Northern Ireland Assembly, 20 January 2014

445 contributions from 70 members. The official report.

Assembly Business

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On the rationale for the selection of amendments — I appreciate that the Speaker's Office reaches these determinations — first of all, are objective criteria applied to the selection? If so, is that something that can be made available for the guidance of parties? In particular, is any cognisance given to the impact of particular motions on particular Ministers? For example, my party was very disappointed that an amendment that was submitted on the issue of rural development funding, which largely arose as a result of a court case taken by one of our Ministers, was not selected, when obviously that issue directly affects our Minister and the Agriculture Minister.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I hear very much what the Member is saying, but he will know that this is a matter for and decisions for the Speaker. I am very happy to talk to the Member about the issue outside the Chamber. These matters are not normally raised here on the Floor of the Assembly.

Peter Weir (DUP, North Down)

I appreciate that. Further to that point of order, is there any sort of guidance that the Speaker's Office can issue to parties on what factors are taken into consideration when amendments are being selected?

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

Yes, and the Business Office will continually advise parties on motions, on amendments and on the general business of the House. Certainly, through the Business Office, we can look to see whether there is guidance, especially when it comes to amendments to particular motions here in the House.

I have to say that our officials here are always very keen to try to guide Members to a point. I have to say that it is not my role or the Business Office's role to keep business out of the House. I am always keen to get business into the House. Certainly, as I say, it is not my role to try to keep business out of the House. I hear what Mr Weir said. Let us look at it and see whether we can give guidance to all parties.

I have to say that it is not that long ago that I said to our Business Office that it might be useful to have a number of sessions with parties on how to formulate amendments. I think that only one party came to those meetings; no other party came. So, we are always keen to help parties to frame amendments and motions and to make sure, as I say, that we get business into the House.

William Hay (Speaker, Foyle)

I inform the House that the Road Races (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 became law on 17 January 2014.

Ministerial Statements

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. In compliance with section 52C(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, we wish to make the following statement on the ninth meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in institutional format, which was held in Dublin on Friday 10 January 2014. The Executive were represented at the meeting by the First Minister and me. The Irish Government were represented at the meeting by the Tánaiste, Eamon Gilmore TD. The Tánaiste chaired the meeting.

Before the meeting, we had a very interesting engagement at the Google European headquarters in Dublin, which I would like to briefly mention. Google has worked with the In Flanders Fields Museum to digitise the records of Irish soldiers killed in World War I. Along with the Tánaiste, the First Minister and I officially launched the digitisation of those records. The partnership between Google and the In Flanders Fields Museum has resulted in an incredible source of information for families, students and researchers. Over 200,000 Irishmen fought in the war and 49,000 were killed. That shows the human impact of the war on the island of Ireland. I know that a number of MLAs were at the launch, and I encourage all MLAs to visit the Google site. I also encourage people to use it and to share their stories so that future generations can better understand the lives of their predecessors.

The NSMC institutional meeting took place in Iveagh House and was very positive and constructive. It provided a valuable opportunity for us to focus on some of the key challenges that we face. We discussed a range of issues, including the economic prospects and challenges for 2014 and the strategies being pursued in each jurisdiction, particularly in relation to the economy, youth employment and job creation.

The success of such events as "The Gathering" 2013 and Derry/Londonderry UK City of Culture celebrations was acknowledged, and the importance of maintaining the positive momentum with regard to tourism figures in 2013 was recognised. In that regard, Ministers welcomed the fact that the Giro d’Italia cycling event in 2014 would have a cross-border element. Ministers also endorsed the importance of attracting other high-profile sporting events to the island of Ireland.

Ministers agreed that as we face into a new year, the economic outlook is more optimistic than it has been for some time. However, we recognised that a lot of work remains to be done.

We had a very good discussion on EU matters. Ministers emphasised the importance of using every opportunity to maximise the drawdown of EU funding in both jurisdictions. The Tánaiste advised the meeting that the Dublin Government were completing a post-EU-presidency review, which will include references to the positive North/South engagement during the presidency. He expressed his gratitude for the assistance given by the Executive during the presidency and agreed to keep us informed of future opportunities for joint working for mutual benefit.

The Council also reviewed progress on the Peace III and INTERREG IV programmes and looked forward to the completion of the consultation process on the new programmes.

Ministers noted that the engagement by officials with key stakeholders on the future direction of the north-west gateway initiative was continuing and agreed that a report would be brought to a future meeting of the Council.

The Council discussed a range of matters relating to the North/South bodies. Ministers noted the progress in respect of their corporate and business plans and the implementation of cumulative efficiency savings within the bodies. Ministers also discussed governance issues, including changes to the terms and conditions of staff in the North/South bodies aligned to those in the Irish public service, the review of the financial memoranda and forthcoming changes to the North/South pension scheme.

The Council also noted changes to the boards of the North/South bodies and that a process is under way to recruit a permanent chief executive to the Loughs Agency.

Ministers welcomed the appointment of Ruth Taillon as director of the Centre for Cross Border Studies and congratulated her on her appointment. We also acknowledged the contribution of the previous director, Andy Pollak.

Ministers were informed that INTERREG IVa funding has been obtained for phase 3 of the Border People project. Training of information advisers and service personnel in the area of cross-border mobility is ongoing, and a needs analysis and sustainability plan is also being prepared.

Ministers had a useful discussion on the St Andrews Agreement review and noted that work is under way to implement the decision taken at the 8 November plenary meeting that Ministers should consider their priorities in their respective sectoral areas. It was agreed that Ministers will consider a report on the outcome of those ministerial discussions at the next institutional. We also considered a board appointment to the North/South Language Body. Ministers approved the appointment of Mr Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire to the board of the body.

Finally, Ministers agreed to meet again in institutional format later in 2014.

Mike Nesbitt (UUP, Strangford)

I welcome the statement from the deputy First Minister. My question relates to paragraph 15. I remind the deputy First Minister of a previous institutional joint communiqué of 3 October 2011, which stated:

"Ministers noted the progress made under the North West Gateway Initiative."

On 29 April 2013, another stated:

"Ministers welcomed progress under the North West Gateway Initiative ... The Council agreed to review progress on this engagement at a future meeting."

Then, it was stated today that the Council agreed that a report would be brought to a future meeting of the Council. Is there any end to the process?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I absolutely welcome the stakeholder engagement that has been taking place over the past number of months about the future direction of the north-west gateway initiative. It is very important that we review the initiative to ensure that it remains relevant to the people of the north-west. The success of the City of Culture celebrations last year shows that Derry and the whole north-west region, when given the opportunity, can delivery spectacular outcomes. I hope that the legacy of the celebrations will give the region the belief that it can deliver and that that belief will help the region to attract investment.

Of course, many other good things are happening. Recently, I visited the new to-be science park on the site of Fort George, which is also linked to the Letterkenny project. It is also important to stress that work on the new radiotherapy unit, costing tens of millions of pounds, will begin this year. That is of hugely important benefit to the people of Donegal, Derry and Tyrone. Of course, we, through the auspices of the Department for Regional Development, are hopefully seeing the situation with the A5 being dealt with in a way that will see a satisfactory outcome. There is general agreement in Donegal and Derry that that is a very important project. It is a pity that the Member who has just spoken is the representative of a political party opposed to the project. That is a bit of a contradiction given that the party holds the ministerial position.

Stephen Moutray (DUP, Upper Bann)

I, too, welcome the work done by Google and the In Flanders Fields Museum on the digitalisation of records of the Great War. Will the deputy First Minster inform the House of whether the Department will work with the Department of Education to ensure that the records of the Irish soldiers will be used in schools to broaden children and young people's knowledge of the sacrifice paid and, indeed, the futility of war?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, that would be a matter for the Department of Education and the Minister. However, I certainly recognise — I am sure that the First Minister will join me in doing so — that 2014 is a very important year. It is the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the First World War, which brought so much tragedy and human misery all over the world. As I said in my statement, some 200,000 Irishmen from all parts of Ireland participated in that war, and almost 50,000 lost their lives. That is of enormous historical significance, and I think that it would be a huge mistake for any of us to try to ignore such an important anniversary.

Other important anniversaries are coming up, such as the anniversary of the 1916 rising in 2016. If we approach all anniversaries in a mature way, we can improve the educational experience of our young people. I encourage the Education Minister to take up the suggestion that the Member makes.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Leas-ChéadAire as a ráiteas. I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. He said:

"We discussed a range of issues, including the economic prospects and challenges for 2014 and the strategies being pursued in each jurisdiction, particularly in relation to the economy, youth employment and job creation."

Will he elaborate?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

We had a very useful discussion with the Tánaiste on the issues facing our local economies. We both recognised during the meeting that there has been positive news on our economy lately, with indicators clearly suggesting that things are starting to stabilise. Our unemployment rate of 7·5% remains a concern, and, as an Executive, we are trying to foster job creation, not just in the context of foreign direct investment but in continuing support for our indigenous businesses, which are hugely important in bearing down on what are unacceptable unemployment figures. The fact that we are well below the European average, and taking into consideration the situation in the South, clearly shows that at least some of our strategies are working in the interests of the people whom we represent.

According to the Ulster Bank's latest purchasing managers' index (PMI) index, the rate of growth in our private sector in November was the second fastest in the survey's history, slower only than the record set in March 2004. The sharpest expansion in activity was in the service sector, with growth also quickening in the manufacturing and construction sectors. That extends the current sequence of growth to five consecutive months, which is good news. Of course, we are not out of the woods yet, but we are optimistic that an economic recovery is under way. It is now our responsibility to provide the environment in which to sustain and promote growth.

We have to keep it going. There is still more work to be done, but I think that, given what we have come through over the past five years, there are signs of things beginning to turn in our favour.

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

I also welcome the statement and note that the meeting was attended by the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, and it appears to have been very constructive. I hope that the trials and tribulations that have since emerged do not get in the way of that.

The statement contains a commitment to maximise EU funding. The deputy First Minister will be aware that a recent Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) programme, motorways of the sea (MoS), was designed to create better linkage between neighbouring countries. Will he tell me whether the Foyle ferry service was discussed under the north-west gateway initiative, and if it was not, will he give the House a commitment that it will be discussed at a future meeting?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It was not discussed during the meeting. I know that it is an important project for people in the Donegal/Derry area. I will certainly undertake to have a further discussion with the Tánaiste at a future meeting. We all know and understand the difficulties with ferries and how their seasonal nature can impact on their ability to perform all year round, but I think that the Foyle ferry has provided an important service that has brought communities together in the area. It has provided a very useful resource for tourism, and I think that it is appropriate to have a further conversation about it.

Chris Lyttle (Alliance, Belfast East)

I welcome the endorsement that the North/South Ministerial Council has given to the importance of attracting high-profile sporting events to the island of Ireland. Will the deputy First Minister comment on whether Ministers discussed how they will work together to support the Irish Rugby Football Union bid to host the Rugby World Cup in Ireland in 2023?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I know that our Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Arlene Foster, and the sports Minister in the South recognise that that could be of enormous benefit to the island of Ireland and to the promotion of rugby. It is presently at an exploration stage, but I think that all of us in the House, and, I am sure those in Leinster House, would feel that it would be a tremendous coup for Irish rugby if we could pull it off. So, that is being very diligently explored at this time.

Obviously, in the context of such a huge event that would propel us to worldwide prominence, economic factors are hugely important, so many of the discussions centre around its economic viability. However, in principle, it would absolutely wonderful if we could pull it off. We will see what the outcome of the discussions between the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the sports Minister in the South bring for us all.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. EU matters have been touched on where ferries and TEN-T are concerned. That will be a very substantial pot of money in future years. What discussions have taken place on transport issues and the possibility of cooperation to gain further investment from Europe for some of those issues, given the very good work that many Executive Ministers have done in Brussels over the past number of months?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, a huge priority for the Executive is to increase the drawdown from Europe across a whole range of issues, not least in the area that the Member mentioned. I think that we have had some considerable success in doing that. More work needs to be done, but I think that all our Departments are very clearly focused on the opportunities that exist for us in the coming period. So, I believe that that work will continue and that we will gain benefit and, indeed, increased drawdown from such engagements.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the deputy First Minister for his statement. Regarding attracting important sporting events to the island of Ireland, how do Ministers view the importance of the Giro d'Italia?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is very important. It is clearly one of the most prestigious cycling events in the world, and, given that we recognise that tourism is a very important contributor to our economies, it is really important that we focus on ensuring that those events are a success.

