Beta This is a new service and it is still being tested. Tell us about a problem.

Parliament's record since 1997: debates, questions, statements, votes, bills, committees and members' interests

Where They Stand

Sourced briefings on the record of Parliament

Northern Ireland Assembly, 1 October 2013

304 contributions from 55 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

As with similar motions, the motion on Committee membership will be treated as a business motion. Therefore, there will be no debate.

Resolved:

That Mr Kieran McCarthy replace Mr Stewart Dickson as a member of the Committee for Regional Development; that Mr Stewart Dickson replace Mrs Judith Cochrane as a member of the Committee for Social Development; that Mr Trevor Lunn replace Mr Kieran McCarthy as a member of the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development; that Mr Trevor Lunn replace Mr Stewart Dickson as a member of the Assembly and Executive Review Committee; and that Mr Kieran McCarthy replace Mr Chris Lyttle as a member of the Committee on Procedures. — [Mr McCarthy.]

Executive Committee Business

Mark Durkan (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I beg to move

That the Second Stage of the Local Government Bill [NIA 28/11-15] be agreed.

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. First, I would like to thank my Executive colleagues for their support in bringing this Bill to the Assembly. We have a once-in-a-political-lifetime opportunity to shape the future of local government so that it delivers improved outcomes for everyone. My key priority is to continue the important work that was taken forward by my predecessor Alex Attwood, which built on the extensive programme started in the previous Assembly mandate.

I want to acknowledge the commitment of everyone, including elected representatives, local government officers and departmental officials, whose direct involvement has enabled us to reach this significant stage. In addition to developing the policies to be given effect by this Bill, a major reform programme is being delivered through the structures that were put in place by my predecessor.

Councils and councillors have a key role to play in addressing issues that affect the lives and the life experiences of all our people. The Executive's vision is one of strong, dynamic local government, creating communities that are vibrant, health, prosperous, safe and sustainable and that have the needs of all their citizens at their core. Councillors play a unique role in delivering that vision by linking the delivery of services with local people’s needs and ambitions. Working together, they have a clear role in providing strong civic leadership and acting as a consistent advocate for their area.

The Local Government Bill provides the legislative framework necessary to give effect to the Executive’s decisions on the future shape and function of local government. The provisions are comprehensive and will impact on all aspects of the operations of the new councils. Taken together, they represent the most significant shake-up of our system of local government in over 40 years.

Before I go into some detail on the Bill’s provisions, I want to say a few words about what is not included. The Bill does not provide for the operation and functions of the new councils during the shadow period. That will be provided by way of a programme of subordinate legislation using enabling provisions of the Local Government (Boundaries) Act (Northern Ireland) 2008 and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (Northern Ireland) 2010, and the power to make supplementary and transitional provision conferred by clause 123 of this Bill. It is my intention that all the necessary regulations will be made before the local government elections take place in May 2014. Elections are an excepted matter, so the Secretary of State will make the necessary legislation to provide for the terms of office of existing councillors to be extended until 1 April 2015 and for cooption arrangements to continue until 1 January in that year.

The Local Government Bill has 128 clauses, 16 Parts and 12 schedules. It introduces strong, modern statutory governance arrangements that will provide for proportionality in the allocation of positions of responsibility and protections for the interests of minority communities, and it will improve the transparency in the operation of councils and their business. It will establish an ethical standards regime, which is to include a mandatory local government code of conduct for councillors and others appointed to take part in council business. The code will be supported by mechanisms for the investigation and adjudication of alleged breaches of the code. A bar will be placed on those holding a publicly elected representative position from being elected or acting as a councillor, in order to end the dual mandate.

The Bill will also introduce council-led community planning to provide a statutory framework for councils to work in conjunction with other public sector service providers to deliver on our objective of improving outcomes for everyone. The delivery of community planning will be supported at council level by the introduction of an updated performance improvement framework that focuses on the delivery of continuous improvement in service delivery against more strategic aspects. It will also be supported by the introduction of a general power of competence for councils, which will enable them to act more innovatively in addressing issues. Recognising that the various Departments will continue to have responsibility for the delivery of a wide range of services and retain the overall policy responsibility for functions and responsibilities transferring to councils, the Bill will establish a partnership panel between Executive Ministers and elected representatives for the new councils.

The reorganisation of the councils and the transfer of functions from Departments to councils will result in the transfer of staff, assets and liabilities to the new councils from existing councils, from other local government bodies, and from Departments and other organisations that are transferring functions to the new councils. The Bill makes provision for the development of schemes to effect those transfers. Those relating to staff will provide for the protection of contractual employment rights and of terms and conditions of service and pensions, and will apply statutory protections, including those enshrined in the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE).

Linked to the transfer of functions from Departments, the Bill will extend to all Departments the supervision powers that are available to my Department.

The opportunity is taken in the Bill to address a small number of technical issues, including those necessary to reflect the current organisational structure of the Northern Ireland Audit Office.

Part 1 deals with councils as entities, specifying how the names are to be formed, and provides a mechanism for the name of a council to be altered. It also introduces the first aspect of the arrangements to enhance openness and transparency in the operation of councils by requiring each to publish a constitution. A council's constitution will set out how it operates in terms of its political governance structure and organisational structure and how decisions are reached, including details of those decisions devolved to council officers. It will also provide a single reference source for the range of procedures and codes of practice that govern a council's operation.

Councils are, of course, made up of elected representatives, and Part 2 and schedules 1 and 2 set out the requirements for an individual to be elected or to be a councillor, unless they are disqualified by virtue of specified conditions. In relation to the disqualification conditions, I am taking the opportunity in the Bill, with the agreement of my Executive colleagues, to place a bar on MLAs, MPs and MEPs from being councillors. I am also removing, for human rights purposes, the blanket bar on council employees being councillors. The ban will continue to apply to those officers who are in positions in which they work directly with and provide advice to a council or one of its committees.

As I stated, there will be a mandatory Northern Ireland local government code of conduct for councillors as part of the new ethical standards regime. Currently, councillors are required to sign a declaration of acceptance of office before sitting as a councillor. The Bill will amend that declaration to state also that they have read and:

"will observe the Northern Ireland Local Government Code of Conduct for Councillors in the performance of their functions".

A similar declaration will be required to be made by others appointed to take part in council business — for example, members of committees of councils — prior to sitting on that committee.

Although a number of councils have arrangements for the sharing of power, I am committed to ensuring that the sharing of power and responsibility is the cornerstone of the new councils. Recent experience in the formation of some statutory transition committees highlighted and reinforced the absolute need for these new arrangements. Through Part 3 and schedule 3, the new councils will have a choice of methods to achieve that. Those include the d'Hondt process, with which we are all familiar; the Sainte-Laguë approach, which is similar to d’Hondt in that it uses a formula to allocate positions to political parties based on their level of representation on a council and the number of positions already allocated to a party; and the single transferable vote.

The d'Hondt process is the default position if the parties on a council cannot agree a method. To ensure consistency in the application of the alternatives, the operation of each is specified in the Bill. I am indebted to, and wish to thank, the members of the policy development panel who formulated the proposals. The panel comprised representatives of the five political parties represented in the Executive, and the provisions we will debate today are a testament to their work.

Some Members will say that the use of a formula-based approach favours political parties with higher levels of representation on a council to the disadvantage of those with lower levels of representation, and independents. I acknowledge that, which is why the method selected by a council will be applied at the start of a council term, following a local government election, for all the positions to which it will apply. The selection of a position of responsibility, and the year for which it will be held, will be a matter for the selecting political party to determine. In other words, as the process is being run, a political party may, if the position has not already been taken, select the position of a particular committee in year 3 of the council’s term. The adoption of this approach should provide the opportunity for elected representatives from all political parties and independents to hold a chairperson or vice-chairperson position, whether that is of the council or one of its committees. I believe that that will go a significant way towards mitigating the drawbacks of a formula-based approach.

Members who serve or have served on a council will know that its range of responsibilities and functions is such that it is unrealistic to expect it to discharge all of them at its monthly meetings. Part 4 enables a council to arrange for its functions, other than the making of the district rate or the borrowing, acquiring or disposing of land, to be carried out by a committee, subcommittee or officer of the council. Councils are also able to establish a committee jointly with one or more councils to discharge a function if they consider that to be appropriate and beneficial. The provisions are a re-enactment of those contained in the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972, with the modifications necessary to cater for the alternative new political governance arrangements that are to be available to the new councils.

Part 4 and schedule 5 also add to my commitment to the sharing of power and responsibility by putting in place arrangements to ensure that the membership of council committees reflects, as far as is practicable, the political make-up of a council, as the House does for its Committees.

The reorganisation of local government, the transfer of functions and responsibilities to the new councils from Departments and the provision of brand new powers and responsibilities will have a significant impact on the work of councils. As I have just indicated, to support the councils in the delivery of their responsibilities and respond to changing circumstances as effectively as possible, I am introducing a small number of alternative political governance arrangements. They are set out in Part 5 and include the committee system, which is currently operated by all bar one of the councils, and executive arrangements under which certain functions of the council will be devolved to the executive, which will be responsible for decisions on the delivery of those functions within a policy and budgetary framework agreed by the council. I am also including a mechanism to enable a council, at any stage, to propose an alternative to the methods specified for consideration.

A council that chooses to adopt executive arrangements may establish a single committee or more than one committee of the council to be responsible for the devolved functions. The latter option would allow a council to share direct responsibility for decision-making across a wider range of members. The introduction of executive arrangements does not do away with a council’s need to form committees to discharge functions because a range of functions, including those of a regulatory nature, such as licensing, will remain the responsibility of the council. Part 6 provides the enabling power for my Department to specify which functions will or may be the responsibility of an executive. It also sets out the arrangements that an executive may put in place to discharge its functions, including by a subcommittee, an officer, or jointly with one or more other councils.

Some Members may question devolving decision-making to a small number of councillors without the requirement for ratification by the council and the opportunity that this would provide for further consideration of a matter. That is why Part 6, in addition to setting out how an executive will operate, requires a council that adopts executive arrangements to establish one or more overview and scrutiny committees. Those committees will have the power to review or scrutinise decisions made or actions taken under executive arrangements or otherwise. They, therefore, provide part of the system of checks and balances that I am putting in place to protect the interests of minority communities.

As is the position in the House, it is normal for a publicly elected body to have in place standing orders for the conduct of proceedings and meetings. Although each existing council has standing orders in place voluntarily, I am making that a mandatory requirement in Part 7. I am also taking a power for my Department to specify matters that must be included in the standing orders. I am taking that action to provide the mechanism that is necessary to set out the practical operation of the two further aspects of the checks and balances that this Part also introduces.

The first of those aspects is qualified majority voting, where the support of 80% of the members of a council present and voting at a meeting will be required for a specified decision or resolution to be agreed. The decisions, to be specified by my Department, will include the permitted form of governance to be adopted and the method to be used for allocating positions of responsibility.

The other aspect is the provision of a call-in procedure. That will enable 15% of the members of a council to request that a decision of a non-regulatory nature is reconsidered. The procedure can be used if the members consider that the decision either was not arrived at after a proper consideration of all the relevant information or that it would disproportionately affect adversely any community in the district.

As I indicated, the new councils need to be open and transparent in their operation and in the transaction of their business. In addition to the publication of a constitution, Part 8 updates the statutory framework for access to meetings and documents of a council. The presumption will always be that a meeting of the council or a committee must be open to the public except in certain limited circumstances. The circumstances under which the public must be excluded and those under which the council may exclude the public are more clearly specified in the Bill.

This Part also expands on the extent of the information to be made available to the public in advance of a meeting of a council and subsequently on request, including the report and any associated background material for any item that is on the agenda for discussion at the meeting. I know that a large number of councils, particularly in response to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act, currently publish the minutes of meetings on their websites. That will become a statutory requirement for the new councils. I am also taking the opportunity to clarify the information that must be available to members of a council.

Part 9 will address the conduct of councillors. It will establish an ethical standards regime to include a mandatory local government code of conduct for councillors and others who are appointed to take part in council business. The code will be supported by mechanisms for the investigation and adjudication of alleged breaches of the code, which will be the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Complaints.

The Bill makes provision for the investigation and adjudication processes that should be undertaken by the commissioner, and it applies relevant provisions of the Commissioner for Complaints (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 to the ethical framework. Where, following an investigation, it is found that a person has failed to comply with the code of conduct, the commissioner may decide to censure, partially suspend, suspend or disqualify the person. In addition, the commissioner may make recommendations to a council about any matter relating to the exercise of a council’s functions.

The mandatory code of conduct will be consistent with the seven Nolan principles of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership, as well as the four additional principles of equality, promoting good relations, respect and good working relationships that are already adopted by the Northern Ireland Assembly code. The code will detail the standards of conduct that are expected when acting as a councillor and conducting council business, including, very importantly, the discharge of the council’s new planning functions. A draft of the code must be laid before and approved by resolution of the Assembly before it can come into force.

It is intended that the ethical standards framework should be reviewed after three to four years to assess how it is working and to consider whether any modifications are needed, such as the setting up of standards committees in councils.

Critical to the delivery of services that respond to local people's needs and ambitions will be an effective, statute-based community planning process that the new councils will lead and facilitate. Effective collaboration between service providers is in everybody's interest, and that is what Part 10 of the Bill sets out to achieve. Community planning is not about overriding or circumventing the existing responsibilities of those service providers; it is simply about local partners determining the broad and strategic context in which their responsibilities can best be exercised to deliver an agreed vision for the economic, social and environmental well-being of a district. Ensuring the successful implementation of community planning will be on the basis of joint working between a range of organisations and effective engagement with the community and the organisations that represent it.

The statutory framework is, of necessity, high level and considers the key principles to provide appropriate flexibility for individual councils that are likely to face different circumstances. However, my Department will be publishing statutory guidance for councils and others in a wide range of areas to ensure the proper implementation of community planning. The guidance will provide practical advice on using the framework to best regional and local advantage. The guidance will expand on the detail of the arrangements in the Bill.

In fulfilling its role as a champion for the district and responding to local people's needs, a council may want to take action on issues that arise but may be unable to do so within its statutory framework. I am sure that Members could point to occasions in the past when they have been advised by a council's legal experts that an action they are proposing is outside their legal vires. In broad terms, that may not be the situation in the future, as I am introducing, in Part 11, a general power of competence for councils. That power will fundamentally change the way a council behaves. Instead of having to find a statute that would allow them to act, councils would be required to satisfy themselves that there was nothing to prevent them using the power. In broad terms, it would enable a council to act with similar freedom to an individual unless there is a law to prevent it from doing so. That will expand the breadth of actions that a council can take and broaden the power base of local government. It is intended to deliver increased confidence, enable innovation and unlock creativity. In turn, that should lead to greater efficiencies, improved partnership working and the ability to help communities, which was previously outside a council's remit.

To support the delivery of high-quality services, Part 12 overhauls the statutory provision for council service improvement. It aims to introduce an effective performance improvement regime that is better coordinated and more responsive to local needs and circumstances. It creates opportunities for councils to serve citizens better, which is vital if we are to secure sustainable improvements in our public services.

I accept that the provisions are detailed and, in places, complex. The subject itself is fairly complex, and many of the areas that I am striving to deal with have never been dealt with in legislation here. However, every effort has been made to ensure that it is not overly prescriptive. It introduces and confers on councils substantial flexibilities in the way in which they define, monitor and account for improvements. A power is included for Departments to specify performance indicators. My intention is that any such indicators would be developed in partnership with local government.

The Bill provides for an external assurance that a council, in preparing its improvement plan, has complied with the requirements of the performance improvement framework. That role will be undertaken by the local government auditor. The role of the local government auditor will also be strengthened to enable the auditor to make recommendations on performance improvement in councils both individually and collectively, if appropriate.

