more transparency to the table. If he does not have those figures, more research and data collection should be a priority.

Moving on from access for SMEs, there are other specific criticisms of the current system. The Minister alluded to as much in his recent address to the Confederation of British Industry (CBI). We must maintain a watchful eye on the bureaucracy that accompanies tendering for government contracts; that, of course, ties in with the European aspect that I have outlined. However, we can and should be working to mitigate that at a devolved level. For example, the Minister should be working to simplify paperwork as well as providing clear guidance and training.

From speaking to businesses, I know that there can also be an inconsistency in how contracts are tendered across the board. The Department and its centres of procurement expertise must apply processes and procedures consistently. If that does not happen, it leads to contracts being tendered in an unsatisfactory manner. For example, a failed tender in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI) led to the lack of a dedicated business start-up scheme in Northern Ireland for nearly a year; that is totally unacceptable.

I fear that the future of the Community Safety College at Desertcreat in my own constituency is under threat. Perhaps the Minister could enlighten us on whether the delay and uncertainty associated with that project are a result of procurement issues.

Input into decision-making and reform is also a key consideration. The Minister must ensure that the voice of small business is heard at the right time and in the right forums so that it is able to influence policy and reform effectively.

With the review of public administration imminent, there are specific criticisms from one council to another. The whole subject of subcontracting is also fraught with problems. My colleague Leslie Cree will deal with those two points in more detail later in the debate.

Members will also be aware of the recent Northern Ireland Audit Office report on collaborative procurement and aggregated demand. That report makes clear that little progress has been made in this area and that there is scope to increase aggregated demand and collaboration for common goods and services. We need an appropriate balance of collaborative policies and aggregated demand and support for SMEs through public procurement opportunities. It is incumbent on the Minister to achieve that balance. I await his reaction to the report.

Lastly, as the motion suggests, we must consider the work that is ongoing in other areas and other regions. In Scotland, the SNP will shortly legislate through the Procurement Reform Bill, which will promote public procurement processes and systems that are transparent, streamlined, standardised, proportionate, fair and business friendly. In Wales, developments such as the review entitled 'Maximising the Impact of Welsh Procurement Policy', 'Opening Doors: The Charter for SME Friendly Procurement' and a new procurement policy statement have all contributed to improvement.

I will conclude by stating that, if we are serious about keeping in step with and even leading the rest of the UK and EU in how we reform public procurement, continuous development and improvement is necessary.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out all after ‘system’ and insert

"to ensure that there is sufficient access for small and medium-sized enterprises, and for organisations in the social economy, to public procurement opportunities and to ensure that employees in companies that are contracted and sub-contracted through government procurement are paid at least the living wage."

In moving the amendment, I also support the substantive motion. We, in this House, recognise — at least, I hope we recognise — the value of public sector procurement, particularly at a time of spending constraints, and the importance of getting the maximum value for our economy and our people. Prompt payment is key to that, and the previous Finance Minister set guidelines for that.

I congratulate the new Finance Minister on his appointment. I will wait to hear what he says about my amendment before deciding whether I welcome his appointment. The previous Finance Minister was keen to set guidelines on prompt payment. We should certainly demand that, in public procurement, the companies with which we contract can guarantee staff their wages and, indeed, their own sustainability.

Mrs Overend addressed social clauses, which are also key to exploring how public sector contracts can be used to boost the number of apprenticeships and tackle youth unemployment. We must get every value out of these procurement contracts for our people. The amendment is an extension of that, and calls for public sector contracts to seek that a living wage is paid under those contracts. The proposal is restricted only to contracts and, indeed, it must be for it to be legal. This is not a proposal that only firms that pay a living wage can secure contracts.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. He indicates that his proposal would be restricted to the contracts. Does that mean that someone will potentially be paid a living wage on a Monday, and then a different wage on a Tuesday if he is working on a different job? That seems illogical and could create administrative chaos.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Member for his intervention. The intention is certainly to encourage firms to pay the living wage in general. Firms that are paying a living wage would be at an advantage because they would not have those difficulties when seeking contracts. I am clear that, although we cannot require that, we can certainly hope to achieve it. This is about making sure that what we do is both legal and beneficial.

The living wage is currently calculated to be £7·20 an hour outside London, recognising the higher costs of London. The principle is to ensure that all workers have a basic standard of acceptable living. We are only too aware of the levels of in-work poverty, and this is a way of helping to tackle that problem. In fact, that is nowhere more pronounced than in Northern Ireland, where it is estimated that a quarter of our workers are paid less than the living wage, which is a higher proportion than in any other region of the UK.

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

As is often the case, this would have the biggest impact on women, who currently comprise approximately two thirds of those who earn less than the living wage. When you consider the social issues that we are experiencing, you find that women are bearing the greater disadvantage caused by the social welfare cuts and the downturn in the economy. This is one way to redress that and ensure that women in work are not treated unequally and earn enough to support a basic standard of living.

I cannot help but be taken back to our debate yesterday and last night. There was a lot of talk about why women end up in prostitution. A lot of claims were made that, given the choice of a profession, no woman sits down and says, "I would like to be a prostitute when I grow up." We need to ensure that there is good quality employment for women in our society so that they are not required to make that choice. We cannot just tackle the symptoms of the problem; we must tackle the causes, and low pay is certainly a cause of social disadvantage.

I heard some of the discussion on this issue on the radio this morning, and there was almost a suggestion that this is a public sector versus private sector debate. We seem to want to get into that argument, but it is the complete opposite: it is about using public money to improve the conditions of workers in the private sector. We have heard it said time and again that workers in the private sector are getting a raw deal and, often, the argument is that, therefore, we should pay our public sector workers less. My argument is that we should pay our private sector workers more and seek to raise standards at the bottom. We seem to have no problem with the vast wages of CEOs or the excessive bonuses that many of them receive, particularly in some of our private companies.

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

Will the Member bring his remarks to a close?

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I have 10 minutes.

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

Apologies.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

We do not seem to have a problem with that, but when it comes to lower-paid workers, we are always trying to lower standards at the bottom. We should seek to raise standards, including in the private sector, and this is one way to do that.

It also benefits business. San Francisco airport introduced a living wage, and there was an 80% reduction in staff turnover across its lower-paid workers. Reducing staff turnover is a huge saving to business, because you save money on recruitment and training costs. You also have more experienced staff who can perform better in their job, so you have improvements in productivity. You also have workers who value their jobs. If workers have nothing to lose and can move easily around low-paid markets, they may not be as keen to do everything that a boss requires. However, if workers value their job, they are more likely to work to ensure that they stay in that job. There are, therefore, benefits to business and to workers. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that well-paid workers are more productive, and happier workers are more productive. Indeed, in Google and other such companies, a key question in staff supervisions is, apparently, "What can we do to make you happier in your work?" That question is asked because those companies recognise that a happy worker is a better worker.

We often hear that another advantage to business relates to whether local companies can compete for contracts, which is part of the motion. There is often outsourcing to foreign companies that can pay lower wages. The amendment would ensure that that would not happen, our companies would compete on an even playing field and lower wages would not be a way to undercut responsible companies who pay their workers well. It will ensure that we reward companies that pay their workers well and that we set a standard that we want others to achieve. As we know, those at the lower end of the pay scale are more likely to spend their money in the local economy, which has multiplier benefits.

I can confirm that this can be done, because I know that questions have been raised about that. The Greater London Authority insists on a living wage in all its procurement contracts. My colleague Jean Lambert, who is a Green Party member of the European Parliament, raised the issue with the European Commission, which said that living wage conditions may be included in the contract performance clauses of public procurement contracts. It went on to stipulate that it cannot insist on what a business does outside of that contract, as I outlined to Mr Weir, but in public procurement contracts, can insist on how a business operates.

This will be good for our workers, our local businesses and our wider economy. Importantly, it will help us to tackle the causes of some social issues, such as poverty — in-work poverty and child poverty — which we often seek to address by putting in one-off schemes. Through the amendment, we can change the infrastructure of our economy to ensure that in-work poverty and child poverty do not occur.

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

I call Mr Steven Weir.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I am not quite sure who is next to speak, but I will give it a go, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome Mrs Overend's motion. First, may I indicate on behalf of the DUP that we are happy to support the motion? We feel that it is timely and more or less strikes the right balance. I do not have the same warm feelings for the amendment. Although I join with Mrs Overend in the importance of highlighting procurement problems, I doubt whether either of us would categorise women pushed into prostitution as being attributable to the failures of procurement. That may be a little bit of a step too far.

This problem has existed for quite some time. One of the major issues, which was touched on by the proposer of the motion, is that the limitations — I would not necessarily call it the straitjacket of Europe — but certainly the constraints have led to a bureaucratic nightmare for procurement and left, for any local Administration, limited room for manoeuvre. That has been belatedly recognised by Europe, but there are a lot steps that it has yet to take, and there are question marks there.