If you look at our experiences over the past while, whether it is the City of Culture celebrations and the way in which the north-west dealt really smoothly with what was an incredible year and with major events, or whether it is the enormous success that was the World Police and Fire Games, you see that they clearly show that there is nothing that we cannot tackle. The people who support this Administration are hugely talented and can take on any challenge. I think that the Giro d'Italia will similarly prove to be a huge success.

Given that we are expecting a massive influx of people who have an interest in cycling and that television networks throughout Europe will be covering the event, it is not to be missed. We certainly do not intend to miss the opportunity that it presents.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I welcome the statement. I particularly welcome paragraph 8, which clearly shows that the economy and youth unemployment were discussed. Will the deputy First Minister acknowledge that, although the figures for Northern Ireland are relatively stable, the figures for the north-west, including for my constituency and Inishowen in Donegal, remain quite high? Those who are economically inactive and especially our young people have found that, even with all the positivity from the City of Culture and the feel-good factor that it brought, there has been no legacy of employment opportunities for them. Will he outline how the north-west gateway initiative or any other project could stimulate that feel-good factor and job opportunities for our young people?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Obviously, coming from the same neck of the woods as the Member, I have total sympathy with everything he said.

The key to all this is that an improving economic situation will hopefully allow us, through time, to bear down on unacceptable figures, particularly in youth unemployment. This is a Europe-wide phenomenon, and the levels of youth unemployment in places such as Spain and Greece are upwards of 50%. That represents a challenge, and the key to all of it is to continue to move forward in a way that develops our economy so that it provides hugely important jobs for our young people.

The recent decision by Fujitsu to locate its very important European base in the city and provide employment for something like 200 people was very encouraging. The confidence that has been built as a result of the City of Culture celebrations means that the city can take advantage of all this in the future. All of us knew that the gains and benefits from that year were not going to happen immediately and would happen over time. Of course, an assessment is being made by the relevant Departments as to what increases in employment occurred during that year. Like the Member, I would be very interested to see those figures.

I agree that there is still a lot of work to be done, but the key is to continue to attract foreign direct investment, continue to support our local entrepreneurs and develop our economy in a way that gets our young people into work.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

The deputy First Minister referred to the governance issues in the North/South bodies and changes in conditions in order to align them with those in the Irish public service. Does that represent parity with the Northern Ireland Civil Service? Are the changes in the pension schemes going to mirror those going through this House?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very pleased to see that the Finance Departments are working together to bring about the reform of the North/South pension scheme. Both Finance Ministers have agreed that the pension reforms, as outlined by Hutton, should apply to the North/South pension scheme. It is important that the Finance Departments continue to work together closely to implement these reforms on the schedule agreed. Agreement has been reached, in principle, to apply the reforms to southern and northern members, thus preserving the concept of a North/South pension scheme. The North/South scheme was modelled on our scheme, so it makes sense to do that. The timescale is to have increased employee contributions in place by April 2014. The key elements of the wider reforms are the move from final salary to career average and linking the normal scheme pension age with state pension age. Those elements should be implemented in line with the other main public service schemes by April 2015. So, huge progress has been made. The short answer to the question is that it is being modelled on what we have here.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Seven years on, what is the product of the St Andrew's Agreement review and what is the level of agreement concerning it? Is the deputy First Minister fed up with that as well? If so, can we expect the mask to slip as it did last week when he made his pernicious attack on the Orange Order?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am not sure what part of that question I should answer. We had a useful discussion on the St Andrew's Agreement review at the meeting. We are pleased to note that work is under way to implement the decision that was taken at the plenary meeting that we attended in November, namely that Ministers would consider the priorities in their respective sectoral areas and that a report on that consideration would be considered at the next meeting. So, without pre-empting those discussions, there are areas that we could explore that would deliver mutual benefits to both jurisdictions.

I look forward to considering the report and what Ministers see as their priorities once they have had those discussions.

The second aspect of the question does not relate to the institutional meeting that we attended.

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

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

On the discussions about the St Andrews Agreement review, does the deputy First Minister accept that there will be a need to build on the changes that were agreed at St Andrews so that, if Ministers take decisions, as the Agriculture Minister did before Christmas, such decisions have to be overturned, whether at the Executive or in the courts of law?

Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I think that the Member is clear about the outcome of the St Andrews negotiations and the legislation that flowed from them. The issue that he raised did not come up at the institutional meeting of the North/South ministerial event that the First Minister and I attended. It is a subject of controversy. The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development spoke about it last week, and I will leave the last word on the subject with her and her Department.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to make a statement in compliance with section 52 of the 1998 Act regarding the twenty-first meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) in agriculture sector, which was held in Armagh on Wednesday 13 November 2013.

The Executive were represented by junior Minister Jonathan Bell MLA and me. The Dublin Government were represented by Simon Coveney TD, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, and Fergus O’Dowd TD, Minister of State at the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government. I chaired the meeting. This statement has been agreed with junior Minister Bell, and I am making it on behalf of us both.

The Council discussed recent developments in international trade, and Ministers had an opportunity to advise on visits made by both Administrations. I welcomed Minister Coveney’s agreement to explore the setting-up of a North/South international trade working group to share lessons learned during negotiations for entry into third country markets.

With regard to tackling tree disease, the Council agreed that the respective Agriculture Departments will work closely with a view to developing a protocol for the cross-border movement of affected larch logs while maintaining the necessary biosecurity. In response to the expansion of the area of woodland affected by the Phytophthora ramorum disease of larch, this arrangement will be beneficial in equipping the forestry industry to manage the difficulties of harvesting and processing timber from areas of affected larch woodland and will help to reduce the risk of further disease spread.

Ministers discussed and acknowledged the ongoing cross-border cooperation in an effort to control and eradicate tree diseases. DARD's spore monitoring equipment, for example, will be put in place by the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) at a Chalara ash dieback outbreak site in County Leitrim, which will assist the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) and allow AFBI to test the use of the equipment on an outbreak site where there has been spread to adjoining hedgerows.

Ministers also discussed and acknowledged the following points: how the all-Ireland Chalara control strategy launched in July 2013 is being implemented; ongoing cooperation on laboratory diagnostics; ongoing discussions on the possible coordinated introduction of pre-notification legislation for certain tree species; continuing cooperation on the proposed new EU plant health legislative regime; continuing cooperation on action plans for the sustainable use of pesticides directive and the pesticides usage surveys; and recognising that the threat of plant disease and pests appears to be increasing. DARD’s intention, as I said to the Assembly on 9 September 2013, is to increase the resources devoted to plant health and to allocate responsibility for all plant health matters to the chief executive of the Forest Service.

The Council noted recent developments on CAP, including the completion of the CAP reform political agreement between the EU Council of Ministers and the European Parliament on 24 September 2013. Ministers noted that the legal texts arising from the political agreement should be adopted by the end of 2013 and agreed that the close contacts between DARD and DAFM officials on CAP issues should continue.

Ministers agreed the significance of the continued work on the delivery of the all-island animal health and welfare strategy action plan, in particular that the African Horse Sickness Regulations 2013 will come into operation on 18 November. DAFM is progressing similar legislation in line with the all-island approach to deal with African horse sickness in the event of an outbreak of this epizootic disease.

Ministers also agreed the continued work by officials to scope the possibility of a joint contingency plan for rendering capacity on the island of Ireland; that officials are progressing work to establish respective disease surveillance priorities with a view to agreeing all-island surveillance priorities; and that officials from both jurisdictions continue their engagement, including with British Departments, to consider a range of equine registration issues.

The Council agreed that, if significant equine welfare and abandonment issues arise over the coming winter months, any required action will be on all-island basis. Ministers agreed that officials will continue to engage on the issue, monitor the level of equine welfare and abandonment cases as the winter progresses and keep the need for action under review.

Ministers welcomed the North/South rural development conference held in October, which will contribute, in the longer term, to strengthening the delivery of the LEADER programme. They also welcomed the announcement of support for a rural, faith-based community engagement programme. The programme, which fits within my Department's tackling rural poverty and social isolation framework, will support churches and other faith-based organisations to engage in anti-poverty and social inclusion initiatives in rural communities. As many faith-based organisations are organised on an all-island basis, this may present a range of opportunities for cross-border work.

The Council agreed that officials should organise a North/South conference in 2014 to develop cooperation ideas that could become early projects for the LEADER element of the new rural development programme. The Council acknowledged the breadth of actions being delivered to support cross-border rural development through the current INTERREG programme.

Ministers approved the appointment of Mr Mick Murphy to the board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission from 13 November 2013 to 12 December 2015.

The meeting concluded by noting that the date of the next agriculture sectoral meeting will be in February 2014. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement. She spoke about pre-notification legislation for certain tree species. This legislation was introduced in the UK over a year ago. Why has it been held up in Northern Ireland? Is it due to the fact that the Republic of Ireland's Minister wants to delay its implementation?

The statement referred to the discovery in the wider environment — County Leitrim in the Republic of Ireland — of ash dieback. The Committee saw photographs of the practice of trying to reduce that. It can be described only as a scorched earth policy. What measures has the Minister taken, and what consultation has she had with the farming community and the bodies representing farming industries?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I am very happy to pick up on the questions raised. In the lead-up to the legislation, we have an all-island strategy in place to deal with the disease. I think that it is very important that we have that. It will be one of our strengths in trying to tackle the disease. The disease knows no barriers or borders, so it is important that we take forward the initiative on that basis. As I told the House before, one of the strengths of that strategy, given the changing circumstances and the fact that this is a relatively new disease, is that it is adaptable. That work continues.

As for legislation, we already have a wide range of powers in DARD to inspect, detain and destroy infected plant material. We will continue to use those powers. However, as the Member pointed out, in the past I have talked about the need to introduce pre-notification legislation and am keen to do that. It will strengthen the current arrangements. Going back to the initial point, however, I think it important that we do that on an all-island basis. I have not delayed the legislation. We are working it up as we speak and plan to coordinate its introduction right across the island. That will come forward in the very near future. Discussions are ongoing with the South to make sure that we tighten up to ensure that the legislation is appropriate. We do not want to bring it forward just for the sake of it; we want to make sure that it is appropriate and effective legislation.

Over the past year of dealing with the disease, we have engaged fairly regularly, particularly at official level, with all the stakeholders and even members of the public, because it is important that people who use forests are mindful of biosecurity measures. That can mean simple things such as washing the wheels of prams or bikes, or cleaning trainers before going onto other Forest Service land. We also implore the public to help us to tackle this and other tree diseases. However, we regularly engage with stakeholders, who are the key people involved, particularly in the forestry end of things. They include private landowners as well as those involved with public Forest Service land.

Oliver McMullan (Sinn Féin, East Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister. Part of my question has already been answered, but will the Minister give us more information on the all-Ireland approach to larch disease?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. I have picked up on some of those things. It is important to assure Members that surveys and a significant body of work are ongoing. We are actively out, surveying land and making sure that we are looking for the symptoms. We are trying to get the message out to the public about the symptoms and are asking people to look for them.

The surveys cover all of the North. They take in recently planted sites of ash in public and private woodland, roadside plantings, established trees and hedgerows, and there is ongoing nursery surveillance. So, quite a significant body of work is ongoing and, as I said, one of our strands is that we have in place an all-island strategy that is adaptable. We continue to engage, across the island, at official and ministerial level to make sure that our approach is comprehensive. In my opinion, the approach and the strategy that we have in place are comprehensive and look at all the issues of eradication, research into breeding for resistance and engaging with the public and stakeholders. As I said, one of the strategy's strengths is that it is adaptable.