Recognising that the aim is to deliver improved services, a power is provided for Ministers, individually, to intervene in the operation of a council if it is shown that the council is failing to deliver its services, or a specific service, as required, to meet appropriate standards within that Minister’s area of responsibility.

That is particularly relevant where a Department has transferred a function to the new councils but retains overall responsibility for the overarching policy.

Delivering the Executive’s vision for local government and improved outcomes for everybody will best be supported by partnership working between Ministers and their Departments and councils. That is why, in Part 13, I am establishing a partnership panel that will consist of Ministers and an elected representative from each of the new councils to formalise the relationship between Departments and councils at a political level. The panel will provide a forum for discussion of matters of mutual interest and concern.

Sections 127 to129 of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 contain powers enabling the Department of the Environment to supervise councils in the exercise of their functions. In recognition that other Departments currently have a responsibility for functions delivered by councils and that this will increase following the transfer of functions as part of the local government reform programme, Part 14 of the Bill extends the supervision powers to enable any Department to make use of them.

As I highlighted in my opening remarks, the Bill addresses a technical issue in relation to the structure of the Northern Ireland Audit Office. At the request of the Chief Local Government Auditor, with the agreement of the Comptroller and Auditor General, Part 15 amends the audit provisions in the Local Government (Northern Ireland) Order 2005 to facilitate proposed changes to the structure of the local government audit section of the NIAO, which will bring it into line with arrangements for audit in the NIAO as a whole.

In addition to addressing a number of technical issues, the final part of the Bill — Part 16 — makes provision in two important areas connected with local government reorganisation. The first of these relates to expenditure by the existing councils in the run-up to the establishment of the new councils. Concerns have been voiced that the existing councils may act irresponsibly in their use of ratepayers’ money during this period. By existing councils entering into sizeable or long-term contracts or loan arrangements, the new councils could be burdened with financial commitments that were not of their making. The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (Northern Ireland) 2010 provided the statutory transition committees with controls over the existing councils’ land disposals and capital and non-capital contracts. Provisions in Part 16 will extend those controls to cover the incoming councils during the shadow period and ensure that the existing councils act in a responsible and prudent manner in that period. Controls will also be introduced during the statutory transition committee period and the shadow period in relation to the treatment of council reserves and borrowings.

The reorganisation of the councils and the transfer of functions from Departments to councils will result in the transfer of staff, assets and liabilities to the new councils from existing councils, from other local government bodies and from Departments that are transferring functions to the new councils. Provision for the development of schemes to effect these transfers is included in Part 16. This approach is consistent with that adopted for previous large-scale reorganisation in public administration; for example, in the health sector.

The schemes relating to staff will provide for the protection of contractual employment rights, terms and conditions of service and pensions and will apply statutory protections, including those enshrined in the TUPE regulations. Those relating to assets and liabilities will ensure the smooth transfer of the legal title of the assets and the liabilities associated with those assets to the new local government structure, without incurring any costs to existing or new councils. Provision is also made in Part 16 in relation to the payment of compensation to an individual who loses employment or has a reduction in remuneration as a direct result of the reorganisation programme.

In summary, I believe the Bill has numerous benefits for local government as it provides considerable opportunities for councils to actively engage with their community to shape their district and provide improved services for the community that they serve. It also provides the opportunity to invigorate local democracy by involving all sections of the community. The Bill will ensure that councils operate within a statutory governance framework with the high standard of behaviours that the public expect from their elected representatives.

I see the Bill as a necessary and highly desirable step in developing the capacity of local government. The greater freedom that councils will have under the Bill will, of course, place additional responsibilities on elected members and officers in local government regarding sound and accountable forward planning and decision-making as they work with the community in shaping their district for the coming years and beyond.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

As Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment, I welcome the next stage in the Assembly's scrutiny of the Local Government Bill. The Committee has been kept updated by the Department on the progress of the policy underlying the Bill. Members received a synopsis of the responses to the public consultation in June 2011 and the final synopsis, together with the Department's response, in July 2012. At its most recent meeting last week, departmental officials briefed the Committee on the Bill, which has been amended from the original proposals to reflect the responses to the consultation, representations from stakeholders and developments in other jurisdictions.

Members understand that the Bill will provide the legislative basis for the reform of local government. That will include statutory governance arrangements to provide for proportionality in the allocation of positions of responsibility; an ethical standards regime, to include a mandatory local government code of conduct for councillors; council-led community planning and a general power of competence for councils; an updated performance improvement regime; the extension to all Northern Ireland Departments of the supervision powers currently available to the Department; the establishment of a partnership panel between Ministers and elected representatives from councils; and the transfer of staff, assets and liabilities as part of the reorganisation programme. These are comprehensive reforms that will impact on every aspect of the operation of councils, and the Department has informed the Committee that, as well as the large Bill in front of us today, there will be a raft of subordinate legislation and guidance to follow.

There are aspects of the Bill on which the Committee will require further information, particularly where these will represent a radical change from existing practice. An example is the removal of a bar on council staff being councillors as a result of a European Court of Human Rights ruling that such a blanket ban is unlawful. The Department proposes that council officials who work directly with and provide advice to councillors, such as chief executives or directors, will still be banned from standing for election, but members asked which other staff should also be debarred. The Department was unable to clarify that but indicated that it plans to go out to consultation to determine the appropriate level at which staff could not stand for election. On behalf of the Committee, I look forward to scrutinising the outcome of the consultation.

Departmental officials outlined the new ethical standards framework that will form an integral part of the Bill and explained that it had been amended significantly following stakeholder consultation. The Committee welcomed the requirement for the new mandatory code of conduct to be laid before the Assembly but was concerned to hear that there would be no appeals mechanism following a decision by the Commissioner for Complaints. The only recourse for a councillor affected by such a decision will be by way of judicial review. Members expressed reservations because a judicial review can be conducted only on limited grounds that relate mainly to procedural issues. Departmental officials have agreed to consult the Ombudsman and Commissioner for Complaints on how appeals are handled in other jurisdictions, and we look forward to hearing more about that at Committee Stage. Members also inquired about the costs of handling complaints. We were informed that costs will be met by local government and will probably be apportioned on the basis of council size, which seems fair.

The Bill introduces a new system of checks and balances in council decision-making through the use of a call-in procedure to provide a review mechanism and qualified majority voting to determine the number of votes to be cast in favour of specified proposals. Members queried the level of support required to trigger a call-in: 15% of the council's membership. We asked officials which other options had been explored by the Department, but we are content that various aspects of the call-in procedure will be specified under standing orders and will be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure.

The Local Government Bill will also introduce community planning. Although that has been in operation in England and Wales for some time, it will be a totally new concept to Northern Ireland. Members requested further information on how the list of those involved in community planning will be drawn up. We await the guidance and subordinate legislation that will identify the organisations eligible to engage in the process.

Members also raised the issue of capacity building to ensure that community planning is delivered effectively. Departmental officials indicated that a working group had been set up to deliver a programme with an initial focus on councillors and staff. Community planning is a new concept so it is vital that there is active and informed participation not just from other Departments and statutory bodies but from voluntary and community organisations.

As I mentioned, the Committee is well aware of the quantity and complexity of the regulations and guidance on which the Bill will rely. Much of the Bill might even be considered enabling legislation. Accordingly, departmental officials have given an assurance that they will endeavour to provide the Committee with draft guidance and related subordinate legislation as soon as possible so that members can carry out well-informed and timely scrutiny.

When the House refers the Bill to the Committee, we will immediately issue a call for evidence. Members will welcome the views of interested organisations and individuals. We also look forward to maintaining an effective working relationship with departmental officials to bring the next stage of the Bill to a successful conclusion. On behalf of the Committee, I support the principles of the Bill.

With your indulgence, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I will now say a few words as an MLA for South Belfast. I am glad to see the Bill finally before the House. We have waited for some time for it, having been promised it almost weekly since April. That has left us with a timescale that is workable but very tight.

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

Will the Member give way?

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

Yes.

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

I share the Member's concerns about the timescale, but I am sure that she will agree and indeed confirm that the delay has been a direct consequence of the chaos in the Executive and the fact that the Bill has lain on the desk of OFMDFM since April. That has not been the fault of the Environment Minister or his predecessor.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Member for her contribution. Yes, I am aware of the delay in the Executive. We must all now work together with the best interests of local government reform at heart and not narrow party political interest.

From a departmental briefing to the Committee, I know that the Department hopes to have the Bill's Final Stage completed by the end of March. That would allow for a formal handover of functions to shadow councils in May. I am aware that elections to the shadow councils can take place without the Bill being finalised, but I think that we would all agree that that would be far from ideal. I would also like to hear from the Minister clarification of the proposed date of the election to shadow councils.

The Alliance Party strongly supports the formal entrenchment of proportionality for the allocation of civic posts such as chairs, vice-chairs and so on. I am relieved to see that the Bill clearly sets out the process to be undertaken for nominations to positions of authority. Expressly setting out how a system of proportionality should be applied will ensure that we do not see any of the undemocratic appointments similar to what we have seen in appointments to the statutory transition committees, particularly in Castlereagh, where my party colleagues have been denied a seat on the STC that is rightfully theirs. However, d’Hondt brings with it its own problems. It is inherently inflexible and may well unintentionally institutionalise the dominance of particular sections of the community in certain areas. The Alliance Party's preference, where local agreement cannot be reached, would be for the use of a different mechanism such as the single transferable vote or Sainte-Laguë. D’Hondt is a blunt form of proportionality; it skews outcomes in favour of bigger parties and favours sections of the community that have a less fragmented number of political parties. The single transferable vote system would overcome that fragmentation. For instance, if we were to use d'Hondt to allocate the post of mayor, we could see in Lisburn and Castlereagh unionists holding the post for all four years of the electoral cycle, despite being less than 70% of the population there.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate the point that the Member makes, and I suppose that that is why there are options for allocation and, in that sense, the Bill is not prescriptive. STV is mentioned as one option for allocation. The issue was looked at fairly extensively in the policy development panel, and people were sympathetic to that being included as an option. If you ring-fence the use of a system purely for the allocation of the position of mayor, for example, and you are allocating four positions over a four-year period, d'Hondt is reasonably workable. The problem is that, to have a fair allocation across the board for all positions in the initial round of the allocations from the list, you may well be dealing with up to 100 positions. At that point, d'Hondt massively breaks down and is not really applicable. It is very hard to work. Furthermore, in those circumstances, with d'Hondt and other means, whatever quirks there are at the very top end tend to level out with proportionality at that point. There is a specific problem with applying STV when you have , in most cases, an electorate of 40, which is the number of councillors, and you are electing to perhaps 100 positions. STV kind of breaks down and is fairly unworkable at that point.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I thank the Member for his contribution. I know that Mr Weir has been a long-term councillor, and I certainly look forward to hearing his input during Committee Stage. In response to what he said about STV, I say that I have never been a councillor myself, but I still think that locally agreed positions would be the best among councillors. That would be the most democratic way of dealing with issues.

I have lost my place now. Similarly, no unionist would hold office top office in Derry, Strabane or Newry, despite making up a significant minority of the electorate. I believe that those outcomes run contrary to the spirit of proportionality, which is critical in what continues to be a deeply divided society.

I note the opportunity in the Bill for councils to reach local agreement. I recognise that that happens well already in a number of councils, although, sadly, as with appointments to STCs, there are examples of councils where the political maturity to reach fair and equitable decisions based on the will of the electorate, clearly demonstrated at the ballot box, is lacking. Unsurprisingly, again in Castlereagh, my party has been denied positions of authority unfairly, and the same has happened in Ards. For the Alliance Party, what would be delivered if the single transferable vote mechanism were applied would be the minimum that we would settle for under local agreement. Where councils seek to give greater representation to parties that have smaller numbers, we may support that; where those with large numbers seek to dominate and bully, we will not. Local agreements and the numbers necessary to agree to them are parts of the legislation that will need much greater scrutiny in Committee, and I commit to doing that.

I strongly welcome the commitment in the Bill to a statutory code of conduct for councillors, something that we could have done with in the not-so-recent past. Currently, unlike for MLAs, there is no one a councillor can be referred to if they do not act as one would expect them to. I am glad to see that anomaly being changed by the legislation. There are several things that the code of conduct must cover. In my view, it must include councillors' behaviour both inside and outside the council chamber. I would like to see a commitment to goodwill included in any code of conduct — councillors working with each other in a way that introduces goodwill to the council setting. Unlike many others who will speak in the debate, I have never been a local councillor, as I said. However, viewed from the outside and according to examples I have heard from party colleagues, goodwill can often seem to be sadly lacking in council chambers across Northern Ireland, perhaps particularly in recent times. If councillors can form that with each other and set a positive example in that respect, it can flow from there and enable communities and individuals to engage in thinking and behaving that cultivates goodwill and positive relationships in various forms and scenarios. There should be a commitment to dignity in how councillors work with each other and everyone in their constituencies.

A third thing that, I believe, is essential in any code of conduct is a commitment to civic leadership. I accept that councillors will undertake a declaration in which they commit to fulfilling the duties of the office to the best of their judgement and ability. However, I believe that, if the code of conduct were to contain a commitment to civic leadership, that would go one step further, affirming councillors' roles as civic leaders with a common purpose to improve our city and the lives of those within it.

In discussions at Committee level, we have already noted that there is no appeal mechanism in the Bill for when councillors are reported to the commissioner. That is something that we may need to return to. There are also a few issues around the sanctions that may be applied to councillors who are found to have breached the code which will require greater scrutiny at Committee Stage.

It is no secret that my party policy in respect of the national flag at council buildings is that the flag should be flown on designated days at all councils. We firmly believe, in line with the majority of councils in England, Scotland and Wales, that that is the most appropriate mechanism to represent the constitutional position of Northern Ireland and the special circumstances that we have here. I realise that the ongoing Haass talks seek to deal with issues like that. I am hopeful for an outcome. However, I seek assurances from the Minister today that, if that turns out not to be the case, he will consider including it at a further stage. Without placing this on a statutory footing, I am sure that we could all predict the first agenda item on many of the new councils. We would see trouble ahead. Proving, perhaps, that not a lot has changed from the old days would not be a good way to start. There are merits in a standard approach across Northern Ireland. It would show that all space is truly shared and operates within the framework of regulation. However, perhaps more importantly than the merits, I believe that this is too divisive an issue to be taken on by each council on its own on 11 separate occasions. It is up to us in this Chamber to show some real leadership.

The inclusion of community planning in the Bill is very welcome. The system works well elsewhere. I am hugely in favour of the community being involved in shaping health and well-being provisions in their area. Coming from many years in the voluntary sector, I certainly think that it has a great role to play in this area. Much work is needed on capacity building for local community and voluntary groups, as well as councillors, to enable everyone to take part in the process, to fulfill their potential to the best of their abilities and to be meaningful. People spend a lot of time and effort thinking ahead about what they want for the community. It is important that their efforts come to fruition and they feel that they have the power and participation to shape the future. Efforts must be made to engage communities in the process at every available opportunity. Councils and councillors must facilitate and encourage this. It cannot be allowed to be a power grab by councils because they believe that they know best.

In closing, I reaffirm my support for the Bill. I look forward to scrutinising it closely and thoroughly with my Committee colleagues. I commit to working with each of them in an open manner, and hope for similar in return. I also look forward to working closely with the Minister and the departmental officials. I support the Bill moving to Committee Stage.

Pam Brown (DUP, South Antrim)

As Deputy Chair of the Environment Committee, I support the Bill in its Second Reading.