It was said that the Executive and Assembly have striven for a number of years to tackle this issue. The proposer of the motion mentioned the Committee for Finance and Personnel's 2010 report. I was a member of the Committee at that time. A lot of good work has been done, but, as was said — I suspect that the Minister will say this later — a lot of good work is still to be done.

The other devolved institutions were mentioned. We have quite a reasonable record. In Wales, the percentage of indigenous companies that receive procurement opportunities from their Assembly is a lot lower than it is in Northern Ireland. There are good practices here, in Scotland and in Wales. As an Assembly, collectively, we can learn from them.

In the remaining time, I want to touch on Mr Agnew's amendment. The Member mentioned good intentions, and I have absolutely no doubt that his amendment was tabled with good intentions. However, I am reminded of the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. That is a road down which, inadvertently, the proposer of the amendment may be taking us.

First, he mentioned Europe. This is not a novel issue, and, as I understand it — I am sure that the Minister will touch on this — the Scottish Government have already sought clarity from the European Commission on whether they can impose a living wage requirement. The Commission's response was that it is not clear whether it would be compatible even with EU law. So, legally, we may not be able to do this. At the moment, certainly, it is not enforceable —

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

Will the Member give way?

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

No. I have only a short time remaining. I am sure that you will more than adequately deal with these points in your winding-up speech.

If, on the basis of goodwill, as the Member said, some firms abide by it, the situation will be that others will not. What might happen to, in the words of the proposer of the amendment, the good firms that impose this? They will put themselves at a competitive disadvantage, and the best contracts will go to those who do not fulfil the requirement to pay a living wage. That seems a bit illogical.

Mr Agnew mentioned an extension of things such as tackling youth unemployment and apprenticeships, but his amendment takes us in the opposite direction. Instead of the current minimum wage, which differentiates, for example, on age, you would have a situation in which you simply have a much higher blanket figure. For some young people, that would mean an increase of around 50% in their salary. That would be a massive disincentive for firms to take on young people who are inexperienced, so it would exacerbate youth unemployment.

It would also mean that, if we were able to deal with it at all, it would be on the basis of trying to impose it on local companies. We would be put in a situation in which we had to go through a process. The common criticism of procurement has always been that it is overly administrative, overly bureaucratic and has too many hoops to jump through. We would create, purely for local firms, a whole series of other hoops and additional costs that would make them less competitive and, indeed, put them at a competitive disadvantage administratively against firms from outside Northern Ireland. Realistically, only Northern Ireland firms could be monitored, allowing firms outside Northern Ireland to have, to some degree, carte blanche.

With the greatest respect, I have to say that the amendment takes things further in the wrong direction. It would be counterproductive and damage local procurement. Look at the difficulties in the tough world of the construction industry. We need to make things easier; we do not need to put in place additional financial burdens that can be placed only on local firms.

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

The Member's time is up.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

Therefore, I urge Members to support the motion and reject what is an ill-advised amendment.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion and the amendment. The amendment adds to the substantive motion.

It was interesting that the Minister of Finance and Personnel said that procurement was one of the priorities for his term ahead. That is to be welcomed. It is important to make it a priority because we are not where we were 10 years ago, and we need to make the public pound go much further.

Some £3 billion is spent annually on the purchase of supply, services and construction works. That level of expenditure offers real potential to maximise the economic and social outcomes for the local community. Reference has been made to the previous Minister and to previous attempts to address procurement. We have this set of groups called COPES — centres of procurement expertise — and I would love to know who gave them that name. I have seen these COPEs appear before different Committees many times, and they are anything but expert in some of their operations. So, I propose that some of those agencies should not have that name unless they actually live up to it.

The Audit Office report confirmed some of the procurement difficulties. The C&AG said:

"‘There is scope to increase aggregated demand and collaboration for common goods and services",

and that:

"If used properly, this can lever significant savings for the public sector."

So, according to the C&AG and the Audit Office, potential significant savings are not being realised for the public sector. The challenge for the Minister is to prevent the continuation of the wastage that occurred during his predecessor's term. I would like to hear today what the Minister plans to do about that particular piece of work. I give him credit for putting the focus on this matter through the public sector reform division, and I am keen to see some meat put on the bones of those proposals.

Best value for money has been one of the Executive's principles of public procurement policy since 2012. It is now defined as:

"The most advantageous combination of cost, quality and sustainability to meet customer requirements."

Of course, that also means that it needs to have a focused business case to support the Programme for Government. So, factors of real benefit to society need to be taken into account, not just cost and quality.

Across the water in Britain, the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 has a similar focus, in that money is not everything. In my view, it can skew government processes in some regard. We need to think bigger than that, and that applies not only to procurement. As I said, the Minister has set up a new public sector reform division, and he has indicated that he wishes to see public service delivered in a more effective and efficient manner by thinking innovatively about procurement and ensuring that we have in place the most effective delivery models. That all sounds great, and I credit the Minister for outlining his plans. There is not much that one can disagree with, but we will want to see something more tangible before long and something that delivers better outcomes than current procurement processes.

We have had our difficulties with procurement in many instances. Patton was a great example of what is wrong in our system. Project bank accounts for projects of £1 million-plus will not fix all that or prevent it from happening again. We need to take a much stronger run at that issue. It is not an issue only between contractors and subcontractors, of course; sometimes, it goes back to public sector bodies themselves, such as the Housing Executive. Certainly, we — the Chair and the all-party Assembly group on construction — looked over the summer at the double glazing issue in the Housing Executive. Some of the things that are going on there are totally unacceptable, and many subcontractors are being put in the unenviable of placing workers on notice because of the fault of public sector organisations. That must be discontinued.

Of course, that is not the only issue. We also have had political interference by the Finance Minister's colleague in the Department for Social Development (DSD), which we heard all about just before the summer. Such political interventions put jobs at risk as much as the inefficiency in the dealings of the public sector bodies themselves.

I am limited in time, but I will just touch on the living wage, which is a topic that the proposer of the amendment introduced. It is worthwhile debating it here today. I know that some of my party colleagues —

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

The Member's time is up.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

—will follow through on that. We support the motion and the amendment.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá áthas orm tacaíocht a thabhairt don rún agus don leasú fosta. I am happy to support both the motion and the amendment.

The SDLP believes that it is incumbent on the Executive and the Assembly to create a procurement environment that facilitates our small enterprises to realise their full potential and that maximises the economic and social impact from the expenditure on procurement.

There is no doubt that the vast majority of businesses in Northern Ireland are small to medium-sized businesses. They are, in fact, the backbone of our economy, and we should do everything that we can to support them. That includes improving access to public procurement, which will obviously have a positive impact on innovation, improve economic strategies and competition, and, above all, help to create greater employment.

Historically, we know that SMEs have faced a number of barriers, including a lack of knowledge or awareness of opportunities, and challenges around the use of frameworks. There are also capacity issues and issues with the perceived complexity of the procurement process.

A number and variety of approaches have been tried to support SMEs and social economy businesses to access public procurement, and those have met with some success. Those approaches tend to concentrate on simplifying the procurement process and making it more accessible to SMEs.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree that one such way of helping SMEs get into the procurement sector is through their participation in events such as the Meet the Buyer event that was held two weeks ago by InterTradeIreland? At that event, many SMEs that had never been involved in public procurement, or had never even thought about it, were able to go along, get coaching and meet with some public buyers. It is that sort of initiative that government can help to run that will help SMEs to get involved in public procurement in the future.

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

I thank the Member for his intervention. I must say that I totally agree with him, and I will deal with that in more detail later on.

Some of the approaches that have been tried include facilitating access to frameworks and opportunities and using proportionate selection criteria. It has also been helpful to divide contracts into lots. Indeed, EU research shows that that approach increases the probability of SMEs winning contracts. It is also good to improve access to information through the type of occasion that Mr Ross mentioned — the InterTradeIreland event that was held a number of weeks ago, which Mr McGlone will elaborate on — and through the greater use of e-procurement. It is helpful to set up proportionate requirements around qualification levels and finance based on the size and subject matter of contracts.

We need to encourage collaboration and joint ventures between SMEs, and between SMEs and larger organisations. It is also necessary to continue to build capacity through holding events such as the one that was mentioned, by helping to develop tender-writing skills and by providing more opportunities to converse with buyers.

All those approaches are useful and helpful, but they are not the be-all and end-all. We need to re-examine them, evaluate them, and ensure that they work and have the desired effect on improving the process and on allowing more SMEs to participate in the procurement process.

There are clear benefits from increased participation by indigenous smaller enterprises providing services, supplies and works to government. That encourages them and gives them the confidence to grow. It also encourages them to participate in public procurement processes outside this jurisdiction. That is a very important point because, obviously, it can improve our economy and lead to greater employment opportunities.