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

I thank the Minister for her statement. Will the Minister state whether she and her Department are considering the proposals that the Republic of Ireland Government have taken on CAP in respect of pillar 1 and pillar 2, and on supporting the development of the agrifood strategy, going forward, as they outlined last week?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Yes. As the Member said, Simon Coveney last week published his proposals for the way forward. We are looking at those proposals, which include quite a number of positive announcements that I think industry will welcome. I have heard some commentary around the rural development end of things, and perhaps that deserved more attention. However, it is important to me, and CAP and common fisheries policy CFP reform is one of the key issues on which we have ongoing discussions at North/South Ministerial Council meetings. It is important that, where possible, we align the types of projects that we do across the island. I am keen to explore further what Minister Coveney has announced and to make sure that, moving forward, when I take my decisions, we can learn from and help each other across the island when we are doing similar types of projects. I am very keen to do that.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

Minister, in reply to a question for written answer from me, you confirmed that, in the past 12 months, you had three meetings with Ministers from the Republic on tackling tree disease. This statement relates to one of those. Given that ash dieback originated in Scotland, is the rush to an all-Ireland strategy ignoring the east-west dimension, and will you commit to work with the Woodland Trust on its ObservaTree initiative, which is a project aimed at creating the very best early warning system in Europe to detect tree disease?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

It is important that we engage with all stakeholders in tackling tree disease. It is vital that we pool all the thoughts and scientific information out there and make sure that we take the best approach to eradicating or at least dealing with some of the tree diseases that we are presented with. As I said, I have met stakeholders and will continue to do so, as and when required. That is key to us being able to tackle these diseases.

On the Woodland Trust project, as I said, I engage with the trust regularly and I am quite sure that it will want to come forward and talk to me again about that project. I think that your initial point was around — I am trying to think —

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

East-west.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

East-west, yes. Absolutely. As I said in the statement, we engage on an all-island basis, which, obviously, is key because if we do not tackle it, disease will just spread across the island. If we do not tackle it on an all-island basis, we will be at a disadvantage. However, as I also said, we are engaging with the responsible British Departments to make sure that we pool resources where we can and learn from each other, because we all have the same aim of being able to tackle this disease.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

Part of the statement to the House after the previous agricultural sector meeting in July 2013 dealt with the issue of horse registrations and passports. Today's statement mentions a range of equine registration issues. Can you inform the House if there has been any movement on this issue to date, or whether it is simply discussion after discussion with no real or meaningful action happening?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I can assure the Member that it is an ongoing discussion, because it is a discussion that we need to be having. Officials are very much engaged at that level. I believe that we need a database system right across the island. A number of lessons have been learned as a result of the horse meat scandal. Whilst the integrity of what we produce here has very much been protected, in moving forward it is important that any lessons that can be learned from that are learned. Some of the issues that were flagged up at that time were around passports. We have had too many people issuing passports. The sooner we are able to tackle that, the better. We need a database system right across the island, but we also have to be mindful of trade on an east-west basis. Discussion is ongoing to make sure that whatever we bring forward is workable for the industry, is not too bureaucratic and is a process that all Governments can be content and happy with.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Minister, you referred to the importance of tackling rural deprivation. Can you give us a progress update on the maximising access in rural areas (MARA) project ?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

The MARA project commenced visits to identified vulnerable rural households back in May 2012. The project target is to visit 12,000 households prior to December 2014. To date, 9,228 visits have been undertaken. As part of the project, a follow-up visit is undertaken to householders who have had a referral for a service, grant or benefit. To date, 5,157 second visits have been completed. From the household visits undertaken, 24,911 referrals have been generated. As you will appreciate, the lead-in time for referrals is significant, but they already bearing fruit. For example, 595 households have benefited from warm homes and levy scheme grants; 2,755 households have been issued with advice and equipment following a home safety referral; and 161 people have received additional welfare benefits. Those 161 claims alone amount to over £443,000 per annum going into vulnerable rural households across the North. Add that to the 425 people who have registered with their local rural community transport partnership, with 34 having received a smart pass, and the 184 boiler replacement applications that have been approved.

The household visits are undertaken by over 100 trained enablers who are working on the project. Those enablers work for local community-based organisations, including the rural support networks. All 286 rural super output areas in the North are being targeted through the MARA project. I am delighted that work is ongoing in all the rural areas of the North, with two rural areas in Banbridge and Omagh recently completed. I am sure that the Member will welcome that. It is a fantastic project. You can see the benefits just from the figures that I have outlined. That is £0·5 million of additional money going into vulnerable households, which would not have been the case if we did not have these people on the ground visiting people, taking them through the process and then making follow-up visits. It is a very worthwhile project, and I look forward to doing more of that in the future.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Minister for her statement. She referred to the setting up of a North/South international trade working group. Can the Minister give us any reassurance that the international trade working group will tackle the discrimination against Northern Ireland dairy producers who are being stopped from putting their products into the southern markets by the National Dairy Council's campaign, which, as she has already admitted to me, is costing Northern Ireland businesses money? Can she confirm that the working group will tackle the Free State's protectionist stance?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not think that any of us has room to be protectionist. The Member will be aware that I raised this issue with Simon Coveney and sought some assurances that our industry would not be disadvantaged. It is unfortunate to say the least, because we are all targeting an export market; that is where the growth potential is. I am in an ongoing conversation with Minister Coveney around how we can tackle that issue. Essentially, it is an industry issue and these are industry decisions. However, we want to be able to engage with industry and say that, as we look to the future, if we want to grow our export market and grow our export sales, we cannot be fighting with each other and being protectionist over these issues.

I will continue to raise the issue, and I know that Minister Foster has raised the issue at a European level. We have to do that and chart our way forward. It is fair to say that I got some assurances from Minister Coveney that he is in discussions with the dairy industry in the Twenty-six Counties. Hopefully, we will have some sort of positive changes in the future.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I call Mr Seán Lynch.

Sean Lynch (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Sorry, I was not following the debate. I did not know that my name was down. Sorry about that.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

The Minister has outlined the benefits that have been accrued so far from the initiatives to tackle rural poverty. However, rural poverty remains a huge issue despite the initiatives. To give us some idea of how successful it is, could she tell us how much has had to be invested in the MARA initiative, for example, to get the half a million pounds return on additional benefits to households?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I do not have a breakdown of the figures and how much has been spent on the MARA project individually. The pot of money that we were talking about was a £16 million tackling poverty fund, and that was to take forward a number of initiatives, including the MARA project, youth employability schemes and rural transport schemes. I would describe a lot of that as leverage funding, and we were able to tie in other Departments to do positive work in rural communities, and that might not have happened if we had not had the investment from DARD. So, although £16 million might sound like a smaller amount of money in the scheme of things, all the initiatives with other Departments have certainly leveraged in significant additional investment.

I gave the example of almost half a million pounds going into rural communities because of someone calling to the house and talking you through what you are entitled to, and, to me, that is significant wins. However, I am very happy to provide to the Member the detailed breakdown of how much MARA cost. As I said, all the other schemes, such as borewells schemes, youth employability and access to benefits, are all positive initiatives. I will provide the detail to the Member.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Today is 20 January. The meeting was on 13 November. Why has it taken the Minister over two months to report to the House? Is it because there was nothing of substance to report or is it that she holds the House in the same contempt as she holds her ministerial colleagues with whom she does not bother to consult about controversial issues? On one specific issue, has she done anything yet to sort out the mess over horse passports?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Perhaps the Member could change the record, because every time I make a statement to the House, he starts his contribution with a very similar comment. You may want to take it up with the Business Office, because I brought the statement in as timely a manner as possible. Obviously, we had the Christmas break in between, and you may have missed the fact that I have been defending rural communities in the courts over the past number of weeks as well. So, I will get on with doing the business but will always come to the House and report on the positive work that is being done in the North/South Ministerial Council.

It is important to remind the House what horse passports are for. They are primarily to protect the food chain and are mandatory for all equines across the EU. I said earlier that I believe that too many people are issuing passports, and that needs to be addressed. I am engaging with the industry on an east-west and North/South basis on how we can get one central database, and those lessons have been learned as a result of the recent horse meat crisis. The horse passport records are about a horse's identity and are not similar to what we have for cattle. So, we need to make sure that people know that there is a distinct difference. However, that said, we need a passport scheme that is enforced properly, and we need to take it on a North/South and east-west basis to protect the food chain. I regularly engage with the Food Standards Agency and all the other partners and will continue to do that in the time ahead.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

In compliance with the requirements of section 52C of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and Standing Order 18 of the Northern Ireland Assembly, I wish to make a report on the third meeting of the British-Irish Council housing work stream, which was held in London on 30 October 2013. This report has been agreed by and is being made on behalf of Minister Carál Ní Chuilín, who accompanied me at the meeting.

The British-Irish Council (BIC) identified housing as a new work stream at its summit in Cardiff in February 2009, and my predecessors Margaret Ritchie and Alex Attwood subsequently hosted the first two ministerial housing work-stream meetings in the Slieve Donard hotel in Newcastle, County Down in December 2009 and in St Mary's College in Belfast in February 2011. I have now hosted a third ministerial meeting, which was held in London and attended by seven of the eight jurisdictions.

The United Kingdom Government were represented by Kris Hopkins MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. The Government of the Irish Republic were represented by Jan O’Sullivan TD, Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The Scottish Government were represented by Margaret Burgess MSP, Minister for Housing and Welfare. The Welsh Assembly were represented by John Howells, director of housing and regeneration. The Jersey Government were represented by Deputy Andrew Green MBE, Minister of Housing. The Isle of Man Government were represented by the Honourable Chris Robertshaw MHK, Minister of Social Care. Unfortunately, the representative of the State of Guernsey was unable to attend due to an urgent housing debate in their Parliament. I co-chaired the meeting alongside Minister Ní Chuilín, and together we represented the Northern Ireland Executive.

Each of the Administrations gave an update on developments and current policy initiatives, including youth employment issues, and a presentation on “Increasing Housing Supply and its Affordability” was given to the meeting by Professor Christine Whitehead from the London School of Economics. Professor Whitehead has previously undertaken work for the majority of BIC member Administrations and is, therefore, familiar with the challenges we face individually and collectively in addressing housing need.

Professor Whitehead noted that the financial crisis has hit the housing market in all eight jurisdictions in house prices, arrears and possession, and confidence. She further noted that all countries in Europe, except France, had experienced large reductions in transactions and output and that development finance has been particularly restricted. She pointed to a growing dependence on income-related benefits, even in working households, and stated that this increases the numbers of households whose income and housing opportunities are determined by government.

Professor Whitehead advised that, in most jurisdictions, worsening income distributions will increase demand for social and affordable housing. She also highlighted problems of a poor supply response, particularly in areas of high housing demand such as cities. In conclusion, she reiterated the key role for government in supporting the owner-occupied market and suggested that greater focus be given to intermediate tenures to meet housing demand.

Going forward, my officials will continue to share good practice with other Administrations to support the implementation of my housing strategy around the key themes of ensuring access to decent, affordable, sustainable homes across all tenures, meeting housing needs and supporting the most vulnerable, how the welfare reforms will affect housing, driving regeneration and sustaining communities through housing and getting the structures right.

A meeting of officials will be held in Belfast in February 2014 to progress the various issues in the housing work stream including the prioritisation of youth employment matters.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Common to all the Administrations, according to the statement, was the pressure that there is currently on the demand for social housing because of the recession, housing repossessions etc. I know that the Minister is disappointed about what is happening in Northern Ireland with the Housing Executive and housing associations giving back money at a time when there is such high demand. Did he glean any information from other Administrations as to whether they are experiencing the same problems with non-delivery by housing bodies and, if they have been, what actions they have taken to ensure that money that has been allocated for social housing is spent?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The focus of the discussion during the meeting was largely on other aspects of its remit, but that was touched on, and I took the opportunity to share with the various other representatives the things that we were doing in Northern Ireland to try to improve the situation. They are not dissimilar to things that are being done elsewhere. I outlined to them the fact that we were setting up a housing supply forum to look at the increased provision of housing and helping to support that market and also that we had, in the course of conversations with housing associations here, identified some of the issues that they have recognised as being hindrances to delivery.

That work is continuing, because it is clear, even from talking to our local housing associations, that there is a range of factors that they find to be obstacles to delivering more. I also think, to be frank, that we need to be more ambitious and that housing associations need to be more ambitious. I am encouraged by recent conversations, which have given me a sense that that is being recognised.