At the outset, I declare an interest as an elected member of Antrim Borough Council. I declare that, as a newly appointed member of the Environment Committee, there is much in the Bill that I am still familiarising myself with. I, perhaps more than most, am looking forward to the Committee Stage, when we will be able to scrutinise fully many aspects of the Bill. As a further brief opening comment, as Deputy Chair of the Committee, I formally welcome the Minister to his new role and wish him every success in carrying out his duties.

I do not think that anyone in the House will argue that, at 26 councils, Northern Ireland's local government is overdue for reform and streamlining. During my time as an elected member of Antrim Borough Council, I have been lucky enough to work with the chief executive, senior management teams and council officers, who have consistently delivered the highest levels of service to all members of the community. I pay tribute to them. In my opinion, they have set the standard to which newly reconstituted councils must live up.

A key benefit of devolution is empowering local people to have a voice in the decisions that impact on their lives. I believe that it is right that the Bill is seen as a further stage of the devolution process, which should see not only more local accountability but greater community involvement in decisions on funding, planning, roads, housing, regeneration and community development.

Sometimes, in Northern Ireland, using the words "residents" or "community" has negative connotations, given our troubled past and recent difficulties, but for all the negative headlines, there are dozens upon dozens of hard-working community groups and dedicated individuals who never make the headlines but nevertheless make an incredibly positive contribution in their areas. I hope that the new frameworks for local government, as outlined in the Bill, particularly with community planning, will allow those in the community to have a greater say in how their council delivers for them and the entire community.

Given the scale of reform that we are undertaking, it is only natural that there may be more questions than answers at this stage in the process. However, I will make one or two observations before leaving the Floor open to other Members who wish to speak.

Although transitional committee meetings have been taking place across the Province in preparation for the changes, I wonder whether the Department has fully considered how to maximise the opportunities that the reform provides. Let me give one example. The establishment of the improvement, collaboration and efficiency (ICE) programme seems to be a very sensible initiative that aims to identify opportunities for collaboration and efficiency across local government. However, at present, it appears that a council can choose whether or not to be part of the programme. I am happy to be corrected if that is not the case, but it strikes me as one area in which it might be better to have everyone on the same page from the outset, identifying shared systems and savings at the outset rather than managing several different systems for, for example, our payroll systems. Surely encouraging that degree of coordination can lead only to uniform best practice across all council areas rather than just some of them.

One aspect of the Bill that I particularly welcome is the transferring of a number of functions from Departments to the new councils. It is a common criticism or perception that the Assembly does not do enough to deliver on the ground. Therefore, this measure should go some way to ensure that local people can have a real say in many areas of policy that were previously centralised — in particular, local planning, especially in relation to town centres, community relations, rural development and tourism. To fully realise the potential of those possibilities, it is essential that councils carry out their functions openly and transparently, recognising that their duty is to deliver for everyone in the community.

Sadly, in our past, we have seen times when councils have taken decisions that have been divisive and not in any way beneficial to wider community relations. I hope that the new arrangements for scrutiny and decision-making will ensure that no one section of a council can act in a way that damages the good work that goes on in the communities that I referred to.

I believe that the Bill constitutes the most significant set of reforms that we have seen in recent times. It recognises the role that councils play in the community and empowers them to deliver social, economic and environmental change. That can be only a good thing for Northern Ireland, as we strive to build on devolution and deliver real change for all our constituents.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. Fáiltím roimh an fhaill labhairt ar an Bhille. I welcome the opportunity to say a few words on the Bill. Although mindful that we will go through a long period — in fact, a relatively short period — of dealing with this 138-clause Bill over the next couple of months, I welcome the opportunity to do that.

I would like to pay tribute to the people on the policy panels, who put a lot of work into this. I see the previous Minister here today. Through the reference groups and everything else, he, too, put a lot of work into it, so I want to pay tribute to him as well. I wish the new Minister every success with his first legislation.

We, as a party, have always been very supportive of reforming, improving and delivering more responsive services to the needs of local ratepayers and, in general terms, making local government more democratic and accountable to the citizens whom we represent.

This is one of the most important pieces of legislation that will ever be introduced in the Assembly. It will facilitate the establishment of 11 new councils, the biggest change in local government in over 40 years. In this mandate, more functions will transfer from the control of Departments to local government. In many cases, local government will be best placed to deliver and roll out those services at ground level.

In this part of the island, local authority is responsible for administering only approximately 4p or 5p in the tax pound. Common sense suggests that that needs to change. We are significantly out of kilter with many EU states that see localism as best. We, as a party, are also strong supporters of the principle of subsidiarity, in that, where possible, certain functions can and should be delivered most effectively at local level.

All that said, from an historical perspective, my party has been reluctant to load on to local government any significant additional responsibilities until it can demonstrate that it can deliver such responsibilities in a fair and equitable manner. Unfortunately, one does not have to delve too deep into the recent past to see how some councils failed to exercise in a fair and equitable manner the powers given to them.

Jennifer McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Member for giving way. On that point about fairness and equality, does the Member agree that Lisburn City Council has refused to use any method of proportionality to ensure that two Sinn Féin councillors would sit on the statutory transition committees? Despite the Minister having written to the council on two occasions, it still refuses to use the d'Hondt system.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for the intervention. I agree with her, and I will touch on that later. Guidance has been issued, and guidance has not been followed. The Minister is well aware of it, and Members will discuss it. If it is the case that some will not follow the guidance, we need to look at regulation and legislative powers to ensure that such things do not happen again and that there is proper representation. I was just about to mention that very point. There has been abuse of housing powers in the past, and we see problems with the likes of the STCs at the minute.

I am keen to ensure that, in the transfer of additional functions and responsibilities, we establish a firm bedrock of checks and balances to ensure effective scrutiny and accountability of the decision-making process and the decisions made therein. The key to providing greater democratic accountability in the workings of local government is providing it in the construct and make-up of the administrative body itself.

Paul Givan (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I appreciate the Member's giving way. I am sure that he would want it clarified that Lisburn City Council made clear that, if Sinn Féin wanted to take up a position on the statutory transition committee, we would support it in taking one of those positions. I am sure that the Member would want to make sure that the minority unionist community of Dunmurry also has representation, which is secured through the locally elected DUP councillor for the area. The first situation has now been addressed because the SDLP's John Drake — maybe he is not a member of the SDLP any more — has taken up the position. We have ensured that there is a nationalist representative on that committee.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I thank the Member for the intervention, but to my knowledge he does not represent the people of a certain area over there. However, the key element in all this —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order. I think that putting this debate into its proper context is useful; however, describing in minute detail issues that are in the immediate past is not. The Bill will deal with a new beginning, if you like, and I think that it is correct to indicate where improvements can be made. However, there is no purpose and benefit in going into the entrails of decisions that were made elsewhere and under different legislation. So, can we just stick to the purpose of this debate, which is about the new beginning for local government and the legislative basis on which it will be delivered?

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

I will take your guidance on that, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. My point is that we need to deal with things through regulation. I think that that is the key element. It is a new start, and I think that we have an opportunity in this Bill to do that. However, I will take your advice and concentrate on the principles of the Bill on the protections for minority groupings. I would like the Minister to expand a wee bit on the call-in procedure, which is set at 15%. I believe that that will provide an opportunity for the reconsideration of certain decisions. Will the Minister indicate whether, if the percentage were to be changed, that decision would go back to the Executive or whether councils would deal with it?

I welcome the introduction of community planning. The new function will, for the first time, compel many of the local statutory agencies to work in tandem with local councils and representatives from the community and voluntary sectors. I would wish to see the final community plan legislation sufficiently strong to ensure that the statutory partners fully engage with the new council authorities. I hope that those partners will provide senior officials to attend meetings and resources and expertise to assist in the effective delivery of programmes that must have at their heart the genuine intention to improve the social, economic and environmental well-being of our citizens.

That should go a long way to putting local communities at the heart of the agenda. There cannot, and should not, be any ceiling to the remits, scope, partnership opportunities and potential of effective community planning to deliver for our communities. The key to good community planning is building on partnership arrangements and building trust among participants.

I ask the Minister to comment on the role of the border corridor groups. Is there a role for them in ensuring the well-being of people in the border areas? Clause 77(3) says that a council and its community planning partners "must have regard to" guidance. Does the Minister consider that language strong enough? Perhaps he will comment on that in his response.

I also welcome the councils' general power of competence. That is an important departure and an improvement on the earlier, muted power of well-being. The general power of competence will empower councils to carry out functions that fall outside the responsibilities of the other statutory bodies. I hope that that will go some way to bridge gaps where issues in the past have been passed between Departments with no one Department wishing to take responsibility. That said, there also needs to be clear regulations — I mentioned guidelines — to determine the extent of such a power and to mitigate any potential issues. As I mentioned, it is important that proper partnerships take effect between the citizens and those bodies that are charged with delivering services, whether they are for central or local government. Equally, there needs to be strong partnership between central and local government.

I ask the Minister to expand a wee bit on what will trigger the 80% qualified majority and how he sees it working in the decision-making process.

I want to talk a wee bit about the subordinate legislation that is coming forward in relation to the Bill. Will the Minister expand on some of the subordinate legislation that we will need to bring forward, because, clearly, we are going through the process of bringing forward the Bill? Does he feel that the subordinate legislation needs to run in tandem with the Bill? Perhaps, he could touch on some of that.

I want to raise a couple of other points. I have general concerns about the transfer of functions, obviously. There has always been a concern within local councils about the costs and funding of that. Perhaps the Minister could touch on what other issues have come forward with regard to what is needed for the transfer of functions and how he believes he will see that being funded.

I am aware that some of my colleagues will pick up on some of the other principles in the Bill, but I have a final point. I want to talk about the transfer of assets and liabilities and what proposals are in place to ensure that we maximise the assets of the council areas for the benefit of the whole area.

Sin a bhfuil le rá agam. That is all that I have to say for now. I support the principles of the Bill, and I look forward to the scrutiny in Committee. Go raibh míle maith agat.

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

On behalf of the SDLP, I too welcome the Second Stage of the Local Government Bill and support it, in the main. However, there are a number of points on which I seek further information and on which I wish to make comment.

There are a few issues in relation to ending the dual mandate, and I think that that is important. There is, of course, an issue in which some Members are also members of the House of Lords, and the issue of whether that would bar an individual from being a councillor has not been referred to. The Minister might want to reflect on that.

It is an important Bill, and I think that we all know the importance of service delivery to the local ratepayer and the role that local councils have.

In his comments, Mr Boylan said that localism is the best. Given that, I have been somewhat puzzled when, in the past, Sinn Féin insisted on there being seven super councils and finally settled for 11, when other parties wanted to see a reduction to 15. However, we are used to having contradictory messages coming from Sinn Féin on the matter.

There are issues that I have been concerned about for a long time in relation to local councils, not least protection and safeguards for minority communities. I have also been concerned about the power and function of the local government auditor. Over many years, I know that the auditor has issued management letters to local councils, and, year on year, we see the same recommendations not being complied with by them. In other words, lack of regulation and authority has been given to the local government auditor in the past, and he or she has largely been ignored by local councils across a wide range of recommendations. I therefore seek further clarification on the suggested increase in powers and authority for the local government auditor and I will be scrutinising the Bill more closely when we see its progress through Committee.

It is also important that there is greater openness and transparency, and I welcome the Minister's commitment to put that into statute. In the past, the SDLP in some councils called for the press to be allowed to attend committee meetings, but that was voted down by our unionist colleagues in Craigavon. I can speak with some authority on that happening in the past. It is a sad reflection on the members of that time. I believe that ratepayers should have full access to information, and that it is provided to them, by those who are making decisions on their behalf. Therefore, I welcome the improvements in those matters that are promised in this Bill.

I welcome the suggestion of delegated authority. I am somewhat concerned, however, about the executive function. In my experience, some chief executives, though not all, tend to restrict information going to all members of councils and all elected representatives. I hope that those councils that choose to have the executive power and Cabinet-style control will share the widest possible range of information among all elected representatives. After all, they all have the same mandate.

I also welcome the greater ethical standards that are to be required of local councillors through the code of conduct. I note the appointment of a commissioner; it would be interesting to hear how that commissioner's office is going to be funded. It might be useful to require local elected representatives to have some mandatory training in line with the good relations commitments. It would be useful, in the interests of transparency, to require each elected representative to sign a register of interests rather than having a voluntary system. That helps with the wider public's perception that it is an open, transparent and accountable form of governance.

I want now to refer to a case in which I was involved in the past in Craigavon Borough Council. Mr Gardiner was also involved in it. The council's management was making certain decisions and was disbarring aggrieved employees of that council from seeking representation from their local representatives. We felt very strongly about that, particularly where there was a closed atmosphere of decision-making and some employees were adversely affected.

I can understand how, from a management point of view, employees cannot go running to public representatives at the drop of a hat on every issue, but nonetheless, I feel strongly that people who have genuine grievances should be able to have representation and to have their case heard. I know that there are instances currently in some councils across the North where employees have been very clearly told that they are not allowed to seek representation. Despite that, this Bill allows some employees to put themselves forward for election. There seems to be some level of disconnect between those two sorts of rulings, so I would be interested to hear the Minister's views on that particular scenario.

I welcome the qualified majority voting and the safeguards and protections. The SDLP has been exercised about that for quite some considerable time. I welcome the methodology and the powers that the Minister is introducing in the Bill.

I want now to refer to comments that have been made by other contributors about the experience thus far of the statutory transition committees. The previous Minister introduced guidance because there was a greater sense of partnership, power sharing and representation in the voluntary transition committees than is proving to be the case in the statutory transition committees. In Craigavon, Banbridge and Armagh councils, for example, the SDLP has only one representative on the statutory transition committees but had three on the voluntary transition committees. That does not send out the right message if all the parties in this Chamber are signing up to a better Northern Ireland with a shared future and partnership and power sharing. The STCs thus far do not exemplify the best of that ethos of partnership and power sharing.

I do not know whether the Minister has any power to redress some of the imbalances that were highlighted by Ms Lo and Ms McCann in their contributions.

I take with a pinch of salt the Alliance Party decrying d'Hondt when it has served it more than well. It was not too worried about d'Hondt when it came to the selection of Ministers to sit around the Executive table. Our party lost out on an additional Minister, and the Ulster Unionists lost out. So, I take with a pinch of salt some of those comments from the Alliance Party.

I welcome the community planning aspect of the Bill, though it is something that we require further information about. Community planning offers real and exciting opportunities for local people and for local partnerships to work and deliver in the best interests of the citizens they serve. Like Mr Boylan, I have some concerns that although it might start out with the right people around the table — the decision-makers — as we saw in the past, with the peace and reconciliation partnerships and the community safety partnerships, what happens is that the other agencies quite often send staff who are not the decision-makers, which dilutes the power and authority of a partnership.

Neighbourhood renewal in my area is something that I am concerned about. Some community organisations are represented around the table and others are not. Neighbourhood renewal is one partnership that needs to be examined, but I recognise that that falls under the Social Development Minister's functions. There have been some good practices in neighbourhood renewal, but we need the right people around the table, and they are the decision-makers. If people are signing up for community planning, that ought to be the case.

I also welcome the general power of competence. It is right and proper that local authorities can mix and take what some might refer to as brave decisions in the best interests of the people. If we do not take a risk sometimes, we fail our people. We have to weigh up that decision. It is also about people being confident in their professional judgement and in their ability to deliver. The power of general competence is something that all parties have largely welcomed.

I congratulate the Minister on trying to promote the idea of greater flexibilities in councils in some of their decision-making processes and the relationship between Departments, Ministers and councils, which is important to get right. We need a lot of clarification, and some Ministers have rolled back on some of the previous commitments on the powers and functions to be transferred. This whole reform process was about strengthening the power and function of local councils and, regrettably, some Ministers have rolled back on some of their commitments.