Additional benefits are, as I mentioned, increased employment and raising the level of productivity and gross value added here in Northern Ireland. The Executive must continue to develop a strategic policy for using public procurement as far as is permitted under the legislation —

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

The Member's time is almost up.

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

— and to use it as a tool for the development of our smaller enterprises —

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

The Member's time is up.

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

— for stimulating economic growth in the longer term.

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I, too, welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the motion. The way in which our public sector allocates resources has a major impact on the economy and society in Northern Ireland as a whole. With the challenging financial environment, we expect our public authorities to reform services and purchase in a way that delivers more for less. With that in mind, it is important to look at whether our small and medium-sized enterprises and our social enterprise sectors can offer better value for money than larger suppliers. If that is the case, how can we encourage them to compete for more public sector business?

There is an argument that our SME sector brings greater competition to the marketplace, which, in turn, drives down costs. They can often offer higher personal levels of service and can be more responsive to changing requirements due to shorter management chains and approval processes. There is also the further benefit of increasing the involvement of smaller enterprises in the government supply chain, in that the more experience our SME and SEE sectors can gain, the more likely they are to go on to grow and compete successfully for business outside Northern Ireland, and that is vital for us to grow our economy.

As the Chairperson of the all-party group on SMEs, I fully recognise the sector's importance to our economy and, therefore, I am keen to explore what can be done to ensure better access to procurement opportunities for them. Indeed, at a recent meeting of the group, that issue was raised by a number of organisations. There is a real apprehension about engaging with the public sector, and we need to try to address that. Examples of the issues that they faced included levels of experience required, which, obviously, affects newer businesses being able to enter the market; issues around over-the-top insurance requirements that are not proportionate to the risks associated with projects; and delayed payment of invoices, which affects those smaller businesses that do not have such established credit arrangements with their own suppliers.

Other issues raised have been around not being able to source information about opportunities, including subcontracting, and not understanding the requirements fully. We really need to focus on removing those barriers, those that are perceived and those that are real, to encourage our SMEs and our SEEs to participate. Often, that sector is put off by red tape and bureaucracy, and we must ensure that they feel that the process is open, streamlined and transparent to encourage their participation while meeting all our legal requirements and protecting the public purse.

We should note, however, that those issues are not faced only in Northern Ireland; there have been many criticisms of procurement processes in the devolved regions too, and it is useful to look at how they are addressing those issues. The Scottish Government have a range of initiatives, including a procurement policy handbook that advocates proactive development of a supplier base of SMEs and third-sector organisations. Similarly, the Welsh Government have a charter for SME-friendly procurement. Northern Ireland does seem to be achieving levels of business participation in government contracts, certainly on a par with other devolved Administrations, and many changes are already under way following the recommendations from the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) report on public procurement. I am keen to know whether the Minister intends to implement further recommendations from that.

One area where we, perhaps, are lagging behind other regions is around what we are delivering in community benefits.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. I am sure that she will agree that one of the positive aspects in Northern Ireland has been the fact that we were the first devolved region to run open competition for the small business research initiative in the area of tourism apps. Does she agree that a greater use of that small business research initiative will help small companies with their R&D and help us drive innovation among SMEs across Northern Ireland?

Judith Cochrane (Alliance, Belfast East)

I thank the Member for his intervention. Yes, I agree with him. There is still more to be done to communicate exactly how that can be best utilised.

I go back to what I was saying around the social clauses.

We have made some progress in that area, but perhaps more can be done, whether they relate to employment, apprenticeships or environmental sustainability. Such clauses should be seen as an integral aspect of the public procurement process, and, arguably, through their implementation, our public spending return is likely to be more beneficial, economically and practically.

Although I support the proposed amendment as an aspirational concept, it is problematical when it comes to contracts. A living wage is hard to define and is ineffective economically. It is better to drive up wage levels through increases in productivity and to achieve that through increasing skill levels. Alternatively, as the national minimum wage has not really changed for a number of years, a UK-wide revision in light of increased pressures might be a more appropriate way to look at that.

We will, therefore, not be supporting the amendment as that move could be viewed negatively by businesses. We are arguing for better access to government contracts, and that move would make it more difficult for SMEs to compete. Therefore, it undermines the thrust of the motion.

From what was said by others, it is clear that we recognise and appreciate the important contribution that SMEs make. We should nurture them and develop their role in fostering economic, environmental and social benefits across Northern Ireland. All that can be done to procurement practices to allow that to happen should be done.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Member for bringing forward the motion and I support it. Among the greatest inhibitors to access to the opportunities that are available to small and medium-sized businesses and micro-businesses in Northern Ireland are EU restrictions. Being a European sceptic, I would say that those have done nothing but drive down opportunities for our small and medium-sized businesses to access.

I want to focus on COPEs — centres of procurement expertise, or lack of. A great body of work needs to be done in joining them up. Each Department seems to have its own COPE. Those COPEs are not necessarily communicating and being effective in ensuring that we do that. A body of work needs to be done to ensure that an opportunity to deal with things in a more effective way is brought back to the centre.

Encouraging small businesses to tender has been a big problem. They are probably put off by the bureaucracy. Work has been done by economic development units in councils to bring small businesses up to speed and to help them to access the tender process. The tender process has sometimes been used to put people out because it works from a select list. That select list process is not necessarily to award the contract but to ensure that certain people do not get the contract. That list has to be set aside.

Small businesses have been delivering as sub-contractors on many contracts but have no track record of delivery. As a consequence, they sometimes do not score when it comes to the final stages. Including contracts that they were involved in should be part of the criteria to allow them to work their way through the process.

The motion refers to other regions in the United Kingdom and how other devolved institutions deal with this matter. Interestingly, Scotland is looking at the procurement process in Northern Ireland, the amount of money that we spend, how we do that and ensuring that it works its way down. They are seeing it as good practice. I am not saying that it is always perfect, but we need to improve on it and ensure that we deliver that.

I think that £2·7 billion was spent in 2011-12, which would have been open to tender for contractors to deliver in Northern Ireland. That is a sizeable amount of money. To ensure that they all get a fair crack of the whip, we need to relax some of the regulation. We have to ensure accountability but, sometimes, in doing so, we do not always get value for money. One contractor said that he would do a small job for, say, £20,000, but that he would see what bids came in if it were put it out to tender. The tender went out and it came back at almost double that price. Therefore, we do not always get value for money when we go out to tender. I can tell you that a certain thing called a cartel is at work out there with those who are on the select list to ensure that they win contracts. They say, "I have won this contract, so you can win the next one." Irrespective of whether people believe it, that does go on.

The expertise must be there to ensure that we get value for money from contracts when they are awarded. Those who have the opportunity to look at building and the mechanical and engineering side should have the expertise to ensure that we do not receive inflated prices and that it is not just an exercise in which people have ticked all the boxes, done everything right and, therefore, set the price that we pay. To ensure access for small businesses, it is important that we streamline the process and get rid of some bureaucracy.

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

Bring your remarks to a close.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

We must ensure that the COPEs work together. Otherwise, we should bring it back into the centre and deal with it in one place.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh an díospóireacht thábhachtach seo. We all know that procurement of goods and services is a vital way in which our public sector and local and central government can help the private sector to grow and help to stimulate economic development and growth. However, the ever-increasing levels of outsourcing of work that probably could and should be carried out by the public sector is a source of great concern to me and many others.

Often, work is outsourced without any comparisons at all being made with regard to value for money. It is simply decided to put contracts out to tender and to get somebody in the private sector to deliver them, without comparing that with how it could be done in-house by the public sector. That is one of the big problems that must be addressed. A considerable number of large contracts are out to tender or were recently closed for tender by the Government here. There is absolutely no reason why they could not have been delivered by civil servants. There are no specialisms or work that could not be done by most civil servants who are employed in the public sector. However, that seems to be how we will rebalance the economy, which is the buzz phrase of the moment — by simply lifting things from the public sector, transferring them to the private sector and saying that the private sector is growing.

Some have made a stab at defining what value for money is. The FSB, in one of its very useful documents on public procurement, stated that value for money requires the promotion of quality, project completion times, ease of communication and project flexibility. Since the new Minister of Finance and Personnel took office, he has repeatedly flown the flag of innovating in the public sector, which sounds like a very plausible and commendable approach. I do not think that anybody could argue with such a phrase. That is certainly an approach that should be taken to deal with public procurement. The FSB has continually requested the introduction of a standard pre-qualification questionnaire for low-value contracts, which small businesses would have to fill in only once and which would then be logged for future bids.