Mickey Brady (Sinn Féin, Newry and Armagh)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement.

Professor Whitehead pointed to a growing dependence on income-related benefits, even among working households. She also advised that, in most jurisdictions, worsening income distributions will increase demand for social and affordable housing. Does the Minister think that his proposed housing strategy will adequately deal with the increasing demand for social and affordable housing? Will he also comment on the fact that, in Britain, so-called welfare reform has had adverse effects on the most vulnerable households? Does he think that that might also apply to the North?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

The housing strategy is the first housing strategy that we have ever had in Northern Ireland, and it is obviously a document that will develop. It is intended that, rather than being a static document, it should get fleshed out more fully in some areas, and there will be developments that flow from it. As I indicated in answer to the previous question, the housing supply forum is important, but so are the conversations that we are having with housing associations to identify the various issues that are holding back the provision of more social and affordable housing.

It is true that we met our target, and we did so at less cost than was initially anticipated, but, if there is money that is not going to be spent, can we do more with the money that we have available to us? From talking to housing associations, I know that there are questions around planning issues and, in some cases, services. One association identified a case in which a housing scheme was held up for six months because it could not get the sewerage and the water supply sorted out. Those practical issues — land acquisition, the best use of publicly owned land and how we get that into the housing supply — are all being looked at at the moment, because it is a question that I want to see an answer to. We are talking to the associations and helping them identify what the problems are, and they are coming forward and saying, "These are the issues". I think, therefore, that we are doing all that we can in that regard. I hope that, on the basis of housing associations having done quite a bit of land acquisition last year, there will be a better outcome this year, although last year, of course, we met our target.

Yes, welfare reform is bound to have an impact on people in the same way as in Great Britain. The difference is that the package of variations, flexibilities and changes that I negotiated and arranged will, I think, produce a better outcome in Northern Ireland and avoid some of the worst difficulties that have been experienced in GB.

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

I, too, welcome the Minister's statement. Given that social housing demand is increasing generally because of falling incomes and austerity, what policy initiatives will be undertaken to improve the housing need situation in the social housing sector in the medium to long term?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

In a sense, the answer to the third question is similar to the answer to the second question, which was similar to the answer to the first question, because all three are substantially the same question.

I have identified the initiatives that we are taking forward to deal with housing supply. Identifying the problems is the first thing, because, until you identify the problems, you cannot find a resolution to them. The good news, as I said, is that last year we met our target. We are on target to produce the 8,000 social and affordable homes that are required under the Programme for Government. We will meet that target, and I am pleased about that, but we want to do even better. Some of the issues in the housing sector are legacy issues that have arisen because of problems that were not addressed by some previous Ministers, perhaps from the Member's own party in some cases.

Michael Copeland (UUP, Belfast East)

I, too, acknowledge the Minister's statement. I cannot help thinking, with apologies, that, in these days of economy, the Minister used so many words to say what was, to me anyway, so very little. Nevertheless, I note that, at the end of the statement, the Minister mentioned that his officials would continue to share good practices with other Administrations, which is welcome. I wonder, however, whether the Minister could enlighten us on what conversations were held around the edges of the meeting, particularly on the introduction of the single occupancy penalty, and whether he believes that any of the other Administrations were as apparently equally unprepared for that as we appeared to be, even in its watered-down version.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I am sorry that the Member is disappointed by the content of the meeting; I suggest that he maybe look at some of Professor Whitehead's work, which I found extremely informative. Some of her publications on housing are extremely informative indeed.

Where underoccupancy is concerned — or the bedroom tax, depending on how you describe it — it should be remembered that this was a meeting at which the bulk of the groups were not from within the United Kingdom in the normal sense. They were from areas such as Jersey and the Isle of Man and so on. Those are areas that have a very different situation from our own not only in government structures and approaches but in scale. The Irish Republic was represented as well, and the situation there is very different.

As for being unprepared, the Member is right on one point: the Housing Executive, over the years, did not prepare for this sort of thing. In fact, when the social housing development programme was first brought to me, a couple of years ago when I came to the Department, one of the first things that I asked was "In developing your social housing development programme, did you take account of welfare reform?". The answer was no. I found that shocking, and that was why, at that point, I sent the social housing development programme back to the Executive. We now have built in to it consideration of the provision of more suitable smaller units, rather than simply building more substantial family-sized units as the entire provision. We need that flexibility and variation to meet the demography in Northern Ireland.

The Member covered a number of points. If I have covered them, I am happy. He is nodding, so he is obviously content with the answer. I will leave it there.

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-LeasCheann Comhairle, agus gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí go dtí seo. As an aside, I note that the meeting took place on 30 October 2013. During the previous statement, a Member was very exercised that it had taken over two months for the Minister to come to the House. Given his absence, I see that that Member does not seem to be as exercised by the time that it has taken for this statement to come to the House. We well understand that bringing statements to the House can sometimes take a few months. We appreciate you coming here today.

I ask the Minister to reflect on Professor Whitehead's observation on the owner-occupier market. What impact does he feel that that may have as he develops his housing strategy?

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I appreciate the Member's question. The delay in bringing the statement to the Assembly was due to other priorities in housing, including —

Raymond McCartney (Sinn Féin, Foyle)

I have no issue with that.

Nelson McCausland (DUP, Belfast North)

I appreciate that. I was just going to say that one of the most important things was the building successful communities programme, which we brought forward towards the end of the year.

It would be very useful for us in Northern Ireland to take some cognisance of the information, assessment and analysis that Professor Whitehead brought forward. It would be useful not just for myself or for one of my officials, having heard it there, but possibly even for the Social Development Committee. She has a specialism in this and a good understanding of the entire market across the British Isles. It would be helpful to have some sort of summary of some of the conclusions in her publications on the matter, as well as of the information that she provided at the meeting. I take the opportunity to suggest that. The Deputy Chair of the Social Development Committee is here, and it may be something that Members would find useful, in the midst of their busy schedule.

Executive Committee Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

No amendments have been tabled to the Bill. I propose, therefore, by leave of the Assembly to group the five clauses of the Bill for the Question on stand part, followed by the single schedule and the long title.

Clauses 1 to 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule agreed to.

Long title agreed to.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

That concludes the Consideration Stage of the Health and Social Care (Amendment) Bill. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

I beg to introduce the Reservoirs Bill [NIA 31/11-15], which is a Bill to make provision about the regulation of the management, construction and alteration of certain reservoirs, in particular in relation to their safety to collect and store water; and for connected purposes.

Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Private Members' Business

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

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

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I beg to move

That this Assembly expresses dissatisfaction with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for her failure to effectively consult with Executive colleagues on her plans to transfer funds from pillar 1 to pillar 2 within the common agricultural policy; notes with concern the ensuing events, which saw the issue brought before the High Court; accepts that, whilst farmers will benefit through increased direct payments, they and many rural communities and organisations may now lose out through significantly reduced rural development funding; and calls on the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to commit to seeking sufficient funding for the future rural development programme to efficiently and effectively deliver a range of schemes, including those to support our burgeoning agrifood sector, increase farm safety measures, incentivise farm modernisation and capital investment, promote agrienvironment measures and support our rural economy and communities.

I welcome the opportunity to present the motion to the House. Although it focuses on the transfer of funding between pillars 1 and 2 of the CAP, it is a motion that strikes at the very heart of what is wrong in the approach of some parties in the House and how, consequently, they are failing to deliver effectively for the people of Northern Ireland. Indeed, I will go further and say that the circumstances around this case would be considered a total embarrassment in other countries around the world. Here we had, just days before the Christmas holidays, two Executive Departments in a legal wrangle. Of course, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development was entirely mistaken if she thought that this was an issue that did not need to go to the Executive, but I was also disappointed that the lines of communication evidently were not in place so that the Finance Minister felt that he instantly had to resort to legal action. Decisions should be taken around the Executive table and not across the High Court. I believe that this is a point upon —

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

No, I want to make my points.

I believe that this is a point upon which we can all agree. In my opinion, neither DARD or the wider public perception of our Executive will have come out well from this. It almost gives the appearance of "Carry On Government".

It will come as no surprise to Members that I have been disappointed with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development's actions over the past four weeks. Never mind failing to deal with the issue correctly at Executive level, she failed to keep members of the Agriculture Committee abreast of decisions and ensuing developments. Instead, she initially opted for a hastily submitted written ministerial statement, a statement that was published at 11.30 am on Friday 20 December 2013, 10 days after the last sitting of the Assembly and, indeed, the last sitting of the Agriculture Committee before recess. There can be no doubt whatsoever that she has lessons to learn. Equally, the Finance Minister has not bathed himself in glory.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

No. I want to make my points.

I noted with interest that, in last week's statement, the point was reiterated, time and again, that the views of the Minister of Finance and Personnel were sought in advance of any proposed transfer but he stayed silent. It was, therefore, surprising that he was so eager to get the issue raised in the High Court. It must be asked, first, why he did not respond to DARD when the issue was initially raised with him. Secondly, but just as importantly, was his personal objection that due process was not followed, or was it to the rate of transfer proposed? Simply put, was it a Finance and Personnel act or a DUP act? Either way, it has left the two Ministers involved with a number of pressing decisions.

Does the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development propose scaling back the 2014-2020 rural development programme, or does the Finance Minister find himself in the unenviable situation of having to make significant funding available for a problem that very few people would have expected? We should not forget that the next RDP has already been given a budget of nearly €230 million, which is not an insignificant sum by any means. The problem is that we do not know, even roughly, what the next RDP will cost or the least that it will cost. The Agriculture Minister was asking for money without knowing how she would spend it. A similarly ludicrous situation happened in early 2011, when the previous Assembly decided on a Budget for 2011-15 just months before an election, having no idea what the next PFG would include. Surely it could not have been that difficult for DARD to work out even a headline anticipated budget for the next RDP and its schemes. I put that question directly to the Minister: how was the 7% arrived at? She must have realised that the decision would have been of great interest to Assembly Members because, much as my party and I recognise the positive contribution that the rural development programme has made to farmers and their families, there have been times when DARD's handling of it and some decisions surrounding the allocation of funding have left much to be desired, to say the very least.

The contentious nature of the RDP has only increased following its governance by the current Minister and her predecessor. Although I accept that, on the whole, many farmers and rural communities generally benefited from it, I can also say that many rural communities looked on aghast at the often exorbitant amounts of funding being spent by local councils and groups such as the GAA on pet projects that often had little or no clear connection to so-called rural development. The clearly deliberate and calculated attempts to lavish funding on items linked to republican ideology were also absolutely morally and procedurally repugnant. All the time, farmers and, indeed, other worthy projects are all too often left to the mercy of an overbureaucratic and inflexible system.

In recent weeks, there has been much debate about what the decision to transfer 0% between pillars will mean on the ground. Before any analysis can be undertaken, clarity is urgently needed on the Executive's contribution to the next RDP. Although there would still have been a contribution of funds even if the Agriculture Minister had had her way with the 7% transfer, the actual contribution will now have to be radically augmented in light of recent events. I ask again that the Agriculture Minister and, even more pertinently, the Finance Minister give us an indication. I wonder whether the Finance Minister —

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

No. I want to make my points.

I wonder whether the Finance Minister really realised what he was letting himself in for. If he had to do it all again, would he try any other route?

Nevertheless, we are where we are. The Ulster Farmers' Union has outlined some sensible suggestions for the next RDP and agreed that some funds may need to be transferred. However, the big question is this: what now for the much-anticipated farm business improvement scheme? The Minister previously told us that the majority of the 7% transfer would have gone on that. We have been continuously told of the importance of this, if Northern Ireland is to capitalise on its agrifood sector. Indeed, the Going for Growth strategy called for a £250 million scheme.

Again, the collective response from the Executive Departments has, in my opinion, been weak, verging on the pathetic, meekly noting the benefits. Coming up to a year later, there has, aside from a loan scheme, been little financial commitment. Of course, other schemes stand to lose out until alternative funding can be sourced.

If you will allow me, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I will make one brief reference to a comment from the Member for Newry and Armagh Mr Irwin at the weekend; I do not see him in the Chamber today. He was irritated that I dared to raise widely held concerns about the future of farm safety measures and was, instead, keen to state that it was a matter for DETI. However, if DETI had put in place extra resources, we would not have to consider the next RDP for funding. Maybe he should speak to his party colleague on that one.