The expenditure of existing councils is a matter of concern for many existing councils, local businesses and ratepayers. That the oversight of expenditure power can fall to the new shadow councils is to be welcomed. There is evidence to suggest that some local councils are disposing of some of their income to make the decisions. I can understand why some of that happens, particularly if a council looks over the road and sees another council that is engaged in high spending, has little in reserve and is going to ask the ratepayer in the new district to pick up the tab. So, we need to settle people's anxieties around all that. This is one method that will hopefully resolve some of the difficulties that some are experiencing.

The Deputy Chair of the Environment Committee made an important contribution on the ICE programme and its voluntary nature. There have been far too many individual fiefdoms created amongst some but not all officers in local councils. They have been reticent in picking up the challenge and the opportunity that the ICE programme offered. If there is a way to force their hands, so that they go much faster and further than has been the experience to date, that ought to be welcomed. However, the message from the House to individuals who are blocking progress on these matters should be that political parties will be watching very closely when they fail to pick up those opportunities, and I am sure that they will not forget those contributions.

It is important that the majority of front line service deliverers know that their terms of employment will be honoured. There is a lot of low morale and concern, particularly among staff who are employed in middle management and on the front line. They are valued workers and have been valued workers for many years. Indeed, they have been valued workers over many difficult years, and some had to go out to areas and provide a service through the worst of times. I think that it is right and proper that their contribution to public service is recognised and that their concerns and worries about their jobs are allayed. I believe that the Bill will do that for the vast majority of staff.

Finally, on behalf of the SDLP, I welcome the Bill and look forward to its progress through Committee.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

At the outset, I would say that there are aspects of the Bill that I obviously agree with. However, there are others that I and, I am sure, most other people do not agree with. One of the difficulties is that elements of the Bill will be hugely difficult to implement and control.

Also at the outset, I want to say that local government needs the recognition it deserves. For many years throughout the Troubles, it was the only form of government in Northern Ireland — the Assembly and Parliament Buildings did not operate, we did not have a Government and there was nothing between the local councils and Westminster. I think that it needs that recognition and credit. That is particularly the case for many people who served through those very difficult times. Indeed, some of them gave their lives for it. I do not just mean that they gave all their work commitment to it; they gave their lives. A number of people were murdered, and I think that that needs to go on record.

Today, we are talking about the principle of the Bill and taking it forward to its next stages. First, I want to deal with the bar on existing Members of Parliament, Members of the European Parliament and Members of the Assembly from standing as councillors, or rather, I should say, from serving as councillors. That provision is contained in schedule 1. I put on record our support for that principle, and parties should have been big enough to have accepted that some time ago and should have carried it out voluntarily instead of requiring legislation. However, that is where we are at the moment.

When the Minister gets to his feet, I would like him to clarify the timing of the Bill. My understanding is that the Bill is not required to be in law before next year's proposed local government elections on 22 May. That being the case, if it is not in law at that stage, I assume that that provision will not apply, and MLAs, Members of Parliament and Members of the European Parliament will be permitted to contest that election and serve as councillors until the legislation comes into being. I ask him for some clarification on that.

Part 5 of the Bill is on permitted forms of governance. Again, I would like clarification on that. Different governance arrangements are set out in that part of the Bill. One of those is the committee structure, which, as the Minister indicated, most councils utilise at the moment. However, the executive structure is also mentioned, and I would be grateful if the Minister would go into a little more detail on that. I know that there is a section on that. However, I would like him to explain how he sees that operating and working in different councils and which councils would operate it. Would it be the bigger ones? Would it be better for the larger councils, such as Belfast or the causeway grouping, or would it be better for the smaller council groups? I note that the chair and vice chair of councils would not be permitted to sit on that executive committee. That is like saying that we have the Executive Committee of the Assembly, and we would not have the First Minister and the deputy First Minister on that Executive Committee. Some people might say that it would work much better. I do not know. However, some people might take that view, although I am not for one minute suggesting that. I am only asking whether that is how it would work — that the two main people on the council would not be permitted to sit on the executive committee.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I thank the Member for giving way. There are two points to that, and it might truncate what the Minister has to say later. With regard to the formation of an executive, if there were an executive, I suspect that it would be more like the model used in England, for example. I suspect that relatively few, if any, of the councils would embrace a full executive model, certainly at the start. However, there would be an opportunity for any council to set the parameters with regard to who would sit on that, and that could involve a mayor or a deputy mayor. The distinction to be drawn, and where the differences tend to be between what happens in England and an executive situation here, is that the mayor and deputy mayor become ceremonial positions and the political leadership of the council form the executive. I think that that is what is intended to be the case here. That is where the circle could be squared. However, there would not be any bar on a mayor or deputy mayor sitting on an executive, if that route were chosen. That is where the distinction lies.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank Mr Weir for that. When we do not have the civil servants on the Floor of the House to explain something, we can always be sure that Mr Weir will give us a reasonable Civil Service explanation of those points. We appreciate the expertise that he brings to the House. I accept what he said, and I know that he has put that point over before. However, the legislation clearly says that the chairs and vice chairs would not be part of the executive. I am wondering whether there are certain aspects of each council that could be run by the executive, and other aspects by committees and the full council.

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

I thank the Member for giving way. A further concern that was raised with me recently involved the Minister's council area of Derry, where the chief executive believes that she has to deal only with party leaders. The message has to go from this House and from the parties on council that the chief executives report to all members of council. Does the Member agree with that?

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I certainly do agree. I am surprised to hear that the chief executive or any council official would suggest that they have to deal only with party leaders or group leaders on council. Every councillor should get the recognition that they deserve; every councillor is elected to their position and should be given that recognition by the officials. Again, I am throwing out some of the queries that the Minister might pick up, or we might pick up at a later stage.

I move on to clauses 44 and 45, which deal with the qualified majority and the power to require decisions to be reconsidered. Clause 44 states:

"Standing orders must specify decisions which are to be taken by a qualified majority."

Will direction be given in subordinate legislation, or will it just be guidance as to what those decisions will be, or is it entirely up to the councils to take that decision? At the Committee last week, officials indicated that we would have sight of all the draft secondary and subordinate legislation before we get through the final stages of the Bill and that we would also see all the guidance that will come forward. If we got that, I would welcome it, as it would be extremely helpful to the Committee and to the entire House. However, there is a question around how the decision will be reached where that 80% qualified majority is needed. If it is left to councils alone, those decisions will be made only on the basis of what the majority of councillors decide. They could decide not to bring in some of those aspects under the qualified majority. That is why I am keen to hear the outworkings of that. The legislation also states that the regulations may amend those percentages, so we might not end up with 80%. We might end up with 60% or 70%, so, again, the regulations will be vital. Why would that change from 80%?

With regard to the powers that require decisions to be reconsidered — or, as I call it, the call-in of 15% of members of the council — the Bill states that a barrister or solicitor would be consulted. What direction would be given by the Department or the councils to a barrister or solicitor for that legal opinion? Where would the direction, guidance and legislation come from that he or she would be required to look at? Will it be only section 75 equality issues or will it be much broader? There are so many unanswered issues in the legislation. It is a large Bill with a lot of information so it throws up far more questions than answers.

In Part 9, which relates to the conduct of councillors, clause 56(3), for example, states that the principles "may be", and clause 56(4) states that the code of conduct "may include". Again, it is very woolly. As other Members said, there have already been issues around the appointment of statutory transition committees. I also see specific issues with the appointment of selection panels for the new chief executives. That is a major hurdle for you, Minister, and members of councils in the not-too-distant future. Positions will be divvied up and carved up between certain parties so that they have huge numbers or a vast majority on one side or the other. It is unfortunate that we have that carve-up at the moment.

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

I appreciate the Member giving way. We heard contributions about Lisburn and Belfast and the representation on that statutory transition committee. Would the Member be surprised to learn that in the new council of Derry and Strabane, Sinn Féin opted to take the chair and vice-chair of the statutory transition committee? That also breaches the spirit of voluntary power sharing.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Sinn Féin opted to do that in not only the Londonderry/Strabane statutory transition committee. I understand that Sinn Féin opted to do that in other areas and, indeed, has taken the chair and vice-chair of the Fermanagh/Omagh statutory transition committee, so, again, there is a lack of a reasonable sharing out of power and positions. I note in the code of conduct that it is up to the Department to issue guidance on that rather than the councils themselves. It will be interesting to see what guidance it comes up with and what will be in the legislation that they are required to adhere to.

In Part 11, clause 82 relates to a council’s general power of competence. I heard a ringing endorsement of that from some Members. I have to tell you, friends, that I am afraid that it is not coming from this side because I do not believe that that is a good part of the Bill. It will be open to huge levels of gerrymandering and a lot of people putting their own perspective on it. You have only to read the first line of clause 82:

"A council has power to do anything that individuals generally may do."

That will be open to huge abuse from those who have the majority on a council. At some stage, they will say that something does not require a call-in or a qualified majority. That aspect needs quite a lot of scrutiny. It needs to be amended. Actually, it needs to be withdrawn. I am concerned that it will be open to significant abuse. I heard the Minister say that it will give greater flexibility; I accept that point, but, with that, comes a balance. You can give too much flexibility, and you can give too much power, which is then abused. Dear help us — over recent weeks and months, have we not been very aware of the abuse of such powers?

Part 16 deals with transitional rate relief. I welcome the provision for rate relief, but I do not believe that it will mitigate totally the overall financial shortfall from council reorganisation. Previously, Members have heard me mention the PwC figure of £118 million. On several occasions since, I have asked whether there was any update on that figure. No one has been able to give me any update at all, nor have I been told whether the money could have been saved in a different 15-, 18- or 26-council model. Nobody has come up with a satisfactory resolution.

Members need to hear about some of the difficulties with rate convergence. How far the Bill can go with transitional rate relief will, obviously, be dictated by the amount of finance that the Minister can direct to it. I know that the Minister of Finance recently said that £30 million might be available, and I have to say that that is very welcome. However, look at Fermanagh and Omagh: in Omagh, local council rates — I am talking strictly about local council rates — are 50% higher than Fermanagh for domestic rates and 28% higher for non-domestic. The convergence of those rates will mean a huge imbalance for Fermanagh people compared with those in Omagh. We need to ensure a satisfactory resolution to that.

That brings me on to the other aspect. I talked to the previous Minister about it several times, and I am sure that I will have the same conversation with the current Minister. It is about the transfer of functions, the finance that follows that, how that finance will be derived and how to ensure that councils are not short-changed. Ratepayers could start to pay for functions that have come back to local councils without being followed by any central funding, so we need to be absolutely sure that the finance will follow from central government.

I suppose that many will be concerned and disappointed at the number of functions and powers that will be devolved to local councils, with planning, obviously, being the main one. How planning will be delivered by local government also presents a challenge.

I have already had a discussion with the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment about trying to devolve some finances to local government for tourism marketing in particular. Local councils and tourism marketing authorities could do a much better job of using that spend to market their area than NITB can do regionally.

A huge number of questions are unanswered, and I look forward to further debate.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Thank you, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. It may well be that even I will finish my comments before that. We will have to wait and see.

First, I welcome the fact that we are at the stage that we are with what is deemed to be very hefty legislation. It seems a long time since we started this journey. I know that there has been an attempt to blame one person after another, but I am not going to go down that road today, because it has been well covered. Some blame the Executive, some blame past Ministers, some blame present Ministers, and, I suspect, some will blame future Ministers. However, as the saying goes, we are where we are.

At the outset, I make it clear that I am a member of a council, namely Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council. One of the many good things that can be said about that council is that it seems to be able to achieve what no other council is capable of achieving, which is not increasing rates in four years. I ask all those who are members of councils to take note of that. It seems that every council automatically increases its rates every year, year on year, and some use a clever tactic of not increasing the rates in the year of an election, which, to me, is a wee bit deceptive. So, we do not do rate increases in Dungannon, and, if you want to know how that works, speak to me privately after the debate, and I will go through the whole thing with you.

As I said, the Bill is hefty legislation, and I look forward to when it comes to the Environment Committee, of which I am a member. It is in that Committee that the real scrutiny will take place.

It is proper and right — Tom Elliott touched on this — that we pay tribute today to councils and local government, because, during the worst of the Troubles in the history of this Province, it was local government that had to stand tall and it was councillors who had to put their head above the parapet when it was unpopular and, at times, extremely dangerous to do so. However, there were those in our society who felt that they had something to offer their community, so they put their name forward and stood for election. As a member of Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council since autumn 1973, I know the difficulties that that entailed and brought to many families. As Mr Elliott has said, some even paid the ultimate sacrifice when their life was taken. That was scandalous: when democracy is attacked, everybody in society and in our communities is attacked. We are moving on, so, hopefully, we have seen the worst of it and will not go back to those days. The Bill and the reform of local government are an attempt to take society to a new place and to move forward.

I will not go through the Bill clause by clause today — the Minister gave a good overview of it — because, as I said, the real work will start when it comes to the Committee. I suspect that we will take our time there. I have concerns, however, about the timing of the whole operation. I am concerned that we will not be in a position to have the Bill in statute by the time that the reform of local government is scheduled to be complete. I am sure that the Committee Chair will give due diligence to that, because we as a Committee have some responsibility to ensure that the Bill is treated in a way that means that it can go through as quickly as possible but not, I add, in haste. That would be the wrong way to go. We would be better to go slow and get it right than to go quickly and get it wrong, because there are big issues at stake for the future of local government.

There are a number of issues, and Dolores Kelly touched on one that I, too, have some real concerns about. That issue is the powers of the auditor. We will want to look very closely at that when the Bill comes to the Committee, as it is of paramount importance, particularly when we bear it in mind that we will go into a different scenario altogether from that whence we have come. The auditor's powers should be very powerful, because there could be issues that would leave councillors or chief executives vulnerable. Our chief executives will have a big task here. They are responsible people who bring professional action to their post, but they will also welcome the auditor having strong powers.

I have a concern about the present debt in local government. That has been touched on by some Members. If my figures and memory are right, the present debt of local government runs at somewhere in the region of half a billion pounds. When I look at the debt in the new mid-Ulster councils of Cookstown, Magherafelt and Dungannon, I discover that it is minimal. For instance, one council shows no debt, and two of the other councils show very little debt. Those three councils attribute, I think, about 1·3% or 1·4% of the total debt in local government. When I look across the spectrum of local government, I see that other councils have considerable debt, but, by the same token, it is a valid point when they say, "We have considerable assets to set beside that debt". I want to see if, in fact, the two do sit beside each other and how one council's debt sits in relation to its assets and how that will all work out. Furthermore, I want the Minister to tell us today whether there is a statutory obligation on a council to have a certain amount of reserves. I have heard both arguments. I have heard it said that there are guidelines to say that you should have certain reserves but no statutory obligation to have x pounds in your reserves. Some councils work consciously on that and are particular about having reserves. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with what other councils do, but I would like to see the logic behind it when they say, "No, we do not have any reserves or a statutory obligation to have any and, therefore, we will carry on merrily". I have concerns about that, and I want the Minister to tell us, either today or on another date, the legal position on that.

I also find it slightly contradictory that the Minister has told us today that council employees will now be able to stand for election. This is not a straightforward one, no matter what way you look at it. I listened carefully when he said why that was the case. In the very next breath, he spoke about those who are MPs and MLAs. I want to make it clear that I am not speaking from a selfish point of view; it is no secret that my days on Dungannon council are in the yellow leaf, and, therefore, it will not apply to me. However, I fail to understand how you can say that it is all about equality and we must give equality, when someone who is an MLA or MP might feel that there is not much equality for them. I am not trying to put up the argument for it; I am simply trying to put forward the equality issue that we seem to always want to concentrate on when we legislate, understandably so. Those are some of the issues that I want the Minister to tackle and give more clarity on.