Much more needs to be done to break down larger contracts into smaller ones and to help smaller companies to collaborate to compete for larger contracts. I think that we would all say that. However, on the other hand, we have to deliver best value for money. It is a tough decision for the Minister and the Department to determine whether to put out large contracts, which may well save the public purse money, or to break them down into smaller contracts to give smaller businesses a chance to win them, which may well cost more. It is a case of determining the wider value for money of that. That variable needs to be looked at.

Much more should be done to provide unsuccessful bidders with feedback or, as the FSB has called it, "debriefing", which is something of a military term that I have never liked. They should receive feedback on why they were not successful in a format that is suitable to their individual needs.

There has been a bit of talk about some of InterTradeIreland's programmes. It provides an excellent programme for businesses across Ireland that gives greater confidence, knowledge and practical skills to enable businesses to tender successfully for public sector contracts. There is one such programme coming up in Enniskillen in the middle of October, and I encourage people to attend it.

To provide greater savings and opportunities for the public sector and business, we need to explore further the potential benefits of greater collaboration across the border between local authorities, North and South, and with the Department of Finance and Personnel. The level of the economies of scale that we could get should be explored, and it would be welcome if the Minister dealt with that.

Much more also needs to be done to help and support small businesses to tap into the potential benefits of public procurement. Business membership organisations, including the FSB, the CBI and NIIRTA, have produced a number of useful documents. Those business membership organisations frequently raise concerns about the Department's public procurement board. I looked at its website, which is drastically out of date. It refers to 2012 and does not know that there is a new man in the chair. Hopefully, the Minister will get that updated. The board does not contain representatives from business or the trade unions; it is mainly made up of permanent secretaries. One thing that I would like the Minister to do —

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

The Member's time is almost up.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

— is to allow business and trade union representatives onto the public procurement board.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

As a newly appointed member of the Finance Committee, I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate and, more importantly, to congratulate the Minister on his recent appointment. This is my first opportunity to put that on the record publicly. He knows that he has a big pair of shoes to fill — I am not sure what his shoe size is — but I certainly have confidence that my colleague can do the job well.

I commend the proposer for bringing this timely motion to the House. The issue certainly affects many people in my constituency. With that in mind, I want to take some time to speak about how, I believe, local government can play a part in building up the SME sector by dealing with public procurement contracts.

I declare an interest as a member of Cookstown District Council. I want to spend some time detailing an initiative that was taken forward by our council's economic development department and how that has helped local SMEs in the council area.

In response to the procurement issues raised by the local SME sector in 2010, the council's economic development department applied to DETI and was successful in accessing 50% match funding from the EU sustainable competitiveness programme. The funding helped to deliver a two-year pilot programme of bespoke one-to-one tendering support for SMEs, aimed at building the capacity of up to 80 SMEs from the Cookstown district in construction, engineering, manufacturing and business services, excluding retail, to identify tender opportunities in the public and private sector as well as to prepare and submit professional tender bids.

The project certainly surpassed the targets that the council set. Although there are many bad news stories about our SME sector, it is important that we talk about some of the positive aspects. There was an expectation that we would set ourselves achievable targets for this multisectoral tendering programme, but when we looked at the final outcomes, we found that it had provided a boost of approximately £15 million to Cookstown district's economy. It supported participating businesses to win new contracts worth £12·6 million and contributed to the creation of 43 new jobs valued at £2 million. It helped companies to access other sources of support worth just over £350,000. It developed seven consortia bids, and 59 businesses, 74% of those involved, were supported to develop a pre-qualification questionnaire. Twenty businesses were referred to Invest NI for further support, and 10 businesses accessed support from six other sources. This is a good news story in the sense that it shows how a district council can take forward an initiative to try to help the local SME sector. With that in mind, as we move into RPA, there will be bigger budgets, and, as the local councils amalgamate, many more opportunities to learn from a small district council in Cookstown that punches well above its weight. Such initiatives, which currently benefit the local economy, can be used on a bigger and wider scale in the new councils after the introduction of RPA.

There are good news stories. There is no doubt that a lot more work can be done and needs to be done. I hope that the Minister, in his response, outlines some of the issues that he feels need to be targeted. A common theme in the debate has been that there is no doubt that people in the SME sector need our help. We certainly need to do everything that we can, as government, to do that.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

One thing that surprises me about the debate so far is that there has been no discussion about the forthcoming EU procurement directive. The Cabinet Office issued a procurement policy note in July 2013 — just at the start of the summer — providing an update on the progress towards modernising the EU procurement rules. As many Members, including Mr Girvan, said, the EU tends to have a lot to answer for. So it is encouraging that a new major directive will come out this autumn — any time now — and that the UK has said that it will move with alacrity to ensure that it is transformed quickly into UK legislation.

It is interesting to note that some Members mentioned the Scottish procurement laws. A Scottish procurement Bill was tabled but has been postponed from May because the EU directives were coming out. We want to see whether there is any crossover.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member give way?

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

Yes.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

I just want to correct Mr McCrea. I am not sure whether Mr McCrea was present when I proposed the motion, but I want to clarify that I mentioned that then.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

I am grateful for the clarity. I did, unfortunately, miss that bit, but I was listening out for anybody picking it up during the debate.

I wonder whether Mrs Overend dealt with the proposals that were agreed and accepted by the UK Government, which include a much simpler process for assessing bidders' credentials, involving greater use of self-declarations and only the winning bidder having to submit the various certificates. There is also a specific requirement for poor performance under previous contracts to be explicitly permitted as grounds for exclusion, and that is a good thing. The distinction between Part A and Part B services has been removed — I am not sure whether Mrs Overend covered that point — and a new light-touch regime for social, health and some other services has been brought in. The importance of that is that the advertising regime has been changed, and, in fact, the threshold has been increased to a substantial €750,000. One problem with many of the contracts is that the threshold is so low that many small businesses think that it is not worth going to that sort of expense.

Members mentioned other issues that they want to be brought in, such as a dynamic purchasing system that is greatly simplified and, in particular, the ability to reserve the award of certain service contracts to mutuals and social enterprises — we have all been keen to do that.

Again, I am not sure whether Mrs Overend was able to deal with that, but it is particularly important.

There will also be a requirement for a review of thresholds. That is because the directive includes a binding commitment on the Commission to review the economic effects of the internal market as a result of the application of thresholds. That could lead to an increase in the thresholds, which have been broadly static for 20 years. Again, that is important.

There should be legal clarity so that buyers can take into account the relevant skills and experience of individuals at award stage. That has often been a problem for us in procurement, because our people who were applying for it would say that they have particular skills that were not being taken into account.

Another element that is coming through and will become law — in the UK anyway, I presume — but may be of interest to the proposer of the amendment is the improved rules on social and environmental aspects, making it clear that social aspects can now also be taken into account in certain circumstances. That is in addition to the environmental elements that have previously been allowed. So, if you are looking for a living wage or are involved in such issues, these procurement laws would absolutely and implicitly allow them to be taken into consideration. That would surely be a good thing.

I think that I heard Mr Bradley call for e-procurement. That will be implemented within four and a half years. There is an interesting issue there. A turnover cap has been introduced to facilitate SME participation, and buyers will not be able to set company turnover requirements at more than twice the contract value. That is one of the things that most SMEs fail on. When they look at the size of the contract or the financial stability, the bigger players say that that is not appropriate.

Finally, I heard Mr McCrea talk about the councils. He will no doubt be delighted to know that, when the new directive is implemented, public authorities will no longer have to submit detailed annual statistics on their procurement activities. The Commission will collect that information directly online, thereby freeing up valuable time and resources for public authorities.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you may wonder why I happen to be so well informed about this. It is because I intend to bring forward a private Member's Bill on the matter, but, like the Scottish Government, I am delayed until we see what the EU directive says. When it comes, I trust that we will get the support of all present, and, if possible, I would be delighted to work with the Minister of Finance and Personnel on the matter.

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.27 pm.

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

Assembly Business

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Before we move to Question Time, I advise the House that the Business Committee has scheduled the remainder of the Second Stage of the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill this afternoon. It will begin immediately after the debate on access to public procurement opportunities has finished. A revised Order Paper and revised indicative timings have been issued.

Oral Answers to Questions

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

We will begin with topical questions, which will last for up to 15 minutes, and we will then move on to deal with questions that appear on the list of questions for oral answer. Question 7 has been withdrawn.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

1. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, following a visit I made to a business in my constituency called 3M, what the Utility Regulator is doing to try to help businesses that are struggling with ever-rising energy costs. (AQT 101/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am not surprised that Mr Easton has been asked about the price of energy, particularly for our large energy users. It is a feature that comes up more and more in Northern Ireland. It is one of the reasons why I asked the Utility Regulator to look at that very issue. The Utility Regulator brought forward a paper earlier this year in which he pointed out the fact that we were one of the highest cost areas for electricity in western Europe. That, of course, causes me grave concerns, particularly for the manufacturing sector. Therefore, I have asked him to do more work on that issue and to come back to me by October. I am hopeful that that will come to me in the near future.