We recognise that the challenge should be to help organisations to avail themselves of funding. We have been fighting alongside others to roll back DARD's default position of having red tape in abundance. It must be recognised that, at a time of economic difficulty and hardship, rural businesses have been able to establish themselves because of help from that funding.

Before Christmas, I visited Sinton's at the Bridge in Scarva. It is a hugely successful restaurant, where investment created 18 jobs. I also attended the opening of Pear Tree Barn Nursery outside Lisburn, again creating jobs in the heart of our rural community. I would like to see more businesses like Sinton's and Pear Tree Barn, not fewer, where a relatively modest grant has delivered sustainable long-term benefits for the rural economy.

It should be the Executive's responsibility to ensure the sensible use of EU funds to benefit all farmers and the agrifood industry as a whole. I call on the Minister to re-engage with the industry, to identify the key priorities for the rural development programme, to deliver more rural success stories and to support our agrifood sector, farmers and all elements of the industry.

The Executive's failures are no blueprint for future economic success. It is now up to the two largest parties in the Executive to live up to their responsibilities. Let one positive outcome from this debate be that Ministers agree to work through the Executive and not the High Court. There must be no repeat of High Court government. That is not doing what is right for Northern Ireland.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is up.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

I commend the motion to the House.

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

I beg to move the following amendment:

Leave out from "for her failure" to "plans" and insert:

"and the Minister of Finance and Personnel for their failure to effectively consult with each other or with their Executive colleagues over the recent attempt"

Mr Principal Deputy Speaker, I am sorry that I was a little late coming in. I did not realise that proceedings were going so fast.

I support the main thrust of the UUP's motion, but it is unfair to lay blame solely on the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for failing to effectively consult Executive colleagues. The Minister has informed us that she undertook an interdepartmental consultation process with Executive Ministers. When given the opportunity, the Finance Minister, we have been told, raised no concerns. It has been suggested in previous debates by a number of Members, me included, that the legal challenge could easily be viewed as a politically motivated action by the DUP in the run-up to the elections. Regardless of either party's motivations —

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Anna Lo (Alliance, Belfast South)

No, I am sorry. I have a lot to get through.

This should have been addressed in the Executive, not through an external legal battle. It is hugely worrying to me that two Executive Ministers could not resolve the issue within the confines of the Executive. In this, we have shown a complete lack of joined-up government. It is not the image of a stable Executive that we want the world to see. Instigating costly legal proceedings appears to us to be an entirely irresponsible action that has the potential to be seriously damaging for rural communities in Northern Ireland. It sets us back significantly, compared with the rest of the UK and the EU as a whole. We have had our fill of tit-for-tat politics over the past few months, and I would rather not reduce myself to that level.

Rather than speculating about whether the DUP is more interested in supporting big farmers than rural communities and small farms, I would like to focus on the implications of the 0% transfer to pillar 2. Let us look at the figures. The EU budget allocation for Northern Ireland from 2014 to 2020 for direct payments is €2·3 billion and, for rural development, it is €227·4 million, which is about 10% of the direct payments budget. Our new rural development allocation has been reduced by about 14% compared with the current 2013 level, as a result of cuts to the overall CAP budget. Northern Ireland now has the lowest EU allocation for rural development in Europe. We had a chance to transfer 15% of pillar 1 to pillar 2, and, even with the proposed transfer rate of 7%, which some had already argued was too low, we would have added €137·5 million to the regional development programme between 2014 and 2019. However, because of political wrangling, we are not transferring any money at all between the two elements of CAP. In contrast, Wales plans to transfer a rate of 15%; England, 12%; and Scotland, 9·5%. That totals around €2·3 billion of additional investment for rural development and environmental protection. For Northern Ireland to have a 0% transfer is a total shame and is out of step with other parts of the UK. The additional and much-needed funding would have supported investment in the agrifood industry, environmental protection and economic and social development in rural areas.

Mrs Dobson highlighted a number of schemes in the RDP, and I would like to spend the next few minutes exploring the potential negative effects of a lack of funding for the RDP's environmental measures. Within pillar 2, 30% of EU funding must be spent on environmental protection, addressing, in particular, two of the six EU priorities. Those are priority 4, which is restoring, preserving and enhancing ecosystems dependent on agriculture, food and forestry sectors, and priority 5, which is promoting resource efficiency and supporting the shift towards a low-carbon and climate-resilient economy in the agriculture, food and forestry sectors. The RDP aims to provide a variety of schemes to meet those priorities. However, the environmental sector is very concerned that, given the reduced budget to start with and the zero-rate transfer of money from pillar 1, we are at risk of not meeting our local, UK, European and international environmental obligations and are, therefore, at risk of huge infraction fines. For example, the water framework directive sets a target for us to restore 59% of all water bodies to good ecological status by 2015. Currently, only 28% of our rivers and lakes meet that standard. In relation to the habitats directive, the 2013 article 17 data indicates that 46 out of 49 of our natural habitats are deemed unfavourable. We now have more species in unfavourable conditions compared with 2007.

As for greenhouse gas emissions targets, we have achieved a reduction of just over 17% on 1990 levels, and we are unlikely to achieve the target of a 35% reduction by 2015 set by the Executive's Programme for Government.

Some may argue that the greening element in pillar 1 will address environmental issues. The fact is that greening is most likely to be targeted at arable farming, which accounts for only 6% of agricultural land use here. Therefore, it will deliver very limited benefit to the environment. Furthermore, there is already an over-reliance on the voluntary agrienvironment schemes. There is a huge concern that the current proposals, under such a constrained budget, will not enable us to meet our environmental obligations.

The cross-cutting nature of pillar 2 funding could help Northern Ireland to address compliance with the various European directives as well as promoting tourism, reducing rural poverty and sustaining farm businesses. We have seen the recent episode of the DOE facing potentially huge infraction fines over the mismanagement of Strangford lough. It would be very easy for another environmental non-governmental organisation (e-NGO) to raise concerns at European level and to bring an investigation of our poor performance in meeting EU requirements. I urge the Minister to work closely with her Executive colleagues to seek adequate funding to meet the deficit in funding for the rural development programme, which was created by the recent debacle between Ministers.

It is of course essential that our farmers receive financial assistance under CAP pillar 1 funding to sustain a viable farming industry in Northern Ireland, but we must also bear in mind that a sustainable environment is vital for all of us, now and in the future.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I rise as a member of the DUP and not as the Chair of the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee, in case there is some confusion. It is decent courtesy in a debate like this for Members to give way. This is not a monologue; it should be a debate. It is a very important issue. It just shows that parties are not confident in their own positions when it comes to this sort of thing if they will not take interventions.

The motion seems to have been brought —

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I will.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Do you accept that one of the reasons why they are not comfortable is because it is totally contradictory? On one hand, they want to defend the income of the farmers, but on the other hand, they want the money to be taken off the farmers. On one hand, they say that the money is badly spent, but on the other hand, they want more money to spend. If you have such a contradictory position as that, of course you will not be happy to take interventions.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I agree.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Thank you very much. That is a minute that I will surely use. I thank the Member for highlighting that because it is a farce. As I said, the motion seems to have been brought about not because of concern for the agriculture and farming communities and the wider rural community but out of desperation. The UUP was sleeping at the sidelines when the DUP was fighting for the farmers. We had to take it to court because the Agriculture Minister would not bring her proposals and priorities to the Executive.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I will certainly give way, although I point out that his colleague did not afford me the same opportunity.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member. He is so generous with his time. I refer the Member to the guidance book that was handed out by the Speaker at, I think, the start of this sitting. It refers to interventions. I think that the booklet indicates that, if a Member did not indicate that they were going to give way, a Member should not persist in trying to force that direction. The Member talks about being disingenuous and discourteous. Maybe he should take that direction from the Speaker.

In reponse to the DUP having take the Sinn Féin Minister to court to get the decision righted, this is for my own recollection; I am trying to find it out. The previous Agriculture Minister, Michelle Gildernew, made a similar decision. Could the Minister, sorry, could the Member — maybe I am pre-empting something that might happen after tonight's programme — possibly tell me what steps the DUP's Finance Minister took at that stage, when Michelle Gildernew was Agriculture Minister? If I am correct, it is his current party leader — he is behind you —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I reiterate that it is entirely at the discretion of the Member as to whether they will accept an intervention. Members who are given the courtesy of making an intervention should make it short and sharp, because you are eating up on the Member's time.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for that speech. I am sure that he will afford me the same opportunity when he comes to speak.

We made this decision because farmers and the farming industry have been through terrible years of strife. This was the right decision. Last year, the Minister made a decision on the modulation money. Every single party in the Executive, as far as my memory serves me, supported that. We made a decision. We have a party position. Sinn Féin has a party position. I ask the Member now, what is the UUP's position on transferring from pillar 1 to pillar 2? I will take an intervention on that.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Is the Member going to answer my question? Is he going to answer questions with questions? That seems to be the DUP way in this entire debate. That is another question. Answer my question first: when Michelle Gildernew —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Let us come back to the debate and address remarks through the Speaker.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Because of the problems that farmers have been facing over the past year, we took a decision — [Interruption.] Well, because the farmers were not in the same position as they are in now. I will add to the point. The Member has not answered my question, and I will take an intervention again. What is the UUP's position on transferring from pillar 1 to pillar 2?

The Member does not seem to have a position. I am not going to waste any more of my time on this issue. Is the Member going to answer my question? A percentage. His leader was very good at talking about 90% or 80% of a Haass deal before he went to the Executive, got a verbal kicking and then came back and flipped over. Would the Member like to tell me what percentage the UUP would like to transfer from pillar 1 to pillar 2?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

I remind the Member to address all remarks through the Speaker's Chair.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I will afford him this very brief slip of time to answer that. What is the UUP's position on transferring from pillar 1 to pillar 2?

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Silence is golden.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Silence is golden? Is that another blessing of silence that has been given?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I am sorry: the Member needs to address the point.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

I will address the point. Pillar 1 to pillar 2 transfers are reasonably valuable, and we have supported a transfer from pillar 1 to pillar 2.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

A percentage.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

A percentage. The point has already been made by my party member Jo-Anne Dobson, that, if the budget had been put in place first —

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Percentage.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

The budget has not been established here: that is what we are saying. We are now out to consultation following the declaration on the transfer of money. Surely anyone with reasonable business sense makes the business case and the finance case first before they go bidding for money?

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

The Member cannot answer me as to what percentage the UUP would wish to transfer. The DUP is very clear: we stated that 0% transfer should happen. Even Sinn Féin has a position. The UUP is only carping and complaining from the sidelines.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is almost up.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

The UUP tells us that it is a carve-up between the two largest parties, and then the very next thing they say is that the two parties should decide.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is up.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

The UUP is all over the place on this subject.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

Order. The Member's time is up.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I will follow that exchange, although I do not want to get involved in the middle of a row between the DUP and the UUP. Clearly, the election has commenced. I think that there is a 17-week countdown already.

I will get back to the motion and not the verbal exchanges that have been going on. There are parts of the motion that we can identify with: for example, we are concerned that this matter has been brought before the courts. Certainly, we do not support any criticism of the Agriculture Minister for anything that she did in respect of this matter.

It is absolutely vital that people understand that the rural development programme is crucial for the sustainability and vitality of rural areas. It is important for things such as job creation, economic development and farming families. Indeed, it is important to point out that the rural development programme that we are in now has created 382 jobs, which is very important for deprived rural areas. The budget of the current rural development programme is around £500 million. It is very important to point out that 80% of that goes back to farmers through the various schemes such as LFA, farm diversification, METS and other projects. Twenty per cent, which is £100 million, went to the broader aspects of rural development and schemes such as the MARA project, which the Minister referred to earlier and which has delivered £433,000 into the pockets of those in deprived rural areas, support for rural transport for isolated rural areas, the rural borewells scheme and various other anti-poverty measures for rural areas.