I also have concerns about the community involvement provided for in clause 76. There is now a tendency in society as a whole and when we legislate that we sometimes run the risk of bypassing those who are elected and go for strong community involvement. I am not opposed to a strong community, but the best representatives of a community are those elected by the community. There seems to be an attempt to say, "Well, we have the elected representatives sitting there, but we will have another tier who will be as much consulted or have the same degree of influence". That needs to be carefully looked at.

I also think that other parts of the Bill will take quite a bit of scrutiny. Clause 45 relates to the power to require decisions to be reconsidered. I am not sure that it comes out clearly here how that will go forward. The clause states:

"Standing orders must make provision requiring reconsideration of a decision if 15 per cent. of the members of the council (rounded up to the next highest whole number if necessary) present to the clerk of the council a requisition on either or both of the following grounds".

The "following grounds" are not clear to me. The clause states:

"(a) that the decision was not arrived at after a proper consideration of the relevant facts and issues;"

and:

"(b) that the decision would disproportionately affect adversely any section of the inhabitants of the district."

It goes on to state that the clerk of the council shall or may — I am not sure which it says — consult a lawyer.

I mean no disrespect — we have plenty of lawyers in this place and very able ones too — but, at the end of the day, a lawyer's view is but one man's opinion. You could go to another eminent and skilled lawyer and he would give you a totally different point of view. This has to be a bit clearer as to what exactly this is and what we are trying to say here. I believe that it is not clear and is open to interpretation. However, I suspect that most legislation is open to interpretation.

Part 8 makes provision for access to meetings and documents. Clause 46 states:

"A meeting of a council must be open to the public except to the extent that they are excluded".

Now, that is clear to a layman, but it continues:

"(whether during the whole or part of the proceedings) under subsection (2) or by resolution under subsection (4)."

It then goes on to give the reason why it would be like that. Those of us who serve on a council often know the reasons that will be given. It may be that there are some sensitivities around a business transaction, which sounds fair enough. Sometimes, councillors are a wee bit sceptical; I would not be among the sceptics. They feel that that is abused and that it is a euphemism for saying, "No, you can't have the answer because it doesn't suit". Therefore, there has to be real clarity around that, and I hope that the Minister will perhaps also take on board and deal with that issue when he sums up today or in Committee, where I suspect that he will be with us at some stage. Clause 128 —

The debate stood suspended.

The sitting was suspended at 12.34 pm.

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

Oral Answers to Questions

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

1. asked the Minister for Social Development to detail what discussions he had with John McPeake before, during and after his resignation from the post of chief executive in the Housing Executive. (AQT 141/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I have had no discussions with Mr McPeake on that matter. Mr McPeake is employed by the Housing Executive and, as the Member is well aware, the Housing Executive has its own board, its own chairman and its own chief executive. Therefore, his resignation was tendered to his employer, the Housing Executive. I was made aware of the fact that he was resigning, and the matter rests there. The chairman indicated to me that Mr McPeake will probably step down at the end of the financial year or, possibly, at the end of the calendar year. That matter is somewhat unclear.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

Will the Minister detail whether his much-vaunted overspend figure of £18 million, which now looks decidedly inaccurate and for which this House and the companies concerned might eventually be owed an apology, played any role in any discussions that he had or that others may have had on his behalf with Mr McPeake prior to his resignation?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I find the supplementary question somewhat surprising in so far as I said that there were no discussions with Mr McPeake. Therefore, the supplementary is somewhat irrelevant.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

2. asked the Minister for Social Development to outline the help-to-buy scheme, which the Prime Minister announced at the weekend, to state whether he believes it will work and whether it will be available in Northern Ireland. (AQT 142/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Next week, the help-to-buy mortgage guarantee scheme, originally announced by the Chancellor in Budget 2013, will be open to applications. That scheme will operate right across the United Kingdom and will see the Government and lenders guaranteeing up to 15% of a property's value. It will allow potential buyers to purchase a home with a 5% deposit, with the balance covered by a mortgage.

Several high street banks will be offering the new help-to-buy mortgages to customers. So far, RBS and Lloyds have confirmed that they will participate. The mortgages will range from 80% to 95% of the property's value and will be on a repayment basis. Borrowers will be subject to the usual affordability and income-verification checks normally conducted by lenders to ensure that they can afford the mortgage that they are applying for.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

A number of commentators suggested that the scheme could lead to a house price bubble. How will the Government ensure that that does not happen?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Some of those concerns have been more directed towards the situation in the London area and the south-east of England as opposed to the north of England or Northern Ireland. Every September, the Government and the Bank of England's financial policy committee will be reviewing the impact of the scheme and examining whether the fees or the price cap should be adjusted. So, at the United Kingdom level, there will be that safeguard to ensure that you do not get a house price bubble. In the Northern Ireland situation, it would be very unlikely anyway.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

3. asked the Minister for Social Development for his assessment of the recent visit by the UN special rapporteur Ms Rolnik. (AQT 143/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The visit by the UN special rapporteur to the United Kingdom as a whole generated a large amount of newspaper coverage, a large portion of which was extremely uncomplimentary about Ms Rolnik. I think it was the 'Daily Express' that described her as the "Brazil nut". Other newspapers followed a similar line. Her Marxist pedigree seemed to have influenced some of her comments.

A lot of detailed comment was made after her visit to Northern Ireland, but on the basis of a very short visit, and having seen her preliminary comments — her final report will not appear until March 2014 — some of her views seem extremely ill-informed. I think that someone from a country where there are tens of millions of people living in shanty towns is in a poor position to comment on the housing situation here in Northern Ireland. She might have been better spending some time sorting problems out in Brazil, where tens of millions of people live in appalling conditions.

Brenda Hale (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his answer. Will he confirm that Ms Rolnik's programme was organised in collaboration with the Participation and the Practice of Rights group (PPR) and that she only visited social housing on one side of the community?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for her supplementary question as it raises a significant issue. The Participation and the Practice of Rights project, which is a lobby organisation, seems to have had a key role in organising her visit. It was noticeable that, in the one day that she spent here, she spent longer with that group than she did with officials in the Department for Social Development or the Housing Executive. It was also significant that, during that visit, she spent two and a half hours in the afternoon touring the New Lodge, Seven Towers and Sailortown areas. She was here to look at the whole of Northern Ireland, yet she devoted two and a half hours to one specific area.

I was also interested to note, when I spoke to community organisations in adjacent unionist communities, that none of them had been informed by PPR about the visit, they had not been invited to any of the meetings and she was not invited to their communities. I think the fact that PPR excluded unionist communities and only took her to a nationalist community says a lot about that group and its operation. If we are dealing with housing issues, we need to deal with the whole community: unionist, nationalist and other. Everybody deserves a fair deal, although not in the eyes of some people. People are dealing in human rights issues, yet I thought that one human rights issue was the right to equality of treatment. That certainly does not seem to be the case in this instance.

Megan Fearon (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

4. asked the Minister for Social Development, given his comments about the help-to-buy scheme and the potential for a second housing bubble, whether he plans to increase the number of social housing units to meet the demand. (AQT 144/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Member raises the question of increasing the amount of social housing, which is a matter that is very near to my heart. It is something that I have put a lot of effort into, but the problem that we face is that the people who are meant to be delivering social housing in Northern Ireland, the housing associations, have not really stepped up to the mark. I dealt with this in the Chamber recently; we have around 30 housing associations in Northern Ireland, and only around half a dozen of them are really building. Some, in fact many of them, do not build at all. A small number are building, and an even smaller number do the overwhelming majority of the newbuild. We need a situation where housing associations are stepping up to the mark.

I think that they have a lot to learn from some of the housing associations in Great Britain that are much more creative, imaginative and innovative. If that were the case with housing associations here, I think that we would be in a much better position to deliver social housing. It has been disappointing to me, and I will meet housing associations again in the not-too-distant future to press them on this. I have met them and I have met the Housing Executive and pressed them on this issue in the past. The housing associations and the Housing Executive need to deliver more if we are to achieve the sort of targets that the Member and I would want to see delivered.

It is a sad situation when there is money there to be spent, but you are not able to spend it. In fact, quite often, there is a rush to buy off the shelf to make up numbers at the end of the year. That is not a god way of doing things. It is not a planned way, and it is not the proper way to do it. It is the best way in the circumstances, but the problem needs to be tackled at its heart: we need to get the housing associations building.

Megan Fearon (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Given what he has just said and with a waiting list of approximately 40,000 people, does he think that enough social housing is being built? What key actions can we take forward to see results quickly?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

In a sense, the answer that I gave to the first question has dealt with part of the second. There are 40,000 people on the waiting list, but I could own a house in Cultra worth £1 million and still be on the waiting list.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

You wish.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Yes, I do wish. [Laughter.] There is not much chance of it.

A person could be the owner of a house worth £1 million or whatever in Cultra and could still put themselves down on the waiting list. Anybody can put themselves down. You could be on the waiting list with no points, but you are still on the waiting list. You are actually dealing with a smaller number than the number that has been mentioned when it comes to real need. That is why we deal with the issue of stress and people who are over 30 points, rather than people who are possibly sitting there with no points or are already homeowners. A person can be a homeowner in any situation and still put themselves onto the waiting list, so the figures that are often quoted can be somewhat misleading.

The real challenge is that we get a situation where housing associations are facing up to the challenge and really delivering. We have a higher level of housing association grant in Northern Ireland than in GB. Housing associations here are in a privileged position because of that, so we really need to see more delivery. I had a very useful visit across to Liverpool and Manchester not so long ago to see some of the work being done by housing associations there in not just their newbuilds but some of their other initiatives, which were very imaginative. I would like to see more of that here.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

5. asked the Minister for Social Development, as the Minister responsible for delivering 10 shared neighbourhood projects as part of the OFMDFM Together: Building a United Community strategy, to update the House on what neighbourhoods have been identified, where those neighbourhoods are and a timescale for their delivery. (AQT 145/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The issue of shared communities is one that members of the Alliance Party often seek to raise.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

We certainly do.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Absolutely.

I make this point often when the issue is raised: segregation is not limited to social housing. There is as much segregation in private sector housing as there is in many areas of social housing. Secondly, social housing integration can take place only where there is a desire and willingness to do it. In many places, that is not the case. For example, if I come through the Westlink, I see a block of flats with the names of hunger strikers on it and one with tricolours on the top of it. I do not think that people from the unionist community are going to feel very comfortable there. Quite clearly, certain communities have made a choice. The aim is to have more shared communities developed and supported during the next number of years, and that is being taken forward. However, it has been a challenge to fill up Springfarm in Antrim, for example, which was brought forward as a shared scheme. I am not absolutely sure that there is the huge appetite that is sometimes put forward for other schemes.

I am happy to come back to the Member with more details on where we are. I can give him details of 11 shared newbuild schemes. I am happy to come back to him with more details, but I am not as —

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

Minister, you are well over your time.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

— confident that it will necessarily be delivered sometimes —

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

I am afraid, Mr Lyttle, that it will have to be a very quick supplementary.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

The Minister says that he is not sure that there is appetite for shared neighbourhoods. He seems to disagree with the First Minister and deputy First Minister, given that their strategy sets out the need for 10 new shared neighbourhoods. I would be grateful for the information on where they have been identified. What does the Minister think is a key feature of a shared neighbourhood scheme?

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

Very quickly, Minister.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

One of the key things might be actually getting people from both communities to buy into it.

I point out the example of Springfarm to the Member. Invitations were sent out across the Province, and it was a very slow process to get people to buy into it. I am aware of some small schemes that have worked, but they were specialised and in particular locations. It is right that we should be aspirational, which is the First Minister and deputy First Minister's point. We should be aspirational, but the reality also needs to be kept in mind. I remind the Member again —

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

Minister, your time is well up.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

We see problems with segregation in private sector housing, so we should not be surprised that it also happens in social housing.

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

That ends the period for topical questions. We now move on to questions for oral answer that have been listed for the Minister. Question 4 has been withdrawn.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

1. asked the Minister for Social Development to detail the timeline for the Bangor and Holywood public realm works. (AQO 4675/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Over the past 18 months, my Department has been working with representatives from North Down Borough Council, town centre management and the local community to develop a major public realm scheme for Bangor and Holywood. Those works will address all aspects of street design, including paving, kerbstones, street furniture, lighting and planting. The total value of the works is estimated to be £10 million, with my Department investing £4 million and the council investing £6 million. The design work for each town was completed with the help of many different stakeholders, and the schemes will build on the individuality and unique attributes of each town. A contractor is due to be appointed in December 2013, and construction work in both towns will commence in late March or early April 2014. The Bangor scheme will take two years to complete, and the Holywood scheme will take 12 months. Throughout the construction phase, my Department will continue to work with local representatives and the wider community to keep them fully informed about the programme of works.

Steven Agnew (Green, North Down)

I thank the Minister for the information. Are he and his Department aware of the alternative plans that have been proposed by local architect Iain Halliday for Bangor town centre? If so, what consideration has been given to those plans?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I am aware that an alternative proposal was put forward. In fact, that proposal was considered at an earlier stage, but it would have meant removing vehicle traffic from Main Street in Bangor. That was recognised as being inappropriate. I read the architect's article in the 'County Down Spectator', and, as I said, the project board considered his proposal. However, it was discounted because the removal of vehicle traffic from Main Street would have had a dramatically adverse impact on traffic flows. That is an important issue that I am sure local traders and residents will be concerned about.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

Will the same standard of materials and designs be used for the proposed Queen's Parade scheme that the Department is taking forward?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for the question. Yes; my Department will ensure that the specification for the Queen's Parade scheme ties in with the public realm works in Bangor. The Queen's Parade scheme represents a tremendous opportunity for Bangor. We are driving it forward as a scheme, and the two need to mesh so that Bangor gets the best outcome.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for outlining the timeline and costs. Will he advise when details about the scheme will be available — for example, the types of trees, the pavements, the decorations, the lights and all that infrastructure?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Let me run over the timeline that I gave in response to the question. I said that the contractor is due to be appointed in December 2013. Construction work starts in late March or early April 2014. I confirmed that there has been contact with local representatives and the wider public to keep them fully informed about the scheme. That will continue, so the fine detail about trees or what types of flower will be in a flower bed will be discussed at a local level. I am sure that the Member will be part of the wider consultation with those who are designing the scheme and taking it forward. I assume that the Member has already had some input and discussion with them, and I encourage him to continue that, because those things can naturally evolve even as the scheme is being taken forward.

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

I remind Members who wish to be called for a supplementary that they must continue rising in their place.

I call Mr Trevor Lunn. Sorry, Mr Trevor Lunn is not in his place. I call Mr Ian McCrea. Mr Ian McCrea is not in his place. Question 4 was withdrawn. I call Ms Bronwyn McGahan, who is in her place.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister for Social Development whether he will encourage business people to convert the empty parts of their properties into living accommodation in towns and cities. (AQO 4679/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for the question. In 2012, I commissioned a high street task force to review the support provided by my Department to town and city centres to see whether that could be further strengthened. The task force report was published in February 2013 and contained seven recommendations for my Department.

The report commended the Living over the Shop (LOTS) scheme as an example of a programme that should, through my Department, be extended, with a focus on regeneration-led town centre living to bring after-hours vitality to the high street. My Department’s new urban regeneration and community development policy framework establishes town and city centre regeneration as a policy priority, and the housing strategy sets out my intention to revitalise the Living over the Shops initiative and ensure synergy with our mainstream urban regeneration initiatives.