Alex Easton (DUP, North Down)

Do you believe that actions will come forward from the paper that could help businesses?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I very much hope that that is the case. I met the board of the Utility Regulator a few months ago. It knows where the focus is for me as Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. It knows that it is not a good selling point for us to have that level of electricity cost, particularly for large energy users. Therefore, I hope that the paper will come back to me in a timely fashion with actions and costings, which are very important as well; there is no point in bringing forward possible actions if there are no costings associated with them. Everybody in the Assembly will want to know what the cost implications are if we take certain actions. I look forward to the paper, and I hope that it has positive actions for energy costs in all of Northern Ireland, particularly in relation to the large energy users.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

2. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment whether she is aware of the good news from Kilkeel about the opening of the Metalweb factory on the old Cunningham Stone site; whether she knows that the aircraft factory in the town continues to do well and, indeed, has recently completed the construction of the new Lufthansa first-class seat; whether she agrees that that emphasises the importance of manufacturing in the Northern Ireland economy; and although there has been concentration in the construction trade, does she agree and would she accept that the bolstering of manufacturing is the crucial way through which Northern Ireland will get out of its present economic situation. (AQT 102/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for his question. I very much welcome the opening of that new factory. I join him in congratulating staff there and B/E Aerospace as well, which he referred to. I pay tribute to the former CEO of B/E Aerospace, who has moved on. He did fabulous work in Kilkeel. We wish him well for his new position. The Member is absolutely right: manufacturing is key to the economy of Northern Ireland, particularly manufacturing exports. I was pleased to see that manufacturing exports went up 4% in quarter 2 of this year. That will certainly help us with our Programme for Government targets. As he will know, we have a general target of a 20% increase. In new and emerging markets, we have the huge target of a 60% increase. We very much welcome the fact that manufacturing exports seem to be going in the right direction.

Jim Wells (DUP, South Down)

I thank the Minister for her comments. One of the things that came out of the opening of the Metalweb factory in Kilkeel was quite a worrying indication that there was a shortage of skilled craftsmen in the particular area of moulding aluminium for various manufacturing processes. Will she liaise with the Department for Employment and Learning to ensure that, as the economy comes out of recession, we do not go back to the situation of six or seven years ago, when there were areas of the economy that were constricted by the fact that an insufficient number of skilled apprentices and craftsmen were coming through the system?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for those comments. I will certainly raise that with the Minister for Employment and Learning. One of the key elements of having a devolved Administration is to ensure that we have joined-up government and the appropriate skills for the job opportunities that present themselves. That is why we have the assured skills scheme, which has been worked up between the Minister for Employment and Learning and myself. It has worked very well with regard to inward investment, in so far as we can find out what skills the inward investor needs and then manufacture, for want of a better word, the appropriate skills for him or her. It is interesting that you have mentioned an indigenous company that has clearly indicated to you that there is a need for particular skills. I am sure that the Minister for Employment and Learning will want to take that on board, particularly considering his excellent college in that region, and ensure that those skills are available.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

3. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, given her indication that 13,870 jobs have been promoted during this term of the Programme for Government, whether she can state how many of those were jobs that were promoted and how many were new jobs that were created. (AQT 103/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I have the figures in my head in respect of the jobs fund. I think that over 7,000 jobs have been promoted and over 3,600 have been created. I do not have the foreign direct investment figures in my head at present, but, of course, I am happy to write to the Member with the appropriate statistics.

Maeve McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I thank the Minister for that, and I look forward to the detail. Given the announcement from INI a number of months ago that it will begin to publish the statistics on actual jobs created, do we have a timeline for when we are likely to see that detail in the public domain? Go raibh maith agat.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am on record as welcoming Invest Northern Ireland's commitment to provide us with figures on jobs created, as opposed to jobs promoted. The Member will know that the difficulty with the figures on jobs promoted is that the number given to us by the firm depends on the amount of money that it gets in selective financial assistance and so on. Those jobs are promoted over a period, whereas Assembly Members, understandably, considering their constituencies, want to know how many actual jobs are created in a particular year. We will have those figures on a year-to-year basis now. The jobs fund already provides those statistics on a rolling basis, and I am sure that we will have the statistics on jobs created from foreign direct investment at the end of this financial year.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

4. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what progress her Department is making with the Department for Regional Development on changes to the regulations and legislation for the erection of brown signs, particularly to ensure that we have, very soon, tourist directional signs for the Dark Hedges in my constituency. (AQT 104/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Member is very persistent in his campaign to have brown signs for the Dark Hedges, understandably so. Indeed, many colleagues across the Chamber will want to have brown signs in their constituency pointing out particular points of interest and, indeed, recreational areas. I am disappointed with the progress on the policy. The policy, in theory, is shared between the Tourist Board and the Department for Regional Department's Roads Service, although Roads Service has the final say on whether a brown sign is erected. Unfortunately, the policy remains with DRD, and an up-to-date policy is not yet in place.

Mervyn Storey (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her reply. I share her disappointment. I declare an interest as a member of the Dark Hedges Preservation Trust. Will the Minister help me to ensure that, as far as the Regional Development Minister and his Department are concerned, every effort is made to change the policy so that the many hundreds of people who regularly visit the Dark Hedges will be signposted to what I believe to be the most idyllic treeline in Northern Ireland? Indeed, it is the fifth most visited treeline in Europe.

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am sure that the Member is glad to share that statistic with the House today. I had hoped that we would by now have had a policy on brown signs that would recognise the specific circumstances of Northern Ireland and be more flexible. I understand from Roads Service that it does not want a proliferation of brown signs around Northern Ireland. When one visits mainland Europe, one can see why that is the case. There are signs everywhere in France and Germany, and it is very confusing for motorists. However, a little flexibility on brown signs would be wholeheartedly welcomed by people who are trying to find tourist attractions. I hope that we are able to come up with a policy that is flexible and workable and that, above all, works for all the tourists who come to Northern Ireland.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

5. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to outline her priorities for island-wide business development in advance of Michael Noonan’s engagement with the CBI on Friday. (AQT 105/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am not aware of the event on Friday to which the Member refers. However, we work with InterTradeIreland to increase the trade between both parts of this island — between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland — because, in many instances, for many small and medium-sized businesses the other jurisdiction will be the first port of call for their goods. InterTradeIreland will, therefore, continue to work with those small and medium-sized enterprises to make sure that they have good support networks, that programmes are available to them that they can work with and that they can make the most out of their next-door neighbour and work well with them.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagraí. I thank the Minister for her answer. How does she propose to protect against the further marginalisation of our local economy?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I do not accept that we are being marginalised. Last week, I was in South Africa with a trade mission of 27 companies from across Northern Ireland. We were very warmly welcomed. The focus of the trade mission was on manufacturing and heavy manufacturing industry, particularly from the mid-Ulster and west Tyrone area. It was a good trade mission, and I believe that orders will come out of it. So I do not accept that we are a marginalised economy. We are part of a very stable United Kingdom economy, and I think that we will continue to grow as the UK economy grows.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

6. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what level of marketing support her Department has provided to Exploris in Portaferry. (AQT 106/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I welcome the question on the Exploris centre from the Member for Strangford — no, sorry, West Tyrone. [Laughter.]

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

[Interruption.]

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I know that you would welcome him down there.

The Department and, in particular, the Tourist Board have been very supportive of the Exploris aquarium. As you know, it is run by the local council, which has taken an economic decision not to continue with it. I know that that will be disappointing to the visitors — including me — who go to Exploris, but the council has taken that financial decision. It has been voted through the council, and that is where it sits.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Does the Minister accept that the Exploris centre plays a very important role not only in attracting visitors to the area but in supporting the local economy?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am sure that all those points were taken into account by the council when it decided to close the aquarium. It is, of course, regrettable that the decision has been taken, but I can assume only that it was taken for economic reasons and that the aquarium was no longer able to "wash its face".

I note that a local representative for Strangford referred to Exploris as a "fancy plaything for anoraks" and a "constant drain on ratepayers". When a local representative says that about Exploris, it leaves a lot of questions to be answered.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

That ends topical questions. We now move on to questions for oral answer. I advise Members that question 9 has been withdrawn.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

1. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what steps she intends to take to equalise the cross-border trade in dairy produce, given that companies here are currently not entitled to display the National Dairy Council label on their produce. (AQO 4616/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I am concerned that the National Dairy Council (NDC) campaign is a contravention of the principles of the single market. I believe that the campaign is a misuse of country of origin labelling. It discriminates against consumers in the Republic of Ireland, who are being denied the additional choice and benefits of market dynamics that product from Northern Ireland would provide. I have raised the issue with the Irish Competition Authority and with my ministerial counterparts in the Republic of Ireland. I have discussed the negative impact of the campaign with the Agricultural Trust, which includes representatives from the food processing sector, the Irish Farmers' Association and the Irish Farmers Journal. Finally, I, along with my colleague Diane Dodds MEP, have brought the issue to the attention of the European Commission.