Last week, reference was made here to the GAA — I think that Mr Allister raised it — and various schemes that are funded under the rural development programme were referred to earlier today. That gets to the point of unionists' gripe and, perhaps, the motivation for this ending up in court in the first place. I think that it is important to point out that the criticism of the funding of GAA projects is unwarranted. Anyone who comes from a rural area knows that. In the area that I am from, the GAA — apart from the games, pastimes and recreational opportunities that it provides — provides a focal point for all aspects of that local rural community. If we look at some of the events that happened in my GAA club in Loughmacrory over the Christmas period, we see that, for example, the club was used as a focal point for the local women's group, for charity events for local disability groups and cancer charities, for a game of football in aid of epilepsy and for a cycling event in aid of the Alzheimer's Society. It is a base for after-funeral dinners. It is where the youth club —

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Yes, of course.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

In his defence of the squander of rural farming money on the GAA, does the Member seriously believe that the needs of the GAA — including one of the richest clubs on this island, Tyrone GAA — are such that they overshadow the needs of hard-working farmers who struggle day and daily to make ends meet and for whom the single farm payment is not a luxury but a lifeline? Does he really think that squandering that funding on the GAA and other soft, ludicrous options is a proper spend of that sort of money?

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member has an extra minute.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Clearly, the Member was not listening to some of the things I said. If you are referring to those things as soft and unimportant in rural areas, perhaps you should come to deprived rural areas and see what it is like to live there. In many rural areas, there is nothing else apart from the GAA and the basic services that it provides to local communities.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Yes, OK.

Sammy Wilson (DUP, East Antrim)

Does the Member accept that there is still money in the rural development budget? Does he also accept that, if farming is to be competitive, farmers have to have the money that is allocated to them to invest in, for example, milking parlours or to do the job we expect them to do, which is to supply food for the agrifood industry?

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

OK. That is a very good and important point, and indeed our party and Agriculture Minister have done their best to support the farming community. It is important to note that DUP and UUP MEPs voted for the cut to the EU budget. Indeed, the DUP at Westminster supported the Tories in negotiating a 22% cut to the rural development programme. That is probably the joke. We are looking at the current rural development programme and talking about a 22% cut that was negotiated by the Tories with the support of the DUP. We are talking about the TUV, the DUP and the Ulster Unionists who talk about —

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

Will the Member give way?

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

I am not giving way to any more unionists today. They talk all the time about parity, parity, parity, yet, when it comes to the modulation rate, parity does not apply. In England, there is a 12% modulation rate; in Scotland, it is 9·5%; and in Wales, it is 15%. The question we need to ask unionists is why our rural communities should suffer and why parity is so important in all other cases but can just be dropped like a hot potato when it suits.

In conclusion, we share many of the sentiments of the motion: that the matter ended up in court —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is almost up.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

— at the behest of the DUP; that rural community groups and organisations may lose out as a result of the reduced rural development programme —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is now up.

Declan McAleer (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

— but we certainly do not support the charge that the Minister has done anything wrong.

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

The timing of the debate is important, given the CAP situation in Northern Ireland. However, the debate should not be needed. We have had an unfortunate development: a turf war between Ministers played out in the courts. That is a big failure in the political dynamics between Ministers in the Executive, and it led to a High Court battle between the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Minister of Finance and Personnel in the closing days of December.

There is grave concern in the farming community, and in the rural community generally. Will rural development be badly affected, and will the agrifood development strategy be damaged? The Minister needs to answer those questions, along with her colleagues.

The two Ministers should have been in intense discussions since October about the CAP moneys and how rural development was to be funded from 2014 to 2020. Who should have been leading the discussions in the Executive? The Agriculture and Rural Development Minister should have been in direct consultation with the Finance and Personnel Minister to make sure that the CAP money was smoothly presented to the Assembly and to the wider farming and rural communities.

A DARD statement on 20 December outlined a 7% transfer from pillar 1 to pillar 2. That was a reasonable transfer, given the circumstances in Northern Ireland. However, no rational explanation was given, and there was no mention of Executive co-matched funding to supplement the rural development programme. If we were going to keep down the transfer from pillar 1 to pillar 2, it was crucial for the Agriculture and Rural Development Minister to have had an agreement with the Finance and Personnel Minister to co-match funding.

For the CAP direct payment system, farmers generally wanted to lessen the percentage transfer from pillar 1 to pillar 2. Quite naturally, they wanted farmers to benefit primarily from the EU CAP moneys. Co-matched funding was therefore necessary to make sure that we have a viable and workable rural development programme. However, rural development must be adequately funded to make rural communities better serviced and to enable rural sustainability to be promoted and advanced.

The SDLP will support the motion. We will also support the amendment, because it widens the motion to include other Ministers who should have been involved in the discussions.

The CAP moneys are very important to Northern Ireland farming and the rural community. Currently, €2·3 billion is allocated for direct payments over the next six years. My colleague Mr McAleer said that rural development moneys in the UK have been drastically cut by 14%. That is because Mr Cameron wanted to come back from Brussels able to state that he had secured a cut in the EU Budget. Unfortunately, the rural development programme has been the programme most adversely cut in the UK envelope. Rural development programme moneys in pillar 2 have been reduced to £227 million over the six-year period.

Direct farm payments are crucial to active farmers who are engaged in practical farming, be it dairy and beef, sheep, fruit and vegetables, arable, cereals, or whatever. What is going to happen to those who farm in hill areas? There is a raging debate, even in the farming community, about whether Northern Ireland should be treated as a single zone or a two-zone statelet. The sooner that those issues are cleared up, the better.

I appeal to the Minister to make sure that real and meaningful discussions take place to ensure that the farming community and the rural community in general can live in harmony with the outcome, whatever that may be.

The debate is necessary, given what happened between 20 December and 31 December. The amendment focuses on ministerial roles and responsibilities in a so-called collective Government, in particular the role and function of the Agriculture and Rural Development Minister and latterly the role and responsibility of the Finance and Personnel Minister. What a fiasco. We have two Ministers from the one Government in the High Court.

I ask the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development why DARD caved in so quickly when it was challenged in the High Court. That is a fundamental issue that has to be faced in the Assembly and in the Executive. What a sorry mess has unfolded, given the High Court legal battle on the pillar 1 to pillar 2 transfers.

Paul Frew (DUP, North Antrim)

I thank the Member for giving way. Does he acknowledge that any negotiation takes two parties and that, if you are left in a position where a party will not bring forward its priorities and plans to you, there is no form of resolution other than a court case to ensure that your beliefs and the support that the farmers need are established?

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Will the Member give way?

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

Yes.

Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Féin, Mid Ulster)

Is the Member aware that, last week I outlined in a statement the fact that the Minister of Finance and Personnel took no opportunity to raise any issues with me? I had written to him on two occasions, and on neither occasion had he any issue at all. I directly asked him a question about the transfer. So, the DUP is electioneering. I think that that is very evident to everybody; they can speak for themselves, but I ask the Member whether he agrees with that assessment.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is almost up.

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

I will try to deal with both interventions. First, on what Mr Frew said —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is now up.

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

I would have been delighted to respond to both interventions; however, I abide by your ruling, Mr Principal Deputy Speaker. We support the motion and the amendment.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

On 20 December 2013, when the Agriculture Minister announced her intention to make a transfer of 7% from pillar 1 to pillar 2 for the years 2014 to 2019, it came as a surprise to many in the farming community and to many in the House. That 7% amounted to a total of £114 million that was to be removed without consultation with or approval of the Executive. To add insult to injury, the Minister then stated that, prior to reaching her decision, she had consulted widely on the matter.

It is unfortunate that this Minister, who has been in office now for quite some time, failed to realise that she has a duty and a responsibility under the ministerial code to bring all such proposals before the Executive for approval. In failing to do that, did the Minister really think that she could paddle her own canoe and get away without being held to account for her actions at ministerial level, never mind the implications for the future of the agriculture industry? That is why many from the farming community have approached my office voicing their support for the High Court challenge and subsequent ruling, which have ensured that the money is kept where it belongs, which is at the cutting edge of the agriculture industry.

However, I have to say that, on reading the ridiculous comments of Mrs Dobson, who moved the motion, when she labelled the case brought before the High Court as nothing short of a "pantomime", I think that they really show how out of touch she is with the views of the farming community and those who are delivering for the sector as a whole. Also, making the suggestion that this ruling will have detrimental consequences for the funding of farm safety measures, when, in reality, that is a matter for DETI through the Health and Safety Executive rather than for DARD, shows a clear lack of understanding on her part.

When I look at the wording of the motion where, on the one hand, Mrs Dobson:

"expresses dissatisfaction with the Minister ... for her failure to ... consult with Executive colleagues"

yet, on the other, criticises the challenge brought to the High Court and the ruling that followed, I see that it clearly begs the question about the direction that she is pursuing.

I challenge Ms Lo assertion's that this is a political squabble prior to elections. Perhaps she should refer to the St Andrews Agreement, which ensures that a Minister can no longer go on a solo run, and inform herself of the ministerial code. The Minister and Mrs Dobson are exercised about the level of rural development funding, but the reality is that a pot of €227 million is allocated to rural development funding from Europe. It is now the Minister's responsibility to bring forward proposals for future funding to the Executive for approval. That is a practice that she would have been better to engage in, rather than going down a Lone Ranger path of her own making, which was inevitably doomed to failure.

As for Mrs Dobson, I know that she is now playing the Pontius Pilate card by washing her hands and those of her party of the issue, leaving it to other parties in the Executive. I make it clear to the House that the DUP will not shy away from its responsibility in continuing to deliver for the farming community.

Turning for a few moments to rural development funding, let me pose this question: why is it that there is now so much mistrust of the distribution of funding among many who are involved in the rural development programme, despite the real benefit that it has been to the farming community? Is it not the case that millions of pounds have been given to GAA and other projects managed by district councils, which raises questions as to how they have benefited the environment or the rural community as a whole? I know of one case in my constituency of the GAA receiving in excess of £800,000 despite the fact that it was not signed off by the chair of that steering committee as they deemed that it had not met the criteria for the funding. Lo and behold, the Minister signed it off despite that and passed it on to the GAA in that area.

Therefore, I now challenge the Minister to engage with the Executive to bring forward properly funded and meaningful projects that will be vehicles to deliver much-needed support and economic growth to the agricultural industry and rural communities. Let us have no more solo runs —

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin, South Antrim)

The Member's time is almost up.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

— but let us bring forward those meaningful proposals to the Executive.

The debate stood suspended.

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

Oral Answers to Questions

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to outline the reasons for the intended closure of the senior common room at the Coleraine campus of the University of Ulster. (AQO 5306/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The University of Ulster is undertaking a £15·15 million development of the physical estate at its Coleraine campus. This includes the rationalisation of the central buildings, where the senior common room was housed, the demolition of the south buildings and the construction of a new state-of-the-art teaching and learning block to replace the academic provision previously housed in the south buildings. The university will continue to provide common room facilities for university staff. Societies will be able to book the common room space for evening or weekend events.

Tom Buchanan (DUP, West Tyrone)

I thank the Minister for his response. Will he advise us whether any of the funding received from DEL benefited this project?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. The redevelopment of the Coleraine campus is subject to capital support from my Department. As I said, the overall cost is £15·15 million, of which the Department is contributing £13·6 million in total. In particular, the current phase of the rationalisation is in receipt of a grant of £5·1 million from my Department.

Sandra Overend (UUP, Mid Ulster)

Will the Minister inform us what interaction the Department had with the university or the protesters during this period?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for her question. Essentially, this was a matter for the university to address and resolve. It is important that Members appreciate that universities are autonomous bodies. Although they receive considerable support from government in Northern Ireland, that support runs to the policy direction for the universities and a considerable amount of resourcing support. It is not the job of government to micromanage how universities conduct their affairs. That said, I was pleased that a resolution to the situation was found through dialogue. Hopefully, that solution will be sustainable as the months proceed.

Pat Ramsey (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

Like a number of Members, I was concerned at media reports, particularly when utilities to rooms that were being used exclusively by students were knocked off. I ask again: will the Minister ensure that, by holding meetings with the students and management involved, departmental officials are on top of incidents of this nature in future?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I certainly assure the Member that my officials and I kept ourselves informed of developments as the situation unfolded. No doubt, as in any situation, lessons can be learned on how similar situations can be handled in future. I am pleased that the situation was resolved very quickly in its final days, as it seemed to escalate with the comments that were being made. I again stress that there have been discussions between the university and those involved in the dispute, and the University visitor is examining the situation. I hope that a sustainable solution has been found that will stick over the coming months.