Housing can play an important role in helping to diversify and re-energise our town and city centres. The development of a regeneration-led approach will help to bring people back to town centre living and could have an added-value dimension by bringing vitality to Northern Ireland’s high streets after normal trading hours to help to promote the evening economy. It was called the LOTS scheme, but I think that we will be looking for an alternative name, because we want a scheme that is broader than simply living over the shops.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for his response. Has he considered the impact on commercial businesses when part of a business area is turned into a housing area?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I would be interested to know what concerns the Member has in that regard. The Member has not raised them with me in the past, but I would be happy to hear them. Across the British Isles, there are many town centres in which commercial and residential accommodation fit together. It depends very much on the nature and style of the accommodation. I remember the difficulties in Belfast some years ago when there was a block of apartments above a hot food takeaway, which tended to attract people from a bar nearby in the early hours of the morning. The conflict there was between residents and the noise and disruption associated with the business. It is dependent on the type and the place, and that is why we have planning laws — to make sure that we get the right result, hopefully.

Sydney Anderson (DUP, Upper Bann)

What grants are available to target derelict or vacant town centre properties to help to bring them back into productive use, or to enhance the commercial viability of existing properties?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for the question. The reference is to the urban development grant (UDG) scheme, which was developed to encourage private sector investment in towns and cities by offering financial assistance to bring into use vacant sites or buildings that were derelict or underused. UDG assistance can be up to 35% of grant-eligible costs for owner-occupier schemes, or up to 35% of total development costs for investment schemes. The applicant provides the remainder of the capital through private funds or bank loans. The regional development office has offered grant assistance on a number of UDG applications that included the creation of new accommodation in town centres.

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

I welcome the Minister's intent to improve upon the Living over the Shop initiative. If he has not already done so, will the Minister give a commitment to write to the Minister of Finance about the possibility of zero VAT or VAT refunds for those who renovate properties, particularly in town centres, so that that is made a more attractive proposition?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I have no doubt that the Finance Minister reads every last word of questions for oral answer every day. I am sure that he will take up the Member's point and that he will listen to it and give it consideration. I am also sure that he will be aware that she raised that point today.

Stewart Dickson (Alliance, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Many properties above shops do not have separate entrances at street level. I am thinking of two areas in my constituency — Main Street in Larne, and High Street and West Street in Carrickfergus. Does the grant scheme extend to providing for that?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I said in an earlier answer that we are looking to develop a new scheme. If individual Members have issues that they want to raise, we would welcome those suggestions. I appreciate the Member's point. Quite often, shops that previously had a side entrance to upstairs have, over the years, removed that to extend the shop frontage. You can see examples of that in Royal Avenue in Belfast, where maybe six storeys above shops are virtually inaccessible other than from the rear. The right outcome depends on the location, but I welcome that the Member is generally supportive of the initiative. I will certainly take an interest in his point.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

6. asked the Minister for Social Development, given that contractors identified in connection with the alleged £18m overpayment on planned maintenance have been barred from receiving any new contracts, what action was taken in respect of the successive directors of design and property services who oversaw Northern Ireland Housing Executive contracts during the relevant time. (AQO 4680/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. As I previously advised the House, the Housing Executive has appointed an external consultant to independently review the alleged overpayments. The Housing Executive is still awaiting their report. The chairman of the Housing Executive stated in June that the investigation would specifically review how the situation arose, the reliability of the information on overcharging and the actions that were taken to recover the overpayments. Since the report was commissioned not by me or my Department but by the board of the Housing Executive, I will, of course, expect to be briefed on the Housing Executive's findings in due course. The Housing Executive has advised that it is continuing to work with the contractors to reach an agreement on the quantum of any overpayment. When that work is complete, the Housing Executive will consider what further actions, if any, are required.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

I direct the Minister back to the question, which was: given that four contractors have been blocked from further contracts as a consequence of the alleged £18 million saga, what action was taken in respect of the Housing Executive directors who oversaw that alleged situation? How is it that one of the primary directors in charge went on, in fact, to become chief executive? The Minister, in collaboration with the chairman of the Housing Executive, was able to secure a blockage on the four contractors getting further work. In collaboration with the Housing Executive —

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

Order.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

— did he take any steps to penalise the directors who were in charge?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I want to correct the Member. I did not stop contracts being taken forward. The Member is well aware that this is entirely a matter for the Housing Executive. So, I welcome the opportunity to correct Mr Allister and to set the record straight. I hope that he is now better informed about the situation.

As regards the people who are involved in this problem, whether on the contractor side or the Housing Executive side, the Member is aware — because I have just said it — that a report has been commissioned by the Housing Executive, and it is looking into the matter. The chairman of the Housing Executive took that matter forward, and the report will be with us fairly soon, or rather, it will be with the Housing Executive fairly soon. My expectation is that it will be with the chair of the Housing Executive within the next number of days. When the Housing Executive has had the opportunity to review that, it will take whatever action it thinks, as a board, is appropriate in due course. It is important that we distinguish between the role of the Department and the role of the Housing Executive; so, I truly welcome the opportunity to set the record straight and to correct the Member.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

Given the fact that a number of companies are disbarred from applying for contracts due to overcharging or overspending, depending on how you look at it, and should the scale of the alleged activities prove to be less than previously anticipated, does the Minister accept that there is a likelihood, at some stage, that companies who found themselves disbarred on that basis will feel slightly unjustly treated and seek recourse in law, and challenge contracts that might be issued during the period of their disbarment? Does he feel that there are any necessary contingencies in the Executive or the Department to deal with that?

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

Order, please. I remind all Members that supplementary questions have to be brief and have to relate to the original question.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I think that it is important to repeat again that the Housing Executive commissioned external consultants — Campbell Tickell — to produce a report and take forward that piece of work. In advance of the receipt and examination of that report, it is premature for anyone to set out all sorts of potential eventualities. It was stated at the time that the initial figure produced and given out publicly by the chair of the Housing Executive, and which I then reported to the House, was estimated, by means of an extrapolation from samples taken, to be in the region of £18 million. I said at the time that it may be a bit less than that, but it does not matter to me whether it is £2 million, £5 million, £10 million or £18 million: it should not happen.

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

When does the Minister expect the report to be published, so that we will know the actual accurate figure?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I have said already, in answer to a previous question, that we anticipate, from information provided by the Housing Executive, that it will have the report within a matter of days. It will then want to take that to its board. We are into the month of October, and the board meeting is normally towards the end of this month; but if the report raises very substantial issues — and it may well do so — the Housing Executive will want its board to meet earlier in the month, because this is a matter of concern to the general public, politicians, contractors, and the Housing Executive. Therefore, it will be a matter of the Housing Executive bringing the report to its board as soon as possible. I have not seen the report yet, but I expect to be briefed in due course on the findings and on what action will be taken, and I assure the Member that, whatever the outcome, it will be relayed to this House.

Paula Bradley (DUP, Belfast North)

Will the Minister tell us the position regarding the letting of new maintenance contracts?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The Housing Executive has advised that a number of planned schemes were let under the current arrangements prior to 27 January 2013.

Those schemes are ongoing, and it is hoped that they will be complete by the end of the year. Once procurement procedures are completed, new contracts will be let.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

7. asked the Minister for Social Development for his assessment of the independent review of the work capability assessment carried out by Dr Paul Litchfield. (AQO 4681/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

Dr Litchfield's fourth independent review of the work capability assessment has not yet been completed. He is at the evidence-gathering stage of his review, which includes considering whether more can be done to ensure that the assessment process is effective and perceived as objective by all stakeholders. As part of that process, I launched a call for evidence in Northern Ireland on 10 July 2013. That gave everyone with an interest in how the work capability assessment process operates the opportunity to submit their views and comments on how it could be improved. There were a total of 48 responses from interested parties in Northern Ireland. That evidence has now been collated and passed to Dr Litchfield for consideration.

I met Dr Litchfield during his visit to Northern Ireland on 18 and 19 September as part of his evidence gathering. He advised that Northern Ireland's operational processes appeared to operate better than those in Great Britain. I found it encouraging that his assessment was that we were doing it better in Northern Ireland than the folks in Great Britain. In addition to meeting me, he met members of the Social Development Committee, Social Security Agency staff, Atos Healthcare and customer representative groups. His independent report will be laid before the Assembly by the end of the year.

Ian Milne (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. As the Minister is aware, there is a lot of concern regarding the assessment process. Can he reassure us that protections have been put in place to ensure that people are treated properly during and after the assessment?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for the point that he raises. One of the key things to bear in mind is that Dr Litchfield's report is the fourth. There were three prior to that taken forward by Malcolm Harrington, who is also an occupational health specialist. All the recommendations made by Professor Harrington have been implemented. It is because of the implementation of those recommendations and the initiatives taken forward internally in the Department that we in Northern Ireland have a better arrangement than across in GB. Whatever emerges from Dr Litchfield's report will also be taken forward. I want this to be done in a way that ensures that we have an appropriate and empathetic system in Northern Ireland that is right for our circumstances.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Has the Minister communicated the very specific details and circumstances of Northern Ireland compared with GB, given that we have so many people who suffered horrendous injuries as a result of the Troubles?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

There are circumstances that are particular to Northern Ireland and different, to some extent, from GB. We have higher levels of mental illness than Great Britain. There are areas in England that have a similar profile to Northern Ireland, such as heavily industrialised areas in the north of England, but, nevertheless, the Member is right: we have a legacy in Northern Ireland of people who were the victim of terrorist violence down through the years. It is important that their interests are safeguarded.

In a different context, when Lord Freud was over and we were discussing welfare reform generally, I made a point of bringing the Victims' Commissioner and several victims to meet him. That meeting was very productive and was well received by those who had been a victim of terrorist violence and the commissioner. So, we have a very good relationship there. It was interesting because two victims came: one who had suffered in the Abercorn bombing way back in the early part of the Troubles and another who had been injured in a bombing much later on in the Troubles. That meeting was very helpful. We will have the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland, whether in respect of mental health or the Troubles, very much in mind.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Minister outline the training undertaken by the health professionals who conduct the medical assessments?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question. Once recruited, healthcare professionals undergo training targeted to the benefit areas they work in. They are then subject to audit and only have their appointment confirmed when they have consistently achieved four A-grade reports. Ongoing monthly national audits are carried out using an agreed sample size that has been approved by the Department. New entrants are provided with a personal training plan within three months of their formal approval, and they receive anti-discrimination and mental health training in their first year. Atos Healthcare is obliged to develop and deliver a professional training programme for continuing professional development as part of its contract, and that programme is developed, delivered and evaluated annually. A training needs analysis is carried out to identify training needs and priorities and is provided to the Social Security Agency by 1 April each year. Once the outcome of that has been agreed with the agency, an outline training plan is produced by 1 June, giving an overview of the training programme for the coming year. Atos is also required to audit areas relevant to training modules undertaken to ensure that the principles of training have translated into good practice — there is no point in having had the training unless it is worked through in practice — and to summarise those results in an annual report.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

8. asked the Minister for Social Development whether he is aware that MLAs are not informed about social housing building projects until it is contractually too late to have any meaningful input to the decision-making process. (AQO 4682/11-15)

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I thank the Member for his question because I absolutely agree with him. It is disgraceful that certain housing associations do not properly consult MLAs and locally elected representatives. The concern that the Member has raised has been raised by other elected representatives, and it is one that I can well appreciate. It is imperative that housing associations consult MLAs and locally elected representatives before any scheme is finalised.

Housing associations are required by the 'Housing Association Guide' to ensure that adequate structures are in place to consult all appropriate stakeholders, including prospective neighbours, when considering new projects and purchases of property or land, irrespective of how those purchases are funded. The consultation exercise must be appropriate to the type and scale of the scheme proposal and conducted in a time frame that allows for real engagement and the resolution of issues. The 'Housing Association Guide' suggests that that should be a minimum of six weeks. Furthermore, consultation is a prerequisite for scheme and grant approval by the Housing Executive.

Typically, associations may choose to write to MLAs, councillors and neighbours to advise of development proposals. However, I am not happy with that, and I plan to do some work on the 'Housing Association Guide' as to whom housing associations must consult when they consider a scheme for development. There are some examples of housing association good practice in this, but I want to ensure that there is consistency of approach across the sector. They may, if appropriate, follow up with public meetings, and that would be useful as well.

Genuine and earlier consultation is critical to the success of social housing schemes. If the Member has specific evidence of housing associations not undertaking consultation as required in the guide, I ask that he provides that information to my officials, who will investigate it.

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

The Minister's time is up.

Jonathan Craig (DUP, Lagan Valley)

I thank the Minister for his detailed answer. I can give him good and bad examples of consultation by housing associations. Who approves the consultation process with housing associations?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The consultation policies and procedures used by housing associations are approved by the board of each of the housing associations. Housing association staff are required to advise their organisation's development committee of the outcome of each consultation exercise. However, as I indicated in the initial answer, it is a matter that I have taken a particular interest in because of issues that have been raised. We are determined to take forward some work in that regard to ensure that, when a grant is being given out, it is in response to the needs of a scheme that has been well consulted on. One of the points here is that local elected representatives bring a breadth and knowledge of the local situation that people in a housing association that may well be based many, many miles away do not have. The MLA or councillor will be working in that area day by day, week by week, year after year. They will have built up a body of knowledge about the area, and they know the local communities. That advice should be sought. It is wrong if a housing association does not seek that local knowledge in order to benefit from it.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, given that the next rural development programme is due to start in January 2014, whether she agrees that to minimise delay, reduce delivery delay, make for a smooth transition and get money on the ground speedily, it is imperative that the current clusters and local actions groups are retained. (AQT 151/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, it will be our intention to make sure that we are able to spend when we have our new allocation of funding. We do not have the final amount yet, but obviously, when we do and we have our systems and programmes in place, we will want to get that spend out as quickly as possible. You will be aware that the new programme is currently out to consultation. As part of that, we have to look at the current structures, how they have worked and whether they have been effective in the past and, obviously, learn from any examples that we can take from that. That is the job of work over the next number of months. It will certainly be my intention to make sure that we spend effectively and quickly and to ensure that we have systems in place, in practice, to be able to go as early as possible.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Further to the rural development programme 2014-2020, will the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) place more emphasis on the LEADER initiative to ensure that we take advantage of the higher cofinancing rate and, thus, reduce the finance required through our national funds?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, we are out to consultation, and everything is up there. I am very open-minded about taking cognisance of all of the feedback that we get as part of the consultation. There are very clear examples and lessons to be learned from the current programme, and there are ways in which we can improve things, but I am very much wedded to the LEADER approach. It is the best method, but, as I said, I am happy to listen to all the views as part of the consultation.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

2. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether, given the financial difficulties that arose in the farming community as a result of the bad weather last spring and the fodder crisis that ran alongside it, she has any plans to bring forward various farm payments, such as the single farm payment and others, to ease the financial circumstances faced by farmers; and whether she can confirm that all hardship and fodder crisis payments have been made. (AQT 152/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Absolutely. The start of the year, with the snow, was a particularly bad time for the farming community. Then we had the issue with fodder and the fodder crisis, and we had to establish the fodder task force, which, in my opinion, has worked very effectively. At the time, we dealt with the initial problems and were able to get hauliers and transport in fodder that we were able to distribute to the farming community. That task force has met four times and has agreed that it will meet as and when required over the next number of months. It has very much been involved in planning for the winter ahead. We have had a good summer with a good growing season, and we are in a positive position at this moment, but who knows what the winter will bring? We are very open. We have been working with farmers in preparing for the winter ahead, and that is a key area of work, given the winter that we have just come through.

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

I call Dr McDonnell for a supplementary question. I remind Members that it is one question only.