I am becoming increasingly concerned by feedback from the Northern Ireland dairy processing industry about the adverse impact of the NDC campaign on local businesses. Over recent weeks, I have written to one of the major multiples in the Republic of Ireland seeking an urgent meeting to discuss the matter. I am aware that the Dairy Council for Northern Ireland is threatening to take action in the European courts to stop the campaign. I welcome that approach and will offer support in addressing the anti-competitive stance of the campaign.

Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland are food-exporting regions, and neither can afford to be protectionist. If the campaign were to be replicated in Great Britain, excluding product that was not produced and processed in the UK, it would cause immense problems for the food industry in the Republic of Ireland.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Has the Minister engaged directly with the National Dairy Council? Is she minded to raise this at the next North/South Ministerial Council meeting?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I have already raised it with Simon Coveney, the Minister in charge of agriculture in the Republic of Ireland, not at a full meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council but on the fringes, so he knows my concern.

A Minister from the Member's party is in China promoting food from this region, and here we have the Republic of Ireland denying our dairy producers the right to sell. They will, of course, contend that they have a right to sell and that NDC is only a label, but my concern is that retailers now use the label when sourcing milk, thereby stopping our dairy processors. Indeed, very recently, one of our dairy processors lost a significant contract in the Republic, so this will have an impact here in Northern Ireland. I will meet whomever I need to meet to discuss the campaign, because I believe that it is detrimental to us now and will be detrimental to the Republic of Ireland in the long run.

William Irwin (DUP, Newry and Armagh)

Should we take a leaf out of the IFA book and encourage multiples to source only UK product?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

There is a temptation to go down that line. However, we, like the Republic of Ireland, are net exporters. If we entered into that sort of protectionism, it would be to the detriment of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. We should not go down the road of protectionism. In South Africa, I spent some time talking to people on behalf of the poultry sector to make sure that there was no protectionism when it came to chicken products from Northern Ireland coming into South Africa. As far as I am concerned, protectionism does not work. The free market works. Therefore, we should, at all times, hold a light up to protectionism wherever we see it.

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

Will the Minister elaborate on the potential loss to northern dairy suppliers if the campaign remains unchanged?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

It is not potential loss but an actual loss that has occurred already. I made reference to one of our processors, and I am happy to say who it is: Dale Farm recently lost a considerable contract in Superquinn because of the NDC mark. That will have an impact in Northern Ireland.

It is a very short-sighted policy. We export to each other every day of the week. We do not want the emergence of a tit-for-tat regime to deal with the NDC labelling or a move away from what should be a single market. We are often told that the Republic of Ireland are good Europeans, so it is about time that they took action on NDC labelling. That should happen very soon.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

2. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for her assessment of recovery in the local economy. (AQO 4617/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The global downturn has clearly had a significant impact on Northern Ireland. Local businesses are still feeling the effects. However, there are positive signs that the economy has stabilised and we are starting to move in the right direction. In particular, I welcome the fact that the number of people claiming unemployment benefits has fallen for seven consecutive months and that the economy has added more than 5,000 jobs over the past year. In addition, manufacturing exports grew by 4% in the second quarter of 2013, and a recent business survey reported that local business activity had grown at its fastest rate in six years. However, it is not a time for complacency; there is still much work to be done.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Minister for her comprehensive and encouraging response. The Minister touched earlier on her trade mission to South Africa — this is always the bother with having topical questions before the main questions for oral answer — but will the Minister expand on that and tell us why she chose to travel to that market?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for her supplementary. I think that some people do not realise that, when we talk about the BRICS, we are talking about Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa; South Africa is the 'S' in that, if you like.

South Africa is a very good opening market to go into from the point of view of Africa as a whole. That has certainly been the experience of some of our more established firms that have been there for a number of years. I am thinking particularly of Terex Finlay, Sandvik and Terex Powerscreen. They were all out with us again, along with a number of companies, to try to sell their wares at bauma Africa, which is a large show that showcases the crushing, screening and material-handling sector for the whole of Africa. There were people from all over Africa looking at the wares at that show in Johannesburg. I was particularly proud of the Northern Ireland presence at bauma Africa. Companies like Powerscreen and Edge Innovate are there doing business right across Africa. It is a very good feeling to see all those guys from west Tyrone, mid-Ulster and right across Northern Ireland doing business in Africa. It is something that we should be very proud of. I was just reminding the Member that he is from west Tyrone. We also had an IT company out with us and, as I said before, somebody from the agrifood sector. It was a very good trade mission.

I also took the opportunity to plug Northern Ireland as a tourist destination, as you would expect me to do. We also had a Northern Irish connections reception, at which we touched base with some people who had left Northern Ireland a considerable number of years ago but wanted to come and listen to the story of what Northern Ireland is doing today. It was a very worthwhile trip.

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

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as a freagraí go nuige. Would the Minister support the establishment of an independent Calman-style commission to examine the sorts of powers that could be devolved to the Assembly and/or the Executive to properly and comprehensively address or help to address the economic problems that we face?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thought that that was what the economic pact was doing at present. The Member knows that that economic pact will become the focus of attention again before the investment conference on 10 and 11 October. In that pact, we are looking not just at corporation tax but at a range of initiatives that we might take to help the Northern Ireland economy in conjunction with the Westminster Government. One of those is enterprise zones and whether they fit in to the Northern Ireland scheme of things and how they would work in Northern Ireland. All those issues will be addressed in the economic pact, and we look forward to the update from the Prime Minister when he comes to our conference on 10 and 11 October.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for her answers. Will she outline the benefits that enhanced fiscal responsibility and powers for the local Executive will have in promoting and assisting economic recovery?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As I said, the economic pact will assess all those issues, and we look forward to what the Prime Minister has to say about the matter. Of course, we continue to press the need for the devolution of corporation tax. We believe that that would have a huge impact on the Northern Ireland economy, and there are varying figures for the impact that it would have on the jobs market. I know that my ministerial colleague in the Department for Employment and Learning has carried out some work on what we would need to achieve in skills provision if we were to be in receipt of the devolution of corporation tax. I am also watching closely what is being said at the Labour Party conference about corporation tax. Whatever you might say about the current Government, they are on a downward trajectory with corporation tax, and I somehow think that that would not be the case if we were to have a Labour Government.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I know that the Minister is aware of the importance of new business start-ups for the local economy. The Northern Ireland figure for 2011 was 3,745, which was less than half the number created in Wales and less than a quarter of that provided in Scotland. Will the Minister tell us what she proposes to do to improve the figure for business start-ups?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

As the Member knows, there was a difficulty with getting the small business start-up programme off the ground, and there was a legal challenge. That would explain the difference between the figures. We very much hope that this year he will see a different story with small business start-ups.

I welcome the loans scheme that was introduced on the mainland for start-up loans. That is a very welcome additional tool for people who want to start a business. So, not only have they now got the Regional Start programme but they can apply for money from some of the delivery agents that deal with the small business loan scheme — sorry, the start-up loans scheme. There are so many loan schemes out there now. If Members would like, I can share with them the number of access-to-finance schemes that we have now. Not only are there the Invest NI access-to-finance schemes but we have some mainland schemes coming into Northern Ireland, which I very much welcome. One of the delivery agents for that start-up loans scheme is the Prince's Trust. We welcome all sorts of financial help for people who want to start up a business, but we recognise that it is about not only the financial start and that they need advice and assistance. That is certainly something that Invest NI will endeavour to provide.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

3. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for her assessment of the impact of civil unrest and street protests on the economy in 2013. (AQO 4618/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I note the report last week highlighting the drop in revenue in Belfast city centre. Some of the events that occurred around the protests were clearly a setback to trade in our towns and cities and to our reputation abroad, but that is very difficult to accurately quantify. I was pleased to see the evaluation of NITB's Backin’ Belfast campaign, which had a positive influence on more than 200,000 visitors. I am encouraged that air passenger traffic between NI and Great Britain has held up in the first half of 2013 and visitor numbers from the Republic of Ireland have increased in the first three months of this year compared with the same period in 2012. Nevertheless, I and my Executive colleagues remain determined to take full advantage of the opportunities presented to Northern Ireland this year. Those include the successful World Fire and Police Games, the various UK City of Culture events being held in Londonderry throughout 2013, the high-profile G8 conference in Fermanagh and, of course, the upcoming investment conference.