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

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the review of initial teacher training. (AQO 5307/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Members are aware that I instigated a review into the teacher training infrastructure in Northern Ireland. The review panel has begun work and is engaged in considering the most recent developments in the field of initial teacher education provision internationally. The panel has also invited submissions on the review from initial teacher education providers and other interested stakeholders. The closing date for submissions was 18 December. My officials are collating the responses for the panel and will be preparing a summary report for publication on the Department’s website in the coming weeks.

The review panel will use the information from the overview of international best practice and the issues raised in the submissions as the background to a series of meetings that it will hold with each of the initial teacher education providers, towards the end of February. The panel will then draw all the information together, along with the information gathered in stage 1 of the review, and produce a report setting out the options for the future shape of initial teacher education infrastructure in Northern Ireland. Once this assignment has been completed, it will form the basis for further dialogue with the various institutions, with the intention of finding an agreed way forward.

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

I thank the Minister for his answer. I go back to the submissions issue. Can you confirm that the review panel will receive full, unedited copies of the submissions that your Department received and not something that has been redacted by your Department? Can you also confirm that the review panel, in its initial work and meetings with the higher education (HE) institutions in the North, will not spend only half a day with each of the providers? That cannot be the case, can it, Minister? Surely that must be false and inaccurate.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for his questions and interest. I am happy to give him the assurance that this will be a proper and thorough process and that the panel will have full access to all of the over 100 submissions that came in from a range of organisations and individuals. To do anything other than that would be self-defeating. It is for the panel itself to work out its programme of work. This is not being directed by me or my officials. Departmental officials are there only to facilitate the work of the panel, which will make its own determination on how detailed its interaction with the various providers needs to be.

Fra McCann (Sinn Féin, Belfast West)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister knows that the Committee has raised many concerns, especially about the smaller colleges. We raised the fact that even the panel that has been set up may not look favourably at smaller institutions. What future is laid out for the likes of St Mary's and Stranmillis colleges?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. What the outcome of the review will be remains an open question, but I am determined that we adopt an evidence-based approach. That is why we have adopted the two-stage approach of, first, examining the financial situation facing, in particular, the two teacher training colleges and, secondly, looking at international best practice and trying to determine the different available options in any potential reconfiguration of the system.

I appreciate the concerns that the Committee and others have expressed, but it is equally important to acknowledge that the system as it stands will simply not be sustainable for Northern Ireland. There are huge pressures on our budgets. In particular, we need to ensure that we get maximum efficiency from our investment in skills. There are considerable inefficiencies in the current approach to teacher education. However, this is not simply about savings. It has to be viewed as an opportunity to make sure that Northern Ireland is in line with international best practice in the institutional format of teacher education provision. It is important that we seize and acknowledge the opportunities that may arise from doing things somewhat differently in the future.

Danny Kinahan (UUP, South Antrim)

Will the Minister take notice of the changing financial position of the colleges? In looking at the future of teaching teachers, is he keeping in touch with the further teaching that they need when in schools?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. The content of teaching is an issue for my colleague the Minister of Education. Financing issues are relevant to my Department because it funds the different institutions. It is important to bear in mind that, as things stand, the colleges will not be financially sustainable over the next decade. If we do nothing, there will be a problem. In the short run, we also have to acknowledge that there are a number of financial interventions that are geared towards maintenance of the viability of, in particular, the small teacher training colleges.

One bizarre outcome is that, in Northern Ireland, it costs more to train a teacher than an engineer. Yet, in the current economic situation, we have a surplus of teachers and insufficient engineers, which is a problem. That suggests that our priorities are not quite right in how we invest our scarce resources to upskill for the future needs of our economy.

Jim Allister (Traditional Unionist Voice, North Antrim)

Will the Minister give an assurance that, during the currency of the review, he will take no steps to prejudice the outcome or the operation of the colleges by virtue of reducing their funding to shape matters in a certain direction?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to give the Member an assurance that we are preserving the status quo while the review is being conducted. I stress that it is to be a short review, and the timescale is that a report should be with me by early summer this year. I will look to have discussions with the teacher training colleges in autumn this year. We are not doing anything to prejudice the outcome of the review. Indeed, the numbers have already been set for this year's entry, and they have been agreed by the Minister of Education for next year. Therefore, there is a degree of stability in the short run for the colleges while we take more fundamental look at the future institutional shape in Northern Ireland.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

3. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how his Department will protect against fraud and the misuse of public funds through the Steps 2 Success programme. (AQO 5308/11-15)

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

4. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for an update on the Steps 2 Success programme. (AQO 5309/11-15)

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

8. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning whether he has had any contact from the NI Audit Office regarding the processing of tenders for the Steps 2 Success programme. (AQO 5313/11-15)

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

15. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning why the recent pre-qualification questionnaire on Steps 2 Success did not ask interested parties to demonstrate that they had a supply chain in place to deliver the contract. (AQO 5320/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Mr Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 3, 4, 8 and 15 together, and I request an additional minute for the answer.

Procurement for the Steps 2 Success employment programme, which is designed to move people from unemployment and economic inactivity into suitable sustained employment, is current. The procurement exercise is being carried out under the guidance of the Central Procurement Directorate of the Department of Finance and Personnel. Its role is to ensure that the procurement meets all legislative and policy requirements.

The procurement is being carried out in two stages. Stage 1 has been completed. It was designed to select six organisations in each of three contract areas to submit tenders at stage 2. At stage 1, bidding organisations provided examples related to previous experience of their capacity and capability to deliver the programme in response to specific questions. Eighteen different organisations submitted bids during stage 1. Following evaluation by senior officials from the Department, six organisations were selected in each contract area. Nine different organisations were selected, because some organisations were brought forward for more than one contract area. In stage 2, organisations will be asked to demonstrate how they will provide a flexible, individually tailored programme to assist eligible participants to move into sustainable employment. It is anticipated that procurement of stage 2 will launch in February, with the programme starting in June.

There will be a number of measures in place to protect against fraud and the misuse of public funds, including inspections by the Department's financial and quality monitoring staff. Bidding organisations were not asked to demonstrate that they had a supply chain in place at stage 1 because that stage was designed to allow them to demonstrate their capability and capacity to deliver the programme, based on examples of previous experience. At stage 2, organisations will be requested to supply details of their proposed delivery infrastructure, including the supply chain that they propose to put in place. They will also need to demonstrate how they will deliver a high-quality service to all participants on the programme. The minimum standard of service offered to each participant is set out by the Department in a service guarantee.

The Department will put in place a robust contract management system to oversee the delivery of Steps 2 Success. That will include assessment of compliance with all terms and conditions, including those connected with claims and payments. In addition, contractors will be required to provide assurance on the controls that they have in place, which will be validated by the Department. I have had no contact from the Northern Ireland Audit Office about the processing of tenders for Steps 2 Success.

Cathal Ó hOisín (Sinn Féin, East Londonderry)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as na freagraí sin. Can the Minister assure us that his Department will ensure that the programme delivers value for money?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to give the Member that assurance. There are a number of fundamental rationales for the new programme. First, Steps 2 Success is a reasonably successful programme in its own right, but there is significant scope for improvement in results, particularly in moving people into sustainable employment. That has to be the ultimate consideration that we keep in mind. The programme is designed to help people who are currently long-term unemployed to progress into sustainable employment. That will be of benefit to individuals and our economy. The recontracting will also ensure that we have value for money. This will be a competitive process, and that is also important for the public purse.

Leslie Cree (UUP, North Down)

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. Can the groups or companies that were unsuccessful in the first round of the tendering process now be brought in to deliver the programme, perhaps on behalf of the successful bidder? Is he happy enough about the ethics of this process going forward?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. Taking his second point first, I am not quite sure what he means by the ethics of the process. I stress that I have full confidence in the system that we are adopting in relation to this procurement. At every stage, we are rigorously following best practice and the law. The Department of Finance and Personnel's Central Procurement Directorate has been assisting and guiding my Department at every stage along the path.

I also stress that we are now moving to stage 2. One of the issues that will be assessed is the nature of the supply chain that the people who have been passed for stage 2 will be engaging with. Within that, there will be opportunities for a range of organisations, including those that are based in Northern Ireland. However, that may not be exclusively the case, given that we are operating under European procurement rules. In essence, there will be a wealth of opportunities locally under this programme. One of the criteria on which people will be judged is the quality of their local supply chain and their ability to bring in organisations to assist with the delivery of the programme.

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

I thank the Minister for his previous answers. I hear what he is saying, but can he assure the House 100% that there will be no misuse of public funds and that there will certainly be no fraudulent activity?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. I am not sure that any Minister can stand before the Assembly, whether it is in relation to Steps 2 Success or, indeed, any other programme, under procurement or otherwise, and give the Member the assurance that he is asking for, because we are dealing with human nature. However, I can assure him that we are taking the issue of combating fraud and the issue of quality extremely seriously. That applies both to the issue of the nature of organisations that will, in the future, deliver contracts on our behalf and to the nature of their interaction with individuals.

It is important to stress that it is a departure from our previous practice with Steps to Work, and from the practice in Great Britain with the work programme, in that we are putting in place service guarantees and a code of conduct. We are not going down the route of the "out of sight, out of mind" approach in Great Britain where, once a person is referred to the contractors, they can do as they wish with that individual. We will be closely monitoring the situation in Northern Ireland because there are important issues of public accountability in place, and also to ensure that companies are not simply addressing the easier cases and that in Northern Ireland, if anything, they are addressing everyone's particular circumstances in an individually tailored way.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht a fhreagraí go dtí seo. I am interested to find out how the Minister is going to stop successful candidate companies that are based overseas from slicing off a large proportion of the revenue in pure profit and then asking unsuccessful bidders to deliver the Steps 2 Success scheme from start to finish at a much reduced rate.

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am grateful to the Member for his question. He is constantly expressing these unfounded fears about this situation. Obviously, there will be situations where any organisation that is delivering a contract will seek to derive a management fee and a profit from that exercise, but one of the challenges in procurement is to ensure that we are assessing and policing that situation. In that respect, Steps 2 Success is no different from any other type of contractual situation that we will face. It is important to bear in mind that it is about delivering results for the Northern Ireland economy. We want to have a step change in our ability to take people who are in long-term unemployment and to assist them into sustainable employment, which, I am sure, is an objective that the Member would welcome alongside everyone else. In doing that, it is not unreasonable that we put in place a structure that will manage and support that.

It is also clear that all of the contractors will be expected to have a supply chain in place to assist them in that regard. I think we are taking this forward in a very responsible manner and that, in time, the programme will be viewed as a real success in supporting both individuals and the economy of Northern Ireland.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to outline his discussions with his European colleagues to find a solution to the problem of youth unemployment. (AQO 5310/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

Tackling youth unemployment has a particular focus in Europe and is of utmost priority for my Department. I met recently, in Brussels, Commissioner Andor, the Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. We discussed youth unemployment, particularly the youth guarantee. My view is that my Department is meeting the youth guarantee through its programmes and policies.

The youth employment scheme is designed to link social and economic policy through a targeted approach to upskilling young people in preparation for work. It is not possible to make a direct comparison with all elements of the youth contract in Great Britain. However, the enhanced employer subsidy element in Northern Ireland is a considerable enhancement, offering 12 months of subsidised employed, in comparison with the 6-months wage incentive in Great Britain. In addition to supporting young people in securing employment, funding for apprenticeship training is also available.

European engagement is a priority for me and my officials to ensure awareness of developments that impact on this region. I am committed to maximising European funding and increasing drawdown of funds to support employment in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland European social fund programme 2007-2013 aims to assist unemployed and economically inactive people, including young people, by helping them to enter, remain and make progress in sustained employment. One of the key targets is to assist 4,500 16- to 19-year-olds over the duration of the programme.