Alasdair McDonnell (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

Sorry. Can the Minister confirm whether all hardship payments have been made and whether future payments or payments due shortly will be brought forward?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The majority of hardship payments have been paid. There are a very, very small number — I am talking single figures — who, for some technical reasons or bank reasons, have not been paid. The majority — 99·9% — have been paid. With regard to getting support out to farmers, I was happy yesterday to announce that, because of the exchange rate advantage that we were able to avail ourselves of this year, we have been able to add an extra £16 million to the single farm payments for this year. That is real money in the pocket of the farmer, so it has been very much welcomed. It is my aim to get the maximum number of payments out in December.

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

I remind Members not to talk unnecessarily and to allow the Minister to answer the questions.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether she can confirm the cost of the support, including British and Irish helicopter assistance, received during the snow crisis at the beginning of the year, which affected much of the North, and in particular my constituency of North Antrim. (AQT 153/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As the Member has rightly said, we needed the assistance of the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Irish Air Corps during the heavy snow. At my request, they provided helicopter support that allowed us to get much-needed fodder onto the hills and into hard-to-reach areas. I am pleased that they were both happy to come forward with that support. At this point, I am pleased to confirm that the Irish Government have said that they will not ask for any reimbursement for the cost of their helicopters. However, the Department has received a bill of around £640,000 from the British MoD.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. That is a significant cost to the DARD budget. Given that the British MoD charges in such circumstances, would the Minister, for future planning, consider availing herself only of resources for which costs are waived, especially in humanitarian circumstances such as this?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was an emergency situation, and the use of the helicopters was an absolute must. It was positively welcomed by the farming community and was a necessary lifeline to get feed to livestock. Obviously, it costs money to run a helicopter, but the fact that the Department has a bill for £640,000 would make me think about where I would look for support if I needed to ask for it in future. I am happy to confirm that I am challenging the bill with the British MoD. I have written to the MoD asking it to waive the bill, given that it was an emergency situation. If we found ourselves in that situation in future — I hope that we will not — costs would be a factor in the services that we would deploy.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what the implications are for the rural development programme of the British Government's decision not to seek additional EU funding for pillar II. (AQT 154/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

From the start, I always said that I was disappointed that, when it came to the overall EU budget, the British Government went to the negotiating table with a negative view, calling for a reduced budget. That was discussed at Westminster, and the parties on the opposite Benches agreed with that position. That said, we do not yet have a final settlement for the rural development budget, but we are of the view that it will be a reduced budget. We face a reduction of about 22%. That will be an issue for us in the time ahead. The implications of that are that we will have to be very effective in how we design the new programme and how we spend the reduced budget. Obviously, there are needs in the industry, We have environmental needs, and rural communities have needs. As I said, we are out to consultation and want to hear views from as many people as possible who have had experience of the rural development programme, know the benefits of it and the areas in which things can be improved. I am happy to look at all that in the round.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. Does the Minister envisage that rural community-based organisations that provide basic services will be included in the new programme?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. To date, the bottom-up approach has been very good, and communities have come forward with their ideas. The best way to do business and to spend the rural development programme's budget effectively is for them to ask for support for their ideas. In moving forward, I welcome some of the priorities that the EU has identified, particularly around tackling poverty. I am keen to make sure that we are able to bring something forward in that area and in new areas of support such as R&D. Research and development and innovation funding are very helpful, particularly if we are looking towards a more competitive and balanced food chain. We need to work on a number of areas. As I said, we are out to consultation, and I want to hear people's views.

We can point to excellent successes, particularly the strategic projects. I visited some excellent projects, particularly over the summer when I had a chance to get out and about. If we are serious about sustaining rural communities and creating thriving rural communities, the rural development programme has to deliver for the rural community in its entirety.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how successful she believes her recent trip to China to have been. (AQT 155/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I returned on Saturday evening. I was there last week at the invitation of the Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, and it was a very effective visit. I was guest speaker at the fourth Sino-European Agricultural Conference, and that was my primary reason for the visit. When I was there, I took the opportunity to secure meetings with those in government charged with processing export certificates. It was important to get that meeting, particularly in relation to pork. My visit also afforded me the opportunity to enhance the links that we have created with China, so I have to say that it was very useful.

Bronwyn McGahan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat. I thank the Minister for her response. Does she think that these trips and the contacts that she makes while there are useful?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely do. At the recent Balmoral show, one of the things that the industry was calling for was for the Executive to get involved in these trips — to go out and seek business, build relationships and enhance existing relationships. This trip was another part of that. One of the most successful aspects of the trip was that the Chinese Government will now prioritise our export certificates for pork. The pork industry has been calling for that, so that was a very effective outcome.

I made my keynote speech to over 100 delegates from across Europe, so we were able to create relationships across Europe and with the Chinese Government. I was able to clearly put out the message that we have high standards of traceability, fantastic food safety and a wholesome agrifood industry. That was all very beneficial and helped us to build on the links that OFMDFM commenced last year on its visit to China. The Chinese are very much into building and enhancing relationships. That is how they do business, and that is how we will get into that market.

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

Mr Jonathan Craig is not in his place.

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

7. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what the ramifications for the agricultural community are if 50% upfront single farm payment grants are not paid in October, and what she believes can be done to rectify the problem. (AQT 157/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member refers to part payments. As I have said previously to the House and the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development, my objective is to finalise and pay as many single farm payments as we can in December. Last year, we paid over 82% in December, and I want to improve on that figure this year.

I recognise the importance of trying to get as big a payment to farmers as quickly as possible, and I want to be in the position to make advance payments in the future. Unfortunately, we are not in that position at the moment because of the difficulties that we have had with Europe over our mapping system. That is where the priority work has been over the past wee while, but we have made improvements that will allow us, as quickly as possible, to get to the position in which we can make advance payments. In particular, we will increase the number of inspections carried out using remote sensing. We went from 250 last year to 1,140 this year, so that is quite an improvement. We are also encouraging more online applications, which allows us to process applications quickly. A combination of all those things will get us to the position in which we are able to make advance payments as quickly as possible. I assure the Member that my priority for this year is to process the maximum number of payments and get the maximum amount of money into farmers' pockets by December.

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

Is the Minister content that officials are doing everything in their power to make sure that the mapping problem is solved?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am content that I am putting enough pressure on officials so that they know that I want the mapping system to be completely up to speed, up to scratch and acceptable to Europe. I am content that I am fulfilling my role in making sure that that pressure is applied. I am also content that they are working very hard. Remapping 750,000 fields is a massive piece of work, and we have to accept that.

We have made progress, although there is a way to go. The Department continues to work with Land and Property Services on field parcels, and we are working our way through that. I think that you will see even more improved maps this year. When our maps are right, when we continue to increase the number of inspections by remote-control sensing and when we have more people coming forward with online applications, we will be in a position, very quickly, to bring forward advanced payment.

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

That ends topical questions. We will move on now to questions for oral answer. I advise Members that questions 2, 11 and 15 have been withdrawn.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, given the number of errors within the new mapping system, whether these errors have been satisfactorily rectified. (AQO 4690/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. I am now confident that I have in place a mapping system that, first and foremost, is compliant with the European Commission's regulatory requirements on providing a maximum eligible area for each field parcel. More detailed work is now under way on some key areas requiring attention, such as the mapping of common land parcels and the updating of older orthophotography. Early difficulties with missing fields have been resolved, although it is always the case that there can be individual instances where inaccuracies have to be resolved. It remains the claimant's responsibility to bring those inaccuracies or other changes to the Department's attention. A significant update to maps will occur at the beginning of 2014, but it will always be important for farmers to remain vigilant, to check their maps and to ensure that they are updated. I have always said that this is a two-way partnership between the Department and the farmer.

Paul Girvan (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. Does that mean that payments can and will be processed and out any way early and that this process has been successful? We are aware that, in the past, it has dragged on for some time before some farmers received their single farm payment.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

As I said, I intend to make sure that we pay out the maximum amount of money and pay the maximum number of farmers in December. That is the target for this year. A lot of work is going on in the Department, particularly on the mapping exercise and making sure that it is fit for purpose, appropriate and acceptable to Europe. We have made a lot of progress on that. My priority for this year is to get the payments out as early as possible. We made 82% well within the target for December last year. However, I would like to go even further this year and to have more money out and more farmers paid in December.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Will the Minister elaborate slightly on the single farm payment and the claims?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Of the 37,585 single farm payment claims submitted in 2012, 98·6% were finalised by 30 June last year. A total of £243·4 million had been paid out, and that was 99% of the total estimated value of the 2012 claims. The Commission requirement to pay at least 95·24% of the 2012 budget by 30 June was met in early April 2013. I intend to publish the payment timetable for this year in November. It will clearly set out the targets for this year, which will be the targets for December, January, February and right through. As I said, my aim is to pay the maximum number of farmers the maximum amount of money as quickly as possible in December and to improve on the percentage that we achieved last year.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether her Department will take additional measures to tackle fuel poverty in rural areas. (AQO 4692/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am concerned about the impact of rising fuel costs, particularly on the vulnerable in rural areas, who are limited in the choice of fuel that they can avail themselves of and do not have access to cheaper alternatives such as mains gas. Addressing fuel poverty is, therefore, a key objective in the financial poverty priority area for intervention, which is detailed in DARD's Tackling Rural Poverty and Social Isolation framework.

The warm homes scheme is DSD and the Government's primary tool in tackling fuel poverty. My Department has collaborated effectively with DSD in the past and has provided supplementary funding to the warm homes scheme, ensuring that many vulnerable rural households that otherwise would not have been supported received much needed home energy efficiency measures such as insulation and central heating systems. I am committed to continuing that support for the incoming winter. My Department has also provided supplementary funding support to the Power NI free insulation scheme, which also installs insulation packages to low-income rural households.

I remain committed to taking action to address the challenges facing people who live in rural areas and to improving their quality of life. I will continue to work with key stakeholders to ensure that action is taken to target fuel poverty in rural areas.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

I thank the Minister for her answer thus far, but will she provide more detail of the outcomes of her work in tackling fuel poverty in rural areas?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We have been successful in the work done to date under the previous anti-poverty framework. In 2008-09, 700 rural homes received insulation and central heating systems through DARD providing £380,000 of top-up to the Department for Social Development's warm homes scheme. That ensured £3 million of the DSD spend that would not otherwise have occurred.

During 2009-2010, DARD collaborated with the DSD and NIE Energy, providing £250,000 to fund the insulation of 300 low-income rural homes that could not be supported through the warm homes scheme. During 2010-11, DARD worked with the DSD and the warm homes scheme implementation agents to assist the targeting of hard-to-reach rural dwellers. DARD also increased the number of rural referrals to the DSD warm homes and insulation schemes through the maximising access to grants, benefits and services project.

Building on the success of the previous anti-poverty framework, DARD provided £23,000 of top-up to the DSD warm homes-plus scheme and grants for four hard-to-treat rural properties in 2011-12 through the current tackling poverty framework. DARD also provided £390,000 in 2011-12 to supplement the Power NI free insulation scheme, which was also supported through the sustainable energy programme. DARD funding resulted in an extra 578 vulnerable dwellers benefiting from the loft and cavity wall insulation scheme. Last year, DARD provided £224,000 to supplement the Power NI free insulation scheme again. That intervention resulted in an extra 323 vulnerable rural dwellers benefiting from the scheme. There has been a lot of positive work, and I want to continue to do more of it.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The warm homes scheme is excellent, and many people have benefited from it. However, will the Minister outline what she is doing on supplementary assistance to the scheme to ensure that people, particularly those in rural areas who do not have broadband access, have knowledge of the scheme and access to it?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is a valid idea: if people do not know about it, they cannot benefit from it. For me, the benefit of the money was that it was mainly leverage money. We are able to attract more money from the DSD because DARD is putting forward something to enhance the DSD's scheme. The cost of insulating a rural property with solid walls because of its age is usually more than the maximum £6,500 that the DSD can provide. For me, this is a key and necessary area of support, but I will certainly look at how we advertise this and get the message out. That is key. I know that we use rural community centres and GP surgeries, but I will take another look to make sure that we get that message out effectively.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

The Minister said that she is concerned about fuel poverty, and I do not doubt her. Why, then, is she taking an ideological stand on something that could ease fuel poverty for all of us in Northern Ireland, namely fracking? Is that an indication that she will be more content to release departmental land for wind turbines?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is fair to say that the process of fracking has not been proved to be safe. If the Member has information to suggest otherwise, he should come forward with it. What I said in the media this week was that there is considerable potential for DARD lands to provide sustainable and environmental benefits and to look at renewables. I am totally committed to looking at all those things and assisting rural communities where possible regarding the add-on benefits that those can give to them. In my opinion, fracking poses —

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

That is your opinion.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is my opinion that counts. In my opinion, fracking causes a real risk to farming and rural communities. I will make sure that that is the ethos that is carried through during my term at the Department. I think that, if fracking were to go ahead in any part of this island, it would cause international damage to the reputation of Ireland as a whole, to our environmental practices and to the clean and green image that we have. That is the position that I have adopted.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

Shame.

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

Whatever you feel about fracking, I am not happy about people shouting from a sedentary position.

David McNarry (UKIP, Strangford)

I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on ash dieback disease. (AQO 4693/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

By 25 September this year, inspectors had visited 887 sites and found only nine new cases of Chalara infection. Together with the 77 cases found during 2012, 86 sites have been declared infected. In all cases, the source of infection was young trees planted since 2006. Scientists advise that there is a significant risk that the disease may spread from young ash trees to older trees and hedgerows through the release of spores from infected leaves that have fallen to the ground. Although inspectors found that only a small proportion of trees showed symptoms, they ordered the destruction of over 70,000 associated young planted trees and leaf debris because the disease may be present without obvious symptoms. Scientists also advise that, once the disease begins to circulate in the wider environment through the release of spores, control will become very difficult. Affected ash trees were also destroyed at three trade premises.

In July this year, I jointly launched the all-Ireland Chalara control strategy with Minister Tom Hayes in Dublin. The strategy provides a framework for the implementation of our policy of identification, control and eradication of the causal agents of ash dieback in Ireland.

The EU Standing Committee on Plant Health is considering the legislative action that has been taken by us, the South and Britain and has asked us to show that our control programme is effective and that we make an application for protected zone status against the disease. Consequently, we will continue our surveillance into the autumn until after leaf fall, because scientific understanding suggests that the conditions for spread in the wider environment probably exist on the island of Ireland.

David Hilditch (DUP, East Antrim)

I appreciate the Minister's answer. It was established that the supplier of the diseased trees to forestry projects in Northern Ireland was traced to certain premises in the Irish Republic. Has any action been taken against those premises or legal advice sought?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is not for me to comment on that. As I said, the biggest risk to us with regard to ash dieback is via trade. There are no barriers to trade right across Europe. However, at present, we are looking actively at bringing forward statutory pre-notification. I intend to talk to the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development about that over the coming weeks because we need to look at the potential risks. Some of those risks relate to four particular species that we are concentrating on for pre-notification status: ash, oak, sweet chestnut and plane trees.

I have very much taken an all-island approach because we are one island. We need to cooperate. With regard to the efforts that Britain has been involved in, it was at a very different disease stage. It would not have made any sense simply to do what Britain is doing. You have to look at plant health in the same way as animal health: on an all-island basis, with regard to trade and benefits to the island. That is why I launched the all-island strategy with Minister Tom Hayes. The good thing about that strategy is that it can easily be adapted to changing circumstances, so, if we find ourselves with a change in disease risk status, we will be able to adapt it. I keep in regular contact with Minister Hayes on the issue.

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

With regard to the all-island approach, will the Minister detail what discussions she has had with Agriculture Minister, Simon Coveney, on the matter?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In plant health, the way in which the system works in the Dáil means that Tom Hayes is the Minister who is responsible. I engage regularly with Mr Hayes, and I have done so over the past number of months. As for conversations with Simon Coveney, we have discussed the issue at North/South Ministerial Council level. Currently, because of ash dieback, overall plant health is, obviously, one of the main topics of conversation. We are actively working towards an all-island plant health strategy because the island is one epidemiological unit. We need to work effectively together. In the past, the fortress Ireland approach served us very well.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for an update on the fodder task force that was launched in spring 2013. (AQO 4694/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

In May, I established a fodder task force to consider the issues facing the livestock industry in the following 12 months and to produce an action plan to mitigate the effects of any potential problems. The fodder task force brought together representatives of ancillary agrifood industries, including feed suppliers, banks and food processors, together with stakeholder organisations and DARD officials.

In July, task force members agreed an action plan that was published on the DARD website. Over the summer, they have been working together to implement it. They have met four times. Although they do not intend to meet as a group until midwinter, they will get together in the interim if a situation develops and new actions are required.

On 18 September, I met stakeholder organisations representing livestock farmers to listen to their assessment of how well farmers were prepared for the months ahead. It was good to hear that the favourable grass-growing conditions during the summer, coupled with the advice that DARD has been involved in delivering, have ensured that farmers are now better placed to mitigate or avoid a fodder situation in the winter ahead. There are still actions that farmers can take to plan for the winter, and DARD will continue to provide advice and support to ensure that farmers are well prepared. A comprehensive programme of workshops, advisory events and publications will be produced by CAFRE to help farmers stocktake their individual fodder supplies and make the most efficient use of the fodder available. In the longer term, I am actively considering the potential of a land improvement scheme. I believe that the joint approach of government and the agrifood industry, by taking responsibility and dealing collectively with the problems facing the industry, is the most effective approach to ensure that another fodder crisis is averted in the winter ahead.

Alastair Ross (DUP, East Antrim)

Does the Minister agree that the success of the scheme was largely down to a number of haulage contractors who imported feed into Northern Ireland? Will she ensure that any outstanding money is paid to those contractors without further delay?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely agree that the scheme's success was because of the partnership approach. All the stakeholders came together, and we were able to establish the task force. I am assured that very close to 100% of the hauliers have been paid. The Department is working through the issues with anybody whose payment is outstanding. We obviously want to pay them as quickly as possible for the vital service that they provided over the past number of months.

Cathal Boylan (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagra. Will the Minister indicate to the House what organisations are represented on the task force?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The success of the task force has been down to the fact that all the key players came together, including the banks, the Ulster Farmers' Union, NIAPA, the Grain Trade Association, the Meat Exporters Association, Dairy UK, NIFDA and Rural Support. I have said in the House before that this has been a difficult time for the farming industry, and we need to put a lot of emphasis on the fact that farmers need a lot of emotional support. Rural Support's involvement was key, and we were delighted that it was also at the table. Part of the discussions were around what assistance it can provide to rural communities and farmers who are struggling financially and practically because of all the problems presented to them over the past, I suppose, 18 to 24 months.

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

Will the Minister indicate whether she has given any consideration to examining the amount of land in public or, indeed, private ownership that might be used for fodder? I am sure that, like me, she has noticed that huge swathes of land have gone to waste over many years. Will she bring that matter to the attention of the task force for some innovative thinking?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

That is not an area that the task force looked at, but that it is an innovative way to look at things. I am happy to relay it to the task force. We do not want to see any wastage, so, if we can make hay while the sun shines, that is what we should do.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

Will the Minister set out her reasons for deciding against extending the fertiliser season beyond 15 September, unlike her counterparts in the Republic, as a way to increase fodder stocks?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We have two very different nitrates action plans in place, and ours is a lot more generous all year round. That is the distinct difference between what the South is doing and what we can do. Ultimately, it is a Department of the Environment decision. That having been said, it is something that I discuss with the DOE. There is not the evidence to suggest that there is enough financial benefit derived to extend the period. The farmer would not get enough growth for the amount that it would cost to spread. We take decisions based very much on scientific evidence, and the fact is that the scientific evidence was not there to support extending the season. Even if we were able to extend the date, it would affect only a relatively small number of farmers. As I said, I will base my decisions on the evidence, and the evidence suggests that there would be no real economic benefit for the farmer.

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

The Member has indicated that he wishes to withdraw question 6 because it was covered during topical questions. However, I remind Members that questions must be withdrawn by noon. For the record, the Member is not in his place.

Jim Wells is not in his place for question 7, but I assure — [Interruption.] Order, please. I assure Members that there is a perfectly good reason for that.

Pam Brown (DUP, South Antrim)

8. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for her assessment of the use of antibiotics in livestock and poultry production. (AQO 4697/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Antibiotics have been widely used in the livestock and poultry industries across the globe since their discovery more than 50 years ago. They are an important tool in treating animal diseases and thereby aiding in the production of animal products such as milk, meat and eggs. It is important, however, that farmers use antibiotics only when they are needed; keep good records of all antibiotics used and the identity of animals treated; and abide by the recommended withdrawal periods. That, of course, applies to the use of all veterinary medicines.

My Department, along with the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, is responsible for implementing controls on the use of veterinary medicines, including residue surveillance and inspection of establishments that produce and market animal feeds and feed ingredients.

The Department is funding a three-year Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute research project on the use of antimicrobials, which, coincidentally, begins today. The project will provide an increased understanding of the issues surrounding antimicrobial resistance and the current use of veterinary antimicrobials here.

In collaboration with DEFRA, the devolved Administrations and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I recently endorsed the five-year resistance strategy, which was published last month. The strategy aims to improve the knowledge and understanding of resistance; conserve and steward the effectiveness of existing treatments; and stimulate the development of new antibiotics, diagnostics and novel therapies. My officials are considering the associated action plan.

Pam Brown (DUP, South Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her answer. She will be aware of the public concern about antibiotics given to animals that are in the food chain. Is she aware of any instances when antibiotics have been added at low doses to the feed of otherwise healthy animals to control growth and disease?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is not an issue that is on my desk, but I absolutely agree with your first point about concerns. There is a consumer confidence issue. People want to be assured that there have been very tight controls on what they are eating and want to know exactly what they are getting. The recent issues with horse meat have further knocked confidence in our supply chain. So, whilst we have very effective traceability in place, including the management of antibiotics and their administration in animals, and while farmers are, in the main, very responsible with their use of antibiotics, I want to see a more proactive approach to animal disease and animal health. As opposed to always just treating sickness, we should look at production diseases, and there is more of an effort towards that now around BVD. We also need to make sure that there is no underhand use of antibiotics. If the Member is aware of anything in particular, I would be happy to talk to her outside of Question Time.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

9. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether the Loughs Agency is involved in the preparations for the return of the round the world clipper race next year. (AQO 4698/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Loughs Agency was a key member of the steering committee for the Clipper Round the World Yacht Race in 2012 and has offered its services to Derry City Council in that respect for Clipper 2014. For the Clipper event in 2012, the agency provided sailing taster sessions and facilitated the experience of sail for those who may not otherwise have that opportunity. Other activity included a full moon paddle by canoe along the River Foyle and a seafood festival. The Loughs Agency is exploring opportunities to similarly animate the Foyle with marine tourism activity during Clipper 2014. The marine event platform — or the pontoon — that was constructed in 2012 through the agency's EU INTERREG programme remains a key piece of infrastructure for the Clipper race. Indeed, the Clipper organisers praised that facility as being the best they had availed themselves of anywhere on their voyages around the world. That is positive, and we can be very proud of that.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a freagra. I thank the Minister for her answer. Everybody in Derry understands the importance of Clipper and, indeed, understands the great work that the Loughs Agency does. Can you outline any other programmes that the Loughs Agency will roll out in the next couple of years?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Loughs Agency is very much involved in looking at the whole tourism aspect and what it can do to promote tourism. Aquaculture is another area that it is very interested in, and I am delighted to see that. We should exploit the natural resource that we have, which, in Derry, is very much valued. So, it is involved in doing a lot of that work. It is also engaged very much with the City of Culture, and the agency brings any aspects that it can to make that even more of a success. In addition, the agency had a key role in supporting the angling element to the World Police and Fire Games, so it has been effective in, I suppose, thinking outside the box and engaging with other agencies on how it can best promote the Foyle and surrounding area.

Fearghal McKinney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

10. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what discussions have taken place with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine about tackling bovine tuberculosis on an all-island basis. (AQO 4699/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I regularly meet Minister Coveney both in the context of the North/South Ministerial Council and separately, as necessary, to discuss a range of issues, including matters that relate to animal health on the island of Ireland. Under the North/South Ministerial Council arrangements, there is a TB and brucellosis working group comprising key veterinary and policy officials from across the island. It meets two or three times a year to exchange information relevant to the control and eradication of TB, including possible areas of cooperation. In addition, my officials and Minister Coveney’s are in regular contact to discuss all aspects of bovine TB.

My Department has a rigorous EU Commission-approved bovine TB eradication plan, which is vital in safeguarding our export-dependent trade in livestock and livestock products, which is valued at over £1 billion each year. The South has similar EU Commission approval for its TB eradication plan. The TB herd and animal testing programmes right across the island comply with the EU trade directive.

Fearghal McKinney (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for her reply. Are the Minister and DARD committed to a joint North/South approach to tackling bovine TB?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes, I have an all-island animal health and welfare strategy in place that looks at the whole gamut of animal disease. It is primarily aimed at how we can remove all the barriers to trade, and disease is one of the biggest barriers that we have. We have officials across the island working on that strategy, and Minister Coveney and I regularly engage on it. We also have the upcoming EU animal health and welfare law, which, we believe, will give us the vehicle that will allow us to facilitate the free movement of cattle across the island. To me, the potential benefits of that will be phenomenal to the whole industry on the island, particularly as we attempt to grow that industry.

Tom Elliott (UUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Has the Minister or the Department considered changing the on-farm testing method to trace bovine TB?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The Member may be aware that I announced on 17 September that I would establish a government/industry partnership to look at the whole area of TB. I said at the time that we needed to look at the whole range of issues again. We have effective work ongoing with our TB eradication plan, which is approved by Europe and allows us to draw down £4 million in funding to help us eradicate TB. I am also going to have the strategic partnership look at the entire issue. We need to look at compensation, the eradication plan that we have in place and the results of the test, vaccinate or remove (TVR) practices that we have, going forward. I am open-minded about looking at everything again to make sure that we do everything that we can. We want to drive out this disease. We want to have a strategy in place, and we need to be open-minded in looking at all aspects of it, including, as I said, compensation, the badger and all the issues in regard to TB. It is a complex disease. There is no quick fix, but, strategically, we have to look at it from that angle.

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

Question 11 has been withdrawn.

Pat Sheehan (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

12. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether the new council structures, following the review of public administration, will be taken into account in the rural development programme 2014-2020. (AQO 4701/11-15)

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

My Department’s proposals for the next rural development programme are currently out for public consultation. As part of that consultation, we are seeking views on the options for delivery of a future programme. The EU proposals for rural development require a minimum of 5% to be delivered using the LEADER approach. Although seven local action groups were established in the current programme, the review of public administration (RPA) will mean that the LEADER local action groups will be reformed, in line with the new council areas and boundaries.

There would still be an option to cluster councils together in line with the new boundaries, if it was felt that fewer than 11 local action groups would be more cost-effective, easier to administer and there might be greater impact of the funds in the combined area. As I said, these are some of the areas that are out to consultation at the moment and on which I am seeking views.

My Department is not transferring any functions to councils as a result of the RPA. However, I am considering how local government will be involved in the next programme, through the LEADER approach and directly with my Department.

Ian McCrea (DUP, Mid Ulster)

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I apologise for not being in my place for Social Development questions. I was in another meeting, and when I got to the back door I heard that I was not in my place. I thought it better not to come in late. I apologise to the House and the Minister for missing the question. [Interruption.]

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

Order, please. The law about shouting across the Chamber still applies.

Executive Committee Business

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

When we stopped, I was nearly finished but just not quite. Therefore, I will not detain the House too long. However, there are a couple of issues about the Bill that I would like to bring to the House's attention.

There are not many, no matter what form of society or walk of life they are in, who like change. Somehow, we do not adapt to change very quickly; or at least, at the beginning, we resist it. I think that one of the biggest challenges, or one of the great concerns, for the new administrations when they come into place — others may have touched on it, but I cannot recall who it was — will be the potential disappearance of localism. The existing structures were formed under the Macrory report in 1972 and 1973. When those reforms came into place, there was little lead-in time; it was one way today, and it seemed to be that the new system just appeared and everybody got on with it. However, that is not proposed in this Bill. There will be a time for everybody to get acclimatised, as it were, to the new system. Not everybody fully understands that. Indeed, a lot of people — I would be one of them — feel that it is hardly necessary either, but that is by the way. Maybe it is easy for me to say that since I will not be part of it, but then I came in from the cold to the new system and it was not part of anything.

In their contributions, Anna Lo and Dolores Kelly made great play of the fact that they felt that their parties were, at times, discriminated against and that they did not get their fair share of mayoral positions. Well, let us —

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Will the Member give way?

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I will in a second, after I tell you my story. [Laughter.] Does it take them as long to get round to sharing in Mr McCarthy's council as it does in Dungannon? I tell you, it took 36 years for the DUP, which had representation for all those years in the council, to get its shared bit. I do not know whether your council moves as quickly or as slowly as that, but I did say that I would give way, and I will.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

Lord Morrow, I am grateful to you for giving way. I was not going to contribute, but I was listening. How would you consider it if a member served on a council for, in my case, 28 years and had applied for a position of deputy mayor and mayor on eight occasions and was never given that opportunity? Yet, I can remember quite clearly one occasion when a DUP man came in following an election and was elected deputy mayor after one year. Do you not think that what is proposed today will eradicate that for the future? I will not be part of it, and you will not be part of it, but at least we will be making progress.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

You did not do so badly at 28 years. As I said, it took me 36 years to get Dungannon council round to the way that maybe others should be given consideration. If it takes 36 years to make it happen in Dungannon, and it took 28 — I do not think that the Alliance was held out of post for 28 years in your council.

Kieran McCarthy (Alliance, Strangford)

I was.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Well now, here we go, you see.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he agree with me that sometimes when we are talking about these issues a perception emerges, particularly from those who are of a nationalist disposition serving on unionist-controlled councils, that they have, in some way, been frozen out for a long time, and they are looking for some comfort that that will not happen again? This is a two-way street. This morning, Mrs Kelly referred to the Londonderry/Strabane area, where Sinn Féin has taken both the chairman and vice-chairman positions on the transition committee. In addition, if there is a situation in which unionists are 20% of the voters but get 10% of the posts on the transition committee, it is a two-way process. People should not have the perception that it is nationalists who have been disadvantaged from the 1970s until now and that they are looking for a nirvana or promised land. It is a two-way process.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I thank the Member for that point.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I thank the Member very much for giving way. I am sure that he and Mr Campbell will join me in congratulating Derry City Council for its efforts over the years to involve unionists. Over a term, there are four mayors and four deputy mayors in Derry. Unionists get one mayor and three deputy mayors over the four years, which equates to 50% of the posts.

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

I think that —

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

Will the Member give way?

Maurice (DUP, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Yes.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

I cannot let that intervention go. I do not know how to describe it, but it is not accurate. We have to go back only to the mid-1980s, and we all know what happened then when there was a nationalist-controlled council headed by the SDLP. It took decisions that not only marginalised unionists but isolated them for decades. That cannot be covered by saying, "We let you have a mayor the odd year."

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

Order. I am sure that Members will agree that we really need to get back to the Bill.