Basil McCrea (NI21, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Will the Minister comment on the call made yesterday by the CBI for politicians to help retailers by reducing the number of parades and protests in Northern Ireland?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I did not hear that call, but what I did hear from the CBI, and other traders, was the fact that traders and businesses are seriously worried about further street protests and, indeed, violence. I think that it was Mr Ian Coulter who said that that was having an impact on the livelihood of citizens across Northern Ireland. Of course we should be hugely concerned about such comments coming from eminent people in the business world, but there are a number of factors at play here. It is not only about the civil disturbance, although it is in part — I do not want anybody to say that I am underplaying that — but in Belfast in particular, it is about bus lanes, parking, city centre access, disposable income and other issues. I say this to the Member and to the House: I would like the people who, of course, have a right to protest and a right to parade to have a dialogue with traders in the city centre, and for them speak to each other about each other's requirements. I say that because we want trade to take place in Belfast and in all parts of Northern Ireland, but we also believe that Belfast should be open to everybody. I hope, therefore, that that dialogue will take place.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

All of us want to do what we can to minimise any negative impact on the economy. In her initial response, the Minister mentioned impacts other than the parades and protests. Can she outline any representations that have been made on bus lanes, for example, and perhaps the economic downturn?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I recently took the opportunity to write to the Minister for Regional Development about cars' use of bus lanes, perhaps at weekends, to allow freer access coming into the city centre. I have not heard back on that proposal. I presume that Roads Service will have to have a look at it to see whether it can be practically implemented.

Belfast is the capital city of our country. Therefore, it needs to send out a very positive message. The need for that positive message is coming through very strongly, particularly for tourism, and we want to ensure that it is achieved. Of course, Titanic Belfast, as well as all the other events, has had a huge role to play in the positivity that we have seen across the world towards Belfast over the past year. I note the comments from David Gavaghan, who is the CEO of Titanic Belfast. He said that Titanic Belfast is now having weekly visits from Chinese visitors, so Belfast is open to the rest of the world. We just need to deal with the issues locally and make sure that we do so in a sensitive way to ensure that Belfast is open to every society, including those who have been so upset by the removal of the national flag from Belfast City Hall.

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

I thank the Minister for her previous replies, but let us cut to the chase, Mr Deputy Speaker: it is not the problem with bus lanes that is choking trade in Belfast but the continuance of parades, demonstrations and flag demonstrations, and so on.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

May we have a question, please?

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

Will the Minister join me in asking all those involved in demonstrations, and flag demonstrations in particular, for a moratorium on any such demonstrations by all parties during the course of the Haass talks so that we can reach a successful conclusion and rescue Belfast city centre for the traders and business folk?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I noted the Secretary of State's comments this morning in response to Mr Haass's call, and I agree with her. I think that it would be detrimental to people's human and civil rights to deny them the right to protest. However, a right to protest should be exercised responsibly. What I am saying is that I hope that those who organise protests and parades, as they have a right to do, will also recognise the rights of the traders in Belfast city centre and their need to make a living. The Member used the word "rescue". I will not use as dramatic a word, but the traders need to be able to continue to thrive. They need to employ people in the city centre, perhaps some of the people from the areas that are protesting. Therefore, I hope that there will be a dialogue with the people who seek to parade and protest about issues, which, of course, they have a right to do. Let us have some dialogue about this so that they understand the position and do not just read about it in newspapers but understand the issues from each side. I do not want a message sent out from Belfast that it is a cold house for those people who want to protest and parade, because it is their city as well. They have a right to come into the city centre.

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

4. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment what her Department is doing to avail itself of funding opportunities through the Green Investment Bank. (AQO 4619/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Green Investment Bank has been proactive in Northern Ireland since it was set up. Through Invest Northern Ireland, my Department organised a briefing session along with face-to-face meetings for 40 sector and business leaders earlier this year. In addition, Invest Northern Ireland hosted a series of "Funding for Renewables" events across Northern Ireland, which were attended by 100 company delegates who were given information on the Green Investment Bank and key contacts. I met the CEO of the bank in April, as did the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. Invest Northern Ireland continues to promote the Green Investment Bank as a potential funding source.

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

I thank the Minister for her reply. Having regard to funding opportunities through the Green Investment Bank, what recent discussions has she had with the Irish and British Governments on the proposed intergovernmental agreement on renewable energy?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

There is a intergovernmental agreement between the two sovereign governments, the UK Government and the Irish Government. I have raised issues with our Government in relation to offshore renewables, but of course we will watch with interest and will be copied in on any agreements that the Prime Minister makes with the Taoiseach on those sorts of issues.

The Green Investment Bank has made its first investment in Northern Ireland, as the Member will know, up in Londonderry at the Evermore Renewable Energy plant. That is quite a big investment, it has to be said, and I understand that other local projects are being considered for investment as well, including Arc21 and the North West Region Waste Management Group. We will continue to highlight the opportunities that there are with the Green Investment Bank and hope that others will benefit from it as well.

Gordon Dunne (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for her answers today. What is Invest NI doing to support businesses where banks are reluctant to take risks on such loans?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

It is Invest Northern Ireland's job to try to plug the gap that has been very evident to a lot of our businesses across Northern Ireland. Earlier, I mentioned the number of access-to-finance initiatives with which Invest Northern Ireland has been involved. Those, indeed, have been supplemented by, as I said, some of the national schemes. One of the smaller schemes that Invest Northern Ireland has been involved with is the finance voucher scheme. I am very pleased that 113 vouchers have been issued by Invest Northern Ireland. That scheme allows businesses that, perhaps, do not have the spare capital to do a business plan for growth or set out the agenda for their business. The finance voucher allows them to instruct someone to do that and then pay the money to them. It is a small but very meaningful scheme for a lot of people who often do not have the spare cash to set about producing a business plan or a growth plan for the future.

Of course, there are other schemes with which the House is very familiar, such as the small business loan fund, and the growth loan fund, which continues to do very well, as well as the equity funds. Invest Northern Ireland is plugging a gap that we have identified. We hope that that gap will get smaller over time, but Invest Northern Ireland is working on it at present.

Samuel Gardiner (UUP, Upper Bann)

Given that this is a £3·8 billion UK-wide fund, will the Minister outline her Department's targets for uptakes of opportunities through the Green Investment Bank?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

We do not need specific targets for the Green Investment Bank. We have been spending time doing what we need to be doing, which is to look around for projects that can avail themselves of the loan fund. I am very pleased to say that the CEO, who is originally from Northern Ireland, which sometimes helps, has been very open to discussions with us. We were very pleased to get over the line with the very first investment by the Green Investment Bank. It was a very considerable investment in the project, totalling £81 million, which is a not inconsiderable investment to start off with.

However, as I say, a number of other projects have been in the pipeline; some are commercial in confidence, but others are local government initiatives that I hope will also get funding from the Green Investment Bank.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

In working with local businesses to have them avail themselves of opportunities through the Green Investment Bank, is the Minister finding that they face barriers or has she found that the process to date has been beneficial?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Certainly, in working with the Green Investment Bank on the Evermore Renewable Energy scheme, its officials were found by my officials to be very open, transparent and flexible with us. I found them very easy to deal with in that scheme, and I hope that that is the case with other schemes that may come forward as well.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

5. asked the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for an update on her Department's efforts to tackle regional imbalance in economic development. (AQO 4620/11-15)

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The Executive, within the economic strategy, recognise the need to ensure balanced subregional growth. They seek to ensure that all subregions are able to grow and prosper, and the regional development strategy is a key supporting policy for achieving this. Although it is important that companies make their own decision about where to locate, our regional aid limits currently favour businesses investment projects locating outside Belfast. I understand that emerging findings from a recent evaluation of selective financial assistance (SFA) indicates that support has been delivered in a balanced and equitable manner across Northern Ireland.

Rosaleen McCorley (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí go dtí seo. I thank the Minister for her answer. Will she please outline what specific consideration has been given to targeting investment to areas of high deprivation such as west Belfast?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

We have of course worked long and hard with areas such as west Belfast. I see a Member for Foyle on his feet as well, and no doubt he will ask me something about Foyle. A number of areas around Northern Ireland require extra help. However, as I said, I have been pleased with the general thrust of the evaluation of our main tool to intervene, which is selective financial assistance. It is highlighted that almost one quarter of SFA jobs promoted were located in 10% of the most deprived neighbourhoods, and it is concluded that SFA has the potential to support job creation in our most deprived areas where rebalancing is essential.

I remind the Member that the economic strategy for Northern Ireland is predicated on two pillars. The first is rebuilding, in which we have been very much involved through the jobs fund and other mechanisms, and the second is rebalancing. So, the twin watchwords of the economic strategy are rebuilding and rebalancing, and that has certainly been my focus since that economic strategy was put in place.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

What evidence is there of financial support by Invest NI for all parts of Northern Ireland to help to attract and secure new business?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

The best way to illustrate it is to look up some of the recent jobs and other announcements that we have made over the past couple of months. We supported firms right across Northern Ireland. Members will, of course, particularly want to hear about their own constituencies. However, in the spirit of generosity, they should accept that we have to go right across Northern Ireland. We had the £1·4 million expansion by McErlain's Bakery in Magherafelt. Creagh Concrete in Toomebridge has won £2·4 million worth of business in Great Britain. There is to be a £1 million expansion by Carrickfergus-based Yelo. Woodland Kitchens in Rasharkin has secured a £2 million order in Great Britain. FM Environmental in Newry is investing £750,000. It is right across the piece, right down to small companies that are opening up their offices. I had the pleasure of opening McElwaine Security in Fivemiletown recently — one must also mention one's own constituency, of course. I was also pleased to be at the £7 million Connected Health Innovation Centre at the University of Ulster in Jordanstown, the first of our competency centres that we have set up, and I look forward to visiting the second of those this week.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I did not think that I was going to get in there. Has the Minister had any conversations with her counterparts in the South about cross-border enterprise zones, given some of the real difficulties in border areas that she will well understand?

Arlene Foster (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

No, I have not had any discussions in relation to cross-border enterprise zones — the Member is probably thinking about Richard Bruton — but we continue to have a good working relationship. I think that the first thing we need to do with enterprise zones is to see how they fit within a Northern Ireland context. If the Member then feels that we need to look at going cross-border, or if he thinks that there are benefits to working with colleagues in the Republic of Ireland, I am certainly happy to look at that. However, I think that the first thing that we have to do is to see how they fit within a Northern Ireland context as far as our policy and legislation is concerned.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

We move to questions to the Minister of Justice, and, again, we will start with topical questions. I advise Members that question 9 has been withdrawn.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

1. asked the Minister of Justice, specifically in relation to prisoners who are sentenced for terrorist offences, and where part of their sentence involves them being subject to licence in the community, who actually — not notionally or on paper — provides that supervision in the community. (AQT 111/11-15)

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am somewhat baffled in that that question seems remarkably similar to one that has been withdrawn from the main question list and for which a written answer has been requested. [Interruption.]

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I assume that it is in order for the Member to trump himself by asking the question as a topical question. In that case, the answer is that where licence conditions are imposed on persons released from prison, they are monitored by the Probation Board with support, where appropriate, from the police, the Prison Service and my Department. Individuals who are released on licence are subject to a combination of standard conditions that are set out in legislation and, where relevant, to additional conditions. The aim of those conditions is to reduce the risk of harm to the public, reduce reoffending and support the resettlement of offenders. A licence may be revoked and the offender recalled to custody when it is considered that the risk of harm that is posed by an individual can no longer be safely managed in the community.

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Before I call Jim for a supplementary question, I ask Members to be respectful in the Chamber and to listen carefully to the Minister's response.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I suggest to the Minister that his answer is what is supposed to happen and what happens on paper. However, the reality on the ground is very different, because the Probation Board refuses to monitor terrorist prisoners. Is it not the case that there are many terrorist prisoners who are supposedly on licence in the community, but who are never monitored because of that refusal by the Probation Board? Is he trying to cover that up?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I do not make a habit of covering things up. I think that my record of coming to the House on a number of occasions when things have been somewhat difficult for the Department of Justice proves otherwise. I have given the Member a statement about what the regulations provide and how the operational guidance between the Probation Board, the Prison Service, the police and my Department has operated since 2011. If he has specific examples of where he believes that that is not being carried out, I have no doubt that he will write to me.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

2. asked the Minister of Justice, following his commitment in June to write to the Minister of Finance and Personnel about the Northern Ireland Civil Service equal pay settlement, to update the Assembly on that correspondence. (AQT 112/11-15)

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I did indeed write to the then Finance Minister in June. That was part of an ongoing series of correspondence, and I am sure that Members will not wish me to bore them with the full details of it. However, I certainly welcome the position that was adopted by the new Finance Minister at Question Time in the Assembly, I think it was a fortnight ago today, when he gave a clear indication of his willingness to look again at the equal pay issue.

I am certainly very keen to see the equal pay issue resolved, but the resolution is not within my powers as Minister of Justice. If it is possible to get a solution on a cross-Executive basis, I would be very pleased.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his reply, and I welcome the Finance Minister's commitment as well. Is it fair to say that the Justice Minister will fully support a cross-departmental, cross-party — [Interruption.]

Roy Beggs (UUP, East Antrim)

Order.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

— approach? This is very clearly a cross-departmental and cross-party issue. If central funding can be found, will the Minister fully support it?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes; that is exactly the case. I have just checked, and it was a fortnight ago yesterday that the Finance Minister made his point at Question Time. I wrote to him the following day, making it absolutely clear that I welcomed his intention to carefully consider the matter in the answer that he gave that day. I outlined why it was not possible for me to take the matter forward but stated that I was willing to participate in any discussions that he wished to have.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

3. asked the Minister of Justice whether he can confirm, given the recent controversy about the sexual exploitation of children, that in the absence of the National Crime Agency in Northern Ireland, we will be left more exposed to this form of criminal activity than other parts of the UK. (AQT 113/11-15)

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

Yes. I am concerned that, when the National Crime Agency (NCA) goes live on 7 October, if Northern Ireland is not part of the arrangements — indeed, clearly, Northern Ireland cannot now be part of the arrangements from 7 October — there will be something of a gap in our procedures. I am certainly well aware of the Chief Constable's statement that he will seek to ensure that the PSNI does its best to deal with the issue of child exploitation. However, the reality is that the specialist expertise for the United Kingdom exists in Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre at the moment, which is becoming part of the NCA, and which, in the absence of agreement in this House, will not be able to operate in the devolved sphere in Northern Ireland.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. Although the opposition of some to the National Crime Agency is dressed up as concerns around accountability, is it not the case that there is good reason to believe that, for some, this is more about protecting their erstwhile friends who are involved in smuggling across the border?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I have no knowledge as to what might motivate any Member of the House in the direction suggested by Mr Buchanan. I am absolutely clear that there would be significant benefits for Northern Ireland if the NCA were able to operate in the devolved sphere, subject to the appropriate accountability arrangements that I believe I have secured in discussions with the Home Office. The issue has to be considered by the Assembly as we look at serious issues such as child exploitation, human trafficking and a range of other crimes that come within our domestic legislation and which, therefore, will not be amenable to full NCA support in the arrangements under which the NCA will be operating from 7 October. The devolved sphere will be left out, while excepted matters will be covered by the NCA.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

4. asked the Minister of Justice, who has said that he does not hide from his responsibilities, whether he is satisfied that there are sufficient prison officers working in our prisons, particularly at Magilligan, which I visited with the Committee for Justice. (AQT 114/11-15)

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I think that Mr Clarke will shortly receive the answer to his question for written answer on that matter. The Prison Service has satisfied me that there are adequate numbers of staff on duty in all three prison institutions at all times.

Trevor Clarke (DUP, South Antrim)

Thank you for that answer. We heard representation from prison officers on the day of our visit. Has the Minister spoken directly to any of the prison officers at Magilligan where, in one wing, there are 50 prisoners with one member of staff looking after them at night?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I am not aware that that is the position at Magilligan; it is not the way that it has been presented to me. However, we have to be realistic in recognising that, when risk assessments are done on the way in which staff are deployed, sometimes it will be entirely possible that the prisoner:staff ratio will be higher in some units than in others. The reality is that the vast majority of our prisoners are not, in that sense, dangerous, and we need to ensure that we have an appropriate staffing level for the different sorts of prisoners in the different parts of the prison estate so that we maximise the use of resources and do not have unnecessary numbers of prison officers in some places that do not require it, at the expense of other areas where a higher staff:prisoner ratio would be appropriate.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

5. asked the Minister of Justice for his assessment of the PSNI's current policy of reducing hours in local stations and getting officers out from behind desks, which has outlined a clear community benefit. (AQT 115/11-15)

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

How the Chief Constable deploys his staff is very much an operational issue for him. The fact that some 600 officers are now available for front line duties rather than performing desk jobs must surely be seen as a positive for all of us.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answer and the fact that it is operational. Will he assess some local policies in relation to the PSNI, particularly where there are high levels of criminal activity, and there appears to be no action?

David Ford (Alliance, South Antrim)

I cannot assess those kinds of operational issues by the Chief Constable. Those matters are properly for him. The Policing Board primarily has oversight of the Chief Constable. If the Member is talking about specific local issues, there are arrangements whereby the PCSPs can raise matters with their local police commander. However, it is not the job of the Minister to interfere in those kinds of operational decisions.