In the new European social fund programme, running from 2014-2010, there will be increased emphasis on improving the employability of young people, particularly those who are not in employment, education or training (NEET). I also hold regular meetings with my colleagues in the South to explore how we can work collaboratively to tackle related issues such as youth unemployment.

Michaela Boyle (Sinn Féin, West Tyrone)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer and wish him well in his efforts on that very difficult problem. Will the Minister detail what discussions he has had in relation to getting a properly funded youth guarantee scheme introduced here?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for her question. We already have, in practice, a range of measures that, in effect, deliver the youth guarantee in Northern Ireland. If anything, I think the Commission would recognise that our approach to the youth guarantee is more robust and comprehensive than that of our colleagues in Great Britain. It is a matter for the UK Government to report back to the European Commission on the UK's overall implementation of the youth guarantee, and our response will be part of that submission. However, they do not intend to submit an implementation plan as such, as other states have been requested to do, but to submit what they term a summary account. I regret that the UK Government have not been more robust and comprehensive in how they are responding to the European Commission.

In essence, the different schemes that we have — whether through the current Training for Success, our programmes supporting those in the NEET category, our assistance for people in apprenticeships, our support through education maintenance allowance (EMA), or the future discussions that we are going to have around the United Youth programme in Northern Ireland — all address aspects of the youth guarantee. It is also worth stressing that we are embarking on a new system of apprenticeships in Northern Ireland, which will offer fresh opportunities for young people in Northern Ireland.

Robin Swann (UUP, North Antrim)

Youth unemployment is quite a serious issue. When the Committee was at the European employment conference, we were told that 90% of jobs will require an IT qualification. What work is your Department doing within the EU's Grand Coalition for Digital Jobs to ensure that our young people are properly educated?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. It is important that we engage with European programmes, whether that is in relation to digital jobs or the European alliance for apprenticeships. Those programmes provide us with the opportunity to exchange best practice and to learn what is happening in other jurisdictions. As well as that, we can often tap into funding opportunities.

The Member is correct to stress the importance of investing in good-quality IT skills. However, in saying that, it is important that, in IT skills, we draw a distinction between people's use of applications and people's knowledge of programming. The former is very much considered to be the third leg of the stool in essential skills, and we will offer support for people in maths, English and information and communications technology (ICT) skills. We are also investing heavily in trying to encourage more and more people to have knowledge of programming skills. That is something that is probably beyond the scope of just my Department. It is something that we need to encourage more and more in our schools. I know that the business community is very keen to encourage an uptake in programming skills, particularly among young people in their more formative years.

Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry)

The Minister referred to the youth employment scheme. A number of us got behind the scheme on a constituency basis to support and promote it. Will he report on how successful it has been, not just in the number of people coming through the scheme but in getting to the hard-to-reach working-class estates where there is endemic unemployment?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. The youth employment scheme has been very successful in its own right. If we compare our performance in Northern Ireland relative to similar schemes in Great Britain, we see that, across a number of indicators, we are performing better. I think that is a reflection of the advantages of devolution. We have not simply copied something that is being delivered in Great Britain and rolled it out in Northern Ireland; rather, we have listened to the voices of young people and the business community and tailored our own solution. Hence, we have, so far, achieved better outcomes.

The Member is right to stress the importance of outreach. The youth employment scheme is open to all. Our employment advisers will, where appropriate, steer those who are unemployed to consider the youth employment scheme. It is important to acknowledge that there are other schemes out there working with those who are more disengaged or facing barriers. That is why the pathways to success strategy for dealing with those in the NEET category is so important. We will have the opportunity, as we look to the United Youth programme over the coming months, to refresh that strategy and to ensure that we move it to a new level of engaging people, in particular those who are most disengaged from the economy.

Jo-Anne Dobson (UUP, Upper Bann)

6. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the impact that cuts to the age-weighted pupil unit at secondary schools are having on further and higher education colleges. (AQO 5311/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

The age-weighted pupil unit is the responsibility of the Department of Education. It is the main element of the common funding scheme, which distributes funding to schools as part of the delegated budgets under local management of school funding arrangements. My officials have contacted the Department of Education, which confirmed that there have been no changes to the age-weighted pupil unit at secondary education or any other phase of education in the past few years; neither have any changes to the age-weighted pupil unit been proposed as part of the current reform of the common funding scheme.

There is no evidence to suggest that the schools' age-weighted pupil unit has an impact on further education colleges. However, since 2008, schools have also been in receipt of entitlement framework funding as a contribution to the additional costs associated with planning and delivering an expanded curricular offer through cost-effective collaboration, which includes further education colleges.

With the entitlement framework becoming statutory, it is anticipated that the delivery of all aspects of the curriculum will be funded through schools’ delegated budget allocations. Consequently, the Department of Education plans to phase out the ring-fenced entitlement framework funding support by the 2015-16 financial year. It is entirely possible that that change will reduce the number of post-primary-school children following professional and technical provision at further education colleges. That would be unfortunate, given the benefits to pupils engaging in a wider range of provision, especially professional and technical courses, at a further education college.

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

I am sorry, but there is no time for a supplementary question because that ends the period for listed questions. We move now to 15 minutes of topical questions.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

1. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how he plans to engage with businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), to identify skills gaps and where existing vacancies could be filled, given the more positive soundings from economists and others about potential economic growth in 2014. (AQT 561/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for the question, and it is an important issue as we look ahead. Already, there is very good engagement with the business community, and I will highlight in particular a number of collaborative working groups that are in existence for some of the priority skills sectors. We have had an extremely successful ICT working group over the past number of years. It has involved a number of Departments, as well as universities, colleges and the business community. The model has been replicated for engineering and advanced manufacturing, as well as for the food and drink manufacturing sector, and can be rolled out to other sectors. In the more recent past, the model has also been used for the tourism and hospitality sector.

The Department has a range of means by which it engages with business. The main interface is through its Skills Solutions Service by providing information on skills opportunities to business. We also engage through Careers Service and the employment service. Bearing it in mind that I have stressed that there are three layers of interaction, work is ongoing in the Department to create a single interface for employers to make engagement much more efficient and streamlined. As part of that as well, we are working with Invest Northern Ireland to ensure that both our efforts on engaging with employers are effectively coordinated.

Daithí McKay (Sinn Féin, North Antrim)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. Business leaders, particularly in Ballymena, often raise with us the link between school leavers and local businesses such as those in the manufacturing sector. How does the Minister's announced review of careers advice fit into his business engagement strategy?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his supplementary question. He mentions Ballymena, which is a good case example of skills engagement. Skill Exchange has piloted Ballymena for its first presence in Northern Ireland.

My Department and the Department of Education are finalising the terms of reference for the review of careers. If that review is to be successful, it really has to be there to address the interests of young people and the economy, and that means ensuring that the business community has its voice well heard during the process. It has been very clear in its articulation of the need for robust careers advice in Northern Ireland that ensures that young people are exposed to accurate labour market information about where future job opportunities are likely to be.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

2. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning whether he agrees that an expanded Magee campus is essential to developing the north-west economy, given that we have talked quite a bit about youth unemployment and some of the economic difficulties that we face, with no better or worse example of that than my constituency. (AQT 562/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. I have put it on record on numerous occasions that I would like to see the Magee campus expand, and I acknowledge the arguments that have been made on the importance of the university to the local economy. We have made some significant increases in the maximum student number (MaSN) for the campus over the past number of years. Those increases were from a situation in which, when I took up office in 2011, we had no provision to allow that to happen. If other opportunities arise, we will see about making further allocations to the university sector, and the University of Ulster has a commitment to direct any additional allocations to the Magee campus.

It is worth putting it on record, however, that any additional undergraduate places need to be baselined, and, as we look to future Budget discussions, bearing it in mind that we are likely to see further squeezes in public spending, we need to ensure that, if we are to make any further allocations of places, they can be sustained into the future. The last thing that I want to see is a situation in which we expand the university sector in Northern Ireland at the same time as we have to make further reductions in allocations to the sector and, as a consequence, we hollow out the quality of education in Northern Ireland. There is no point in putting in additional places if they will be of an inferior nature. So, it is important that we have a balanced approach as we move ahead and fully understand the financial implications of the direction of travel that the Member suggests.

Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic and Labour Party, Foyle)

I think that most people would understand the implications of investing in higher education. Those implications are usually very positive. Given that the Executive have committed to supporting the One Plan, which foresees that there will be 9,400 students at Magee by 2020, will the Minister and his Department work alongside his Executive colleagues, local stakeholders and the University of Ulster to see that target realised?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am happy to see what we can do for the delivery of the One Plan. We are coming close to meeting the initial target of having 1,000 additional places by 2015. Whether we actually get there remains to be seen. Ultimately, there are pathways through which that target for additional places can be met that involve the university itself making some internal reallocations of places, as well as opportunities in part-time study and attracting more international students. Those are on top of any future decisions that the Executive may take on that.

I want to turn this back to the Member and stress that it also takes every other political party in the Assembly to step up and make those commitments. In 2011, when we took up office at the start of this mandate, his party started at a position of supporting the freezing of tuition fees but resourcing that through universities dipping into what were perceived to be their reserves at that time. That would not have been a sustainable solution. If we are to do this, the Member and others will have to identify what we will do less of to allow us to shift resources into the university sector to allow for the potential expansion of Magee.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

3. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning to update the House on the widely talked about proposed merger of Stranmillis University College and Queen’s University. (AQT 563/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I thank the Member for his question. In 2011, when I took up office, the merger was very much on the agenda. Indeed, my predecessor had issued a consultation document on it. However, it became clear that there was opposition in the Assembly to the merger proceeding as it was set out in the consultation document. The particular governance arrangements at Stranmillis required a decision to be taken through the Assembly's structures to enable that to happen. The merger is now essentially on hold as we do the wider review of the teacher training infrastructure. I do not want to predict particular outcomes that may arise from that, although that is something on which the panel will reflect as part of a wider set of potential arrangements that could arise.

Jimmy Spratt (DUP, Belfast South)

I thank the Minister for his answer. In the light of any future announcement, does he recognise and will he take into consideration the very considerable work that Stranmillis has done to raise additional finance through various methods since the proposed merger was last talked about?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I am certainly happy to pay tribute to our teacher training colleges on a range of fronts. They are able to raise additional resources, and I acknowledge their ongoing work on that. They also perform extremely well in national student surveys. However, I do not think that that detracts from what is still the underlying situation that faces our teacher education system in Northern Ireland. It is important that we use resources wisely and ensure that we follow international best practice in arrangements. It is still Stranmillis's policy that the merger should proceed. When we talk about the merger and reflect on what was discussed, it is important to note that it was not about Stranmillis losing quality and being subsumed into the much bigger entity of Queen's University; it was very much a potential marriage of equal partners, where a new ethos would be created on the back of any potential merger and something would emerge that was much greater than the sum of its parts.

We await the panel's recommendations with great interest. Whatever happens, there will be an exciting future for teacher education in Northern Ireland. We are striving to ensure that we have a world-class system, and I do not think that we should aspire to anything less than that.

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

Mr Pat Sheehan is not in his place.

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

5. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning how many complaints, if any, have been registered with the Labour Relations Agency as a result of the agency workers directive. (AQT 565/11-15)

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I do not have the precise figures to hand, but I am more than happy to write to the Member on that. She is right to say that, where complaints are raised, there are mechanisms in place to address them, and investigations will follow if abuses have been identified. It is important that we recognise that the agency workers directive is in place to give a degree of enhanced protection to agency workers, who provide a service to us all through their contribution to the economy.

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

What is the Department doing to protect agency workers against wrongful treatment? Will he make that a priority for his Department?

Stephen Farry (Alliance, North Down)

I assure the Member that we are reviewing the implementation of the agency workers directive in Northern Ireland. It was introduced in June 2011, following a vote in the Assembly, and went live in December 2011. It has now been in place for over two years, so we have a reasonable degree of evidence from which we can draw some conclusions. If we need to make changes on the back of that review, I will come back to the Assembly in that regard.

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

Mr Robin Newton is not in his place.

Phil Flanagan (Sinn Féin, Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

7. asked the Minister for Employment and Learning for his assessment of the success of the Software Testers’ Academy, from which students are graduating today. (AQT 567/11-